PDA

View Full Version : John Kerry's fellow Hanoi activist



usmc4669
03-04-04, 03:04 PM
When Jane Fonda traded in her Ho Chi Minh sandals and Viet Cong pajamas for a pair of tights and a leotard, most Americans quickly forgot how the illustrious star of stage and screen had only a few years earlier been one of communist Vietnam's most loyal and fiery supporters. Fonda's involvement with the Vietnam War began in 1967, after several visits with French Communists and underground revolutionaries in this country convinced her America was the bastard nation of the world.
Using her wealth and influence, she managed to garner support from American college campuses, advocating communism and encouraging rebellion and anarchy against the U.S. government. In a speech to Duke University students in 1970, Fonda told the gathering, "If you understood what Communism was, you would hope and pray on your knees that we would someday become Communist."

Not content with spreading her poison within the home ranks, Fonda began soliciting returned Vietnam veterans to speak publicly about alleged atrocities committed by American soldiers against Vietnamese women and children. The broadcasts were coordinated with North Vietnamese officials in Canada.

A series of "Coffee Houses" established outside U.S. military bases was another scheme Fonda concocted to counter the positive effect patriotic entertainers such as Bob Hope, Martha Raye, and according to Fonda "their ilk" were having on the morale of U.S. forces. There, special employees would attract off-duty servicemen, get them relaxed, and then urge them to desert. According to some of those men approached, they were also promised jobs and money if they deserted.

Fonda was the major financial support to one of the most damaging pro-Hanoi groups called Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), which was led for a time by Robert Muller, a Vietnam veteran who had been shot in the spine. VVAW, at its peak membership, mustered about 7,000, some of whom had been indoctrinated in the "Coffee Houses." That organization was later led by Vietnam vet John Kerry, now a U.S. senator and former co-chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs.

In 1972, Fonda took her pro-communist radicalism to North Vietnam. She visited that country's Russian built anti-aircraft emplacements and cheered the spirits of its communist gunners by wearing a gunners steel helmet and peeping through the gun sight, "looking for one of those blue eyed murderers."

John Kerry's fellow Hanoi activist, Jane Fonda, traveled to North Vietnam in 1972 where she visited that country's anti aircraft emplacements. Pictured right, Fonda cheered the spirits of communists gunners by wearing a gunners steel helmet and peeping thru the gunsight, "looking for one of those blue eyed murderers."

usmc4669
03-04-04, 03:13 PM
At a time when 50,000 U.S. servicemen had already died on the battlefields of Vietnam, Fonda sided with the communists, making radio broadcasts from Hanoi designed to break the morale of U.S. fighting forces while encouraging the North Vietnamese to fight harder and kill more Americans. Fonda's Hanoi radio broadcasts and propaganda films were especially painful and damaging to American servicemen held as prisoners of war by the Hanoi Reds. Communist interrogators used the Fonda recordings, along with starvation and torture in attempting to brainwash American POWs into becoming turncoats.


Upon returning to the United States, Fonda told the world press that U.S. prisoners of war were being well treated and not tortured. Her outrageous claims were later exposed when American POWs were finally freed and told of years of agonizing tortures and inhuman treatment. Fonda responded, not with an apology, but with an accusation calling our returned POWs "liars and hypocrites." Fonda's actions stirred up a firestorm in America, prompting nationwide demands that she be tried for treason.

David Hoffman, a former POW who was shot down over North Vietnam in 1971, said that he had been tortured because of Fonda's visit to Hanoi. "The torture resulted in a permanent injury that plagues me to this day," says Hoffman, who suffers a disfigured arm inflicted by brutal communist guards at the POW camp known as the "Zoo."
"When Jane Fonda turned up, she asked that some of us come out and talk with her," he recalled bitterly. "No one wanted to. The guards got very upset, because they sensed the propaganda value of a famous American war protestor proving how well they were treating us.[/b]

"A couple of guards came to my cell and ordered me out. I resisted, and they got violently angry. My arm had been broken when I was shot down, and the Vietnamese broke it a second time. It had not healed well, and they knew it caused me great pain. "They twisted it. Excruciating pain ripped through my body.

