John MCcain was smeared by the spokesperson for Swift Boat Vets.
- Thread starter Clem D
- Start date
Another swiftboat vet states kerry under fire. States he does not like him for what he did after the war but can't deny what took place there.http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040827/ap_on_el_pr/swiftboat_witness
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/StevieD- I know you don't mind debate or dissent, but you have to admit the forum has deteriorated due to a few who can only resort to name-calling and attacks on those who disagree w/them. And to make it worse they start posting under alias screen names. hope all is well for you on your home front...Chan.
No disrespect Chanman, disent and whatever is fine on both sides, but you never address an issue in my threads, you simply post a link. If you'd like to talk about swiftboat vets I'd welcome a debate.Clem D said:
After listening to alot of stuff today I can see why the swiftees are pissed, but to lie is no good. Kerry ****ed them over, but he still earned his medals.
What's to debate? You were not there and neither was I. I post the links so others can make up their own mind from the info available. I don't agree w/your views, and I also don't feel the need to denigrate you.
If you think Kerry is the answer fine- vote for him. I told you how I feel- I think its a mighty poor choice we have. I don't defend Bush cause there is a lot about him that I don't like. What's the alternative?- Nader...wasted vote.
You and whoever else you sign in under already have your mind made up? Convince me that Kerry is the man. A seasoned veteran of 4 mos who slandered all other Vets and 'threw' his medals away. Who says that Bush should focus on the facts, (Reporting for Duty), and blames the Republican smear campaign for his poor showing after F 9/11, Whoopi Goldberg, etc. Naw Clem or Tossing Salads, better let StevieD, Kosar, or Eddie take the helm, i.e., Dogs I've red them all. Anything that comes out of the swiftboat vets is Bs.
If you think Kerry is the answer fine- vote for him. I told you how I feel- I think its a mighty poor choice we have. I don't defend Bush cause there is a lot about him that I don't like. What's the alternative?- Nader...wasted vote.
You and whoever else you sign in under already have your mind made up? Convince me that Kerry is the man. A seasoned veteran of 4 mos who slandered all other Vets and 'threw' his medals away. Who says that Bush should focus on the facts, (Reporting for Duty), and blames the Republican smear campaign for his poor showing after F 9/11, Whoopi Goldberg, etc. Naw Clem or Tossing Salads, better let StevieD, Kosar, or Eddie take the helm, i.e., Dogs I've red them all. Anything that comes out of the swiftboat vets is Bs.
If the term neocon fits you, and denegrades you, I apologize but that is all i Said. As far as swift boat veterans they have all gotten slammed. They should have simply said Kerry had no right to dis us after the war.
Clem D said:
My fault then Clem D. thanx for apology, but it's not needed. I'm not offended by the neocon label-I don't think it fits- its just that I think I'm used to seeing name-calling by those who disagree w/our left leaning friends. I don't think Kerry or his supporters are Un-American, I just think they have little tolerance for others who disagree w/them. This is another good link too... http://debka.com/article.php?aid=895
"The lies seem to be coming from the Swift Boat Vets all of the Navy's documentation backs Kerry and even O'Neils own words, taped recorded by Nixon prove him to be a liar."
Stevie What you need to understand is the Navy's documents come from on field reports by the commanders of the boats.They do not know what occurs and can only go by reports.Where the problem arises concerning these reports is they can not determine who wrote them. The swiftboats say Kerry and Kerry refuses to comment. It will never be proven. ---but I ask you this--since it CAN and HAS been proven that Kerry himself filed for his purple hearts--and we know how bogus they were do you think there might be a probabilty that he filed the other reports.Just who do you think would file a report nominating him for Silver Star for capping a lone vc with a pistol in a secure area.??????? Would the fact that he had movie camera and would go back and retake these events in the light he wanted shown give you any inkling of his motives. Just food for thought.
Stevie What you need to understand is the Navy's documents come from on field reports by the commanders of the boats.They do not know what occurs and can only go by reports.Where the problem arises concerning these reports is they can not determine who wrote them. The swiftboats say Kerry and Kerry refuses to comment. It will never be proven. ---but I ask you this--since it CAN and HAS been proven that Kerry himself filed for his purple hearts--and we know how bogus they were do you think there might be a probabilty that he filed the other reports.Just who do you think would file a report nominating him for Silver Star for capping a lone vc with a pistol in a secure area.??????? Would the fact that he had movie camera and would go back and retake these events in the light he wanted shown give you any inkling of his motives. Just food for thought.
Dogs I understand that someone had to write the reports but these guys let the reports stand for 35 years. Some of them even accepting medals for them. If you go back to their earlier writings and reports they agree with what Kerry says. They even have O'Neil, on tape, telling Nixon he was in Cambodia. So where do they get off calling him a liar now? I know these guys hold a grudge against Kerry for speaking out against the war, like a lot of other vetrans did, when he got home. Until they can answer why the reports written by them do not agree with they write now I can't believe anything they say.