"Still I resisted and they got more violent, hitting me and shouting, 'You must go!' I knew there was a limit to which I could push them before they might actually kill me.
"I was dragged out to see Fonda. I decided to play the role. I knew if I didn't, not only would I suffer - but the other guys would be tortured or beaten or worse. "When I saw Fonda and heard her antiwar rhetoric, I was almost sick to my stomach. She called us criminals and murderers.

"When I had to talk to the camera, I used every phony cliche I could. My arm hung limply at my side, and every move caused me pain which showed in my face. \
"When it was over, Fonda unbelievably did not see through the ruse - or she didn't want to. I was taken away politely - then shoved back into my cell.
"I detested Jane Fonda then and I detest her now - but I would fight to the death to protect her right to say what she thinks.
"What she did was a slap in the face to every American. It was wrong, ill-advised and stupid. But it was her right. Unfortunately, it was not my right to refuse to be seen with her.
"There is no way I will ever forget what she did to me. I have the reminder here - in an arm that can never be normal again.
In late January, 1973, Fonda divorced her husband and three days later married pro-communist radical leader Tom Hayden, who had founded the revolutionary Students For Democratic Society in 1962 and was a defendant in the conspiracy trial of the "Chicago Seven."

In 1975, after North Vietnam violated the 1973 "Peace Agreement" resulting in the takeover of South Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, Hayden greeted the news by saying "I see this as a result of something we have been working toward for a long time." That "we" includes Fonda of course.
Another infamous deed of Fonda is the naming of her son, Troy. Fonda returned to Vietnam shortly after the war ended in 1975, with her small son, to attend a special service being held in her honor. Fonda was still a recognized idol and hero to the Communist regime from her earlier years of sending money, food and moral support to the North Vietnamese.
But the ceremony, it turned out, was not just to recognize and honor Fonda for her love of the Communists. Her newborn son was formally christened and named for the Communist hero Nguyen Van Troi. Troi was a Viet Cong sapper who was executed by the South Vietnamese in 1963 for attempting to assassinate U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara.

Immediately after the christening ceremony, the baby developed a serious case of bronchitis, according to reports. The Vietnamese and Fonda panicked and called for a Russian doctor. The child was treated and Fonda and her child returned to the United States.
As a result of the communist takeover of South Vietnam, Fonda's friends in Hanoi turned all of Vietnam into a communist Gulag of slave labor camps with police-state oppression and no freedom of speech, press and worship. Millions of Vietnamese were forced to flee their country and turned into homeless "boat people."
Years later, Fonda was invited by NASA as V.I.P. to witness the first space shuttle launching. Apparently, one source said, NASA and its officials felt little or no threat from Fonda's taste for Red Government.
In late 1987, when it became known that Fonda planned to film her new movie "Stanley & Iris," in Waterbury, Conn., there was a huge backlash from local veterans. Veterans held rallies, promising violent demonstrations if the filming began. Many bumper stickers reading "I'M NOT FONDA HANOI JANE," begin appearing throughout the community. On June 18, 1988, Fonda flew to Waterbury in an attempt to pacify the veterans. She met with them for four hours. Fonda later recalled "I told them my story - why I was antiwar and why I had gone to Vietnam."

A few weeks later Fonda appeared on TV with Barbara Walters and apologized saying: "I'm very sorry for some of what I did...I'd like to say something not just to the veterans in Waterbury but to the men in Vietnam who I hurt, or whose pain I caused to deepen because of the things I said or did. I feel I owe them an apology...There were times when I was thoughtless and careless...I'm very sorry that I hurt them."

The vets did not buy it.

They said Fonda, an award winning actress, was faking an apology because veterans were protesting against her all over the country. As a result of the protest, the vet said, her movies were doing badly and she had been removed from Nabisco Shredded Wheat boxes.
The vets said "no apology will ever erase the pictures of Jane Fonda in giggly bliss, laughing and clapping her hands, as she mounted the gunner's seat of a communist Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun." Bui Tin, a former high ranking Vietnam Communist Party official and North Vietnamese Army colonel who served on the North Vietnamese Army general staff during the war, became disillusioned with communism after the war and went into exile in Paris and the United States. He testified in 1991 before the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs about his knowledge of U.S. prisoners of war.

Bui Tin said in a recent interview by Minnesota human rights activist Stephen Young, that Fonda's highly published support of the North Vietnamese gave them "confidence" to continue to fight and "hold on in the face of the battlefield reverses."
When Fonda appeared at a press conference in Hanoi wearing a red Vietnamese dress and declared she was "ashamed of American actions" in the war and that she would struggle along with the communists, "we were elated," Bui Tin said.
He said the American antiwar movement was "essential" to the North Vietnamese strategy for victory. "I'd say a lot of American boys lost their lives because of the encouragement she gave the North Vietnamese," said a former rifle platoon leader from Texas.

In December of 1991, Hanoi Jane, the once fiery communist activist, who advocated violent revolution to overthrow America's democracy and the free enterprise system, married billionaire Ted Turner, a leading American capitalist and chairman of the Atlanta based Turner Broadcasting System Inc., the parent company of Cable News Network.
Today, the communist architects of Ho Chi Minh's brutal war against democracy, freedom and capitalism, which resulted in the deaths of over 3 million North and South Vietnamese, and 58,000 American servicemen, are now "best friends" with Western bankers and capitalist businessmen. They are even traveling the world appealing to foreign investors to bring more big business and money back to Vietnam, so like Hanoi Jane, they too can be rich.
A veteran summed it up: "It is a shame that some of those who fought so well for America can be treated as 'forgotten ghosts' and left to rot as POWs in Hanoi's prisons, while those like Fonda, who so passionately supported our enemy and condemned our system of government, are now overwhelmingly blessed by its wealth."

Jane Fonda poses for the press after a trip to Hanoi. She is sporting a necklace given to her by the North Vietnamese. The necklace was made from the melted parts of a U.S. B-52 shot down by Hanoi. While in North Vietnam, Fonda made radio broadcasts and propaganda films designed to break the moral of U.S. troops fighting in Vietnam.

ivalis
03-04-04, 03:34 PM
4669

You said that Jane Fonda was a major finanancial backer for the VVAW.

If so, prove it!

namgrunt
03-04-04, 03:58 PM
Someone sounds defensive.

Art Petersn
03-04-04, 04:13 PM
I wounder just how strong Kerry would be on defense



John Kerry is strong on defense
He voted to kill the Bradley Fighting Vehicle
He voted to kill the M-1 Abrams Tank
He voted to kill every Aircraft carrier laid down from 1988
He voted to kill the Ages anti aircraft system
He voted to Kill the F-15 strike eagle
He voted to Kill the Block 60 F-16
He voted to Kill the P-3 Orion upgrade
He voted to Kill the B-1
He voted to Kill the B-2
He voted to Kill the Patriot anti Missile system
He voted to Kill the FA-18
He voted to Kill the F117
In short, he voted to kill every military appropriation for the development and deployment of every weapons systems since 1988 to include the Battle armor for our troops.
He also voted to kill all anti terrorism activities of every agency of the U.S. Government and to cut the funding of the FBI by 60%, to cut the funding for the CIA by 80%, and cut the funding for the NSA by 80%.
But then he voted to increase OUR funding for U.N operations by 800%!
Consider the following hypothetical situation. In September 2005, the president is informed by his CIA director that they have concluded there is a one in two chance that North Korea will transfer five nuclear bombs to bin Laden within the next month, and that after the transfer, despite our best efforts, the CIA judges that it is more likely than not bin Laden will succeed in detonating at least one of them in a major American city, resulting in one to three million deaths. Should the president consider taking pre-emptive military action? And let's assume that the president is named John Kerry.

usmc4669
03-04-04, 04:22 PM
welcome back, good to hear from you again, was afraid that you didn't like me anymore, big relief off my mind. Glad to see that Hanoi Jane has one Marine supporter, must be nice to like her she was a great person, love it when she went to Hanoi and hugged all of the North Vietnam soldiers and downed the Marines that was fighting in the South, God bless you ivalis, you one hell of a Marine.

USMC-FO
03-04-04, 04:31 PM
Gunny:

Fonda was the major financial support to one of the most damaging pro-Hanoi groups called Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW)....

You didn't answer Ivalis' question....

usmc4669
03-04-04, 05:00 PM
No wheres on this web site did I find MIA/POWs information, see if you can find any.

namgrunt
03-04-04, 05:08 PM
Google Search for keywords "Fonda"+"VVAW"

1st hit is NewsMax.com
2nd hit is Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry
3rd hit is FreeRepublic.com - this one states Fonda was a major contributor, etc.