Bottom line this Bush front group has deflected attention from Abu Girad, the economy, the war in Iraq, corporate misfeasance, tax cuts for the rich, Bush's military service (or lack thereof), Richard Clarke, Wesley Clark, Bush's record both domestic and international, and all the other issues of the day.
Now Wayne before you go whining well Kerry brought it up and made it a central theme of his campaign, give the following some thought. Bush was portraying himself as the war president, don't change course in midstream and Kerry will be soft on terrorism. Really, how could Kerry counter that other than with promises.
He had no choice but to bring up (I don't think this is the central theme of his campaign by the way) his military record to show he was a war leader. Set up by Bush, I mean Rove? I think so. In my view, Kerry's using his war record was set up by the one who is remaining very quiet (until yesterday) about this issue.
Once again, Bush family politics.
Eddie
Now Wayne before you go whining well Kerry brought it up and made it a central theme of his campaign, give the following some thought. Bush was portraying himself as the war president, don't change course in midstream and Kerry will be soft on terrorism. Really, how could Kerry counter that other than with promises.
He had no choice but to bring up (I don't think this is the central theme of his campaign by the way) his military record to show he was a war leader. Set up by Bush, I mean Rove? I think so. In my view, Kerry's using his war record was set up by the one who is remaining very quiet (until yesterday) about this issue.
Once again, Bush family politics.
Eddie
Steven:
I find your posts some of the most enlightening at this forum. Your logical and rational responses are well thought out and to the point. You concede weakness in positions taken and candidates you support. You are aware that no candidate is perfect but are able to compare and discuss without emotion (unlike moi) the relative strengths and weakness of both sides.
In addition, I really appreciate that you do not use propoganda and lies which play into popular beliefs to support your positions. Your posts are well appreciated. Now, how bout dinner and a movie you cutie. Alright, I will stop with the mutual admiration society stuff but emphasize I really enjoy reading your posts. Probably because I agree with 95% of what you say.
Here we are at the summit of Mr. Everest looking down on alll the others trying to reach the top. It's tough being the brighest people who regularly post at this forum. It's good to be King.
Eddie
I find your posts some of the most enlightening at this forum. Your logical and rational responses are well thought out and to the point. You concede weakness in positions taken and candidates you support. You are aware that no candidate is perfect but are able to compare and discuss without emotion (unlike moi) the relative strengths and weakness of both sides.
In addition, I really appreciate that you do not use propoganda and lies which play into popular beliefs to support your positions. Your posts are well appreciated. Now, how bout dinner and a movie you cutie. Alright, I will stop with the mutual admiration society stuff but emphasize I really enjoy reading your posts. Probably because I agree with 95% of what you say.
Here we are at the summit of Mr. Everest looking down on alll the others trying to reach the top. It's tough being the brighest people who regularly post at this forum. It's good to be King.
Eddie
Now how could anyone vote for Bush after seeing that protester in Channie's link above. I love hippies. I remember her at Woodstock.
Eddie
Eddie
It really depends on who you believe in, someone who changes his mind on every whim in trying to please everyone
--or someone who makes a stand on very contoversial issue and sticks by it even though it may cost him.
Presidents have 2 alternatives they can take actions they deam necessary to do a job at hand despite critisism or they can ride the middle trying to please everyone and pass on the consequences to those that follow like last admin eg terrorist nations and N korea--or 2 biggest looming threats.
You can now add Russia to list of those finding what sitting back and waiting and thinking they are exempt from these people can accomplish.
China is the smartist on terrorists --no muslims=no terrorist
While they have a few in one area they do not get out of line--but once!!!!!
--or someone who makes a stand on very contoversial issue and sticks by it even though it may cost him.
Presidents have 2 alternatives they can take actions they deam necessary to do a job at hand despite critisism or they can ride the middle trying to please everyone and pass on the consequences to those that follow like last admin eg terrorist nations and N korea--or 2 biggest looming threats.
You can now add Russia to list of those finding what sitting back and waiting and thinking they are exempt from these people can accomplish.
China is the smartist on terrorists --no muslims=no terrorist
While they have a few in one area they do not get out of line--but once!!!!!
Ah shucks Eddie, Dogs, everytime there is an attack somewhere you try to play the Bush is tough card. Didn't Bush cut funding to fight terrorism before 9-11? Even Bush knows he can't make the Al- qaeda and Bin Laden connection so he tries to push this democracy thing after the WMD brought up nothing. Bush has bungled the war on terrorism and must be replaced by an administration that will fight terrorism while protecting American troops.
Haven't read any of this thread....
Haven't read any of this thread....
ATTENTION:
John McCain's 15 minutes ARE UP!
:sadwave: :moon: :sadwave:
Haven't read any of this thread....
ATTENTION:
John McCain's 15 minutes ARE UP!
:sadwave: :moon: :sadwave:
IntenseOperator said:
Since you haven't read any of this thread I O, I will tell you that McCains 15 minutes are up because he got smeared by the smae Republican Operatives that now dog Kerry.
All due respect...
Clem
So it's ok to llie and mislead in ads as long as it is to get your man elected? Anyway I O I respect your posts.