And on and on for another 2,047 hits on that keyword combination alone. I won't put down all the different sources found, search it out yourselves. :D :D :D

Semper Fi!

namgrunt
03-04-04, 05:36 PM
Went to the VVAW website.
Someone needs to tell those nummies that the Soviet Union is dead, and there will be no "Order of Lenin" forthcoming for their efforts and actions. They are still doing the same horse**it they did back in the 70s.

ivalis
03-04-04, 05:50 PM
4669

Ya sound like the prez, all hat, no cattle.

Anybody can make unsubstantiated assertions.

namgrunt
03-04-04, 06:03 PM
Oy Vey!

usmc4669
03-04-04, 06:35 PM
ivalis I was trying to be nice to you, seems as if all you want to do is pick a fight, I won't lower myself to your level

Barndog
03-04-04, 07:23 PM
Fellas...

I've had enough.

Before George W. Bush's political operatives started pounding on John Kerry for voting against certain weapons systems during his years in the Senate, they should have taken a look at this quotation:

After completing 20 planes for which we have begun procurement, we will shut down further production of the B-2 bomber. We will cancel the small ICBM program. We will cease production of new warheads for our sea-based ballistic missiles. We will stop all new production of the Peacekeeper [MX] missile. And we will not purchase any more advanced cruise missiles. The reductions I have approved will save us an additional $50 billion over the next five years. By 1997 we will have cut defense by 30 percent since I took office.

The speaker was President George H.W. Bush, the current president's father, in his State of the Union address on Jan. 28, 1992.

(blah blah blah - narrative which explains it all)

It is instructive, however, to look at the footnotes. Almost all of them cite Kerry's vote on Senate bill S. 3189 (CQ Vote No. 273) on Oct. 15, 1990. Do a Google search, and you will learn that S. 3189 was the Fiscal Year 1991 Defense Appropriations Act, and CQ Vote No. 273 was a vote on the entire bill. There was no vote on those weapons systems specifically.

On a couple of the weapons, the RNC report cites H.R. 5803 and H.R. 2126. Look those up. They turn out to be votes on the House-Senate conference committee reports for the defense appropriations bills in October 1990 (the same year as S. 3189) and September 1995.

In other words, Kerry was one of 16 senators (including five Republicans) to vote against a defense appropriations bill 14 years ago. He was also one of an unspecified number of senators to vote against a conference report on a defense bill nine years ago. The RNC takes these facts and extrapolates from them that he voted against a dozen weapons systems that were in those bills. The Republicans could have claimed, with equal logic, that Kerry voted to abolish the entire U.S. armed forces, but that might have raised suspicions. Claiming that he opposed a list of specific weapons systems has an air of plausibility. On close examination, though, it reeks of rank dishonesty.



Continue : http://slate.msn.com/id/2096127

The remainder speaks for itself.

Do your own research. Oh, and have a nice day.

Semper Fidelis

usmc4669
03-04-04, 08:22 PM
Issue: Kerry's Original Position red, Kerry's Revised Position blue.

Welfare Reform In 1988, Sen. Kerry voted against a proposal to require at least one parent in any two-parent welfare family to work a mere 16 hours a week, declaring the work requirement "troublesome to me."

During his 1996 re-election campaign, when his Republican challenger, Gov. William Weld, was calling him soft on welfare, Kerry voted for the much stricter welfare reform law that Clinton signed into law.

Mandatory Minimums In 1993 and 1994, the senator from liberal Massachusetts voted against mandatory minimum sentences for gang activity, gun crimes, drug trafficking, and drug sales to minors, explaining in an impassioned speech that long sentences for some dealers who sell to minors would be "enormous injustices" and that some convicted drug offenders were "so barely culpable it is sad." He also said congressionally imposed mandatory minimums made no sense and would just create turf battles between federal and local prosecutors.

Today, presidential candidate Kerry strongly supports mandatory minimum sentences for federal crimes, including the sale of drugs to minors.

Affirmative Action: In 1992, Kerry created a huge stir among liberals and civil rights groups with a major policy address arguing that affirmative action has "kept America thinking in racial terms" and helped promote a "culture of dependency."

Today, Kerry's campaign Web site vows to "Preserve Affirmative Action," noting that he "consistently opposed efforts in the Senate to undermine or eliminate affirmative action programs, and supports programs that seeks to enhance diversity." It doesn't mention any downside.

Death Penalty: During one of his debates with Weld in 1996, Kerry ridiculed the idea of capital punishment for terrorists as a "terrorist protection policy," predicting that it would just discourage other nations from extraditing captured terrorists to the United States.

Kerry still opposes capital punishment, but he now makes an exception for terrorists.

Education Reform: In a 1998 policy speech the Boston Globe described as "a dramatic break from Democratic dogma," Kerry challenged teachers unions by proposing to gut their tenure and seniority systems, giving principals far more power to hire and fire unqualified or unmotivated teachers.

Today, Kerry once again espouses pure Democratic dogma on education. His Web site pledges to "stop blaming and start supporting public school educators," vowing to give them "better training and better pay, with more career opportunities, more empowerment and more mentors." It doesn't mention seniority or tenure.[/b]

Double Taxation: In December 2002, Kerry broke with Democratic dogma yet again in a Cleveland speech, calling for the abolition of the unfair "double taxation" of stock dividends in order to promote more investment and more accurate valuations of companies.

Five weeks later, after President Bush proposed a second round of tax cuts that included an end to this double taxation, Kerry changed his tune. He voted against the dividend tax cuts that were ultimately enacted by Congress and now hopes to roll them back as president, along with Bush's other tax cuts for upper-income Americans.

Gas Taxation: In 1994, when the Concord Coalition gave Kerry a failing rating for his deficit reduction votes, he complained that he should have gotten credit for supporting a 50-cent increase in the gas tax.

Today he no longer supports any increase in the gas tax.

Social Security: During the 1996 campaign, when I was a Globe reporter, Kerry told me the Social Security system should be overhauled. He said Congress should consider raising the retirement age and means-testing benefits and called it "wacky" that payroll taxes did not apply to income over $62,700. "I know it's all going to be unpopular," he said. "But this program has serious problems, and we have a generational responsibility to fix them."

[/color=blue] Kerry no longer wants to mess with Social Security. "John Kerry will never balance the budget on the backs of America's seniors," his Web site promises.

Trade: Kerry has been a consistent supporter of free trade deals, and as late as December, when reporters asked if there was any issue on which he was prepared to disagree with Democratic interest groups, Kerry replied: "Trade." Slate editor Jacob Weisberg came away impressed by the depth of Kerry's commitment to the issue: "Unlike Edwards, he supports international trade agreements without qualification."

But that was three months ago! In recent weeks, when Kerry has talked trade, he has talked nothing but qualification, calling for "fair trade" rather than "free trade," claiming to agree completely with the protectionist Edwards on trade issues, and vowing to "put teeth" into environmental and labor restrictions in agreements like NAFTA.

go to this web site

http://slate.msn.com/id/2096540/

ivalis
03-04-04, 09:33 PM
at least ya can verify kerry's record, flip flop as it may be, i wanna see where GW made his money.

i want to see a special investigator tear apart the Harkin oil deal like they did Whitewater. It ain't gonna happen of course. I also wish the hypocrite Bush would face the music on the corporate welfare he received while a shareholder of the Rangers.

If GW faced a Democratic congress he would be impeached. Like Clinton he would be found not guilty. It would be fun to watch the shoe being placed on the other foot though.

ivalis
03-04-04, 10:02 PM
4669

By the way, you still haven't answered my first question. I can assume that you made it up.

Don't p!ss in my ear & tell me its raining.

Like I said, all hat, no cattle.

Anybody can cut & paste.

namgrunt
03-04-04, 10:45 PM
Don't you fellas worry about impeachments right now. President Bush will have another four years in office. That should be plenty of time for the 'MINORITY' party to pursue their dream. After all,...

usmc4669
03-05-04, 09:52 AM
A--- Marvin <gysgt@cox.net> wrote:
> Tom,
> Does Jane Fonda support your effort financially? A
> friend of mine said that she didn't and I said that
> she did.
> Marvin

Reply to an email that I sent to Tom Wetzler San Antonio, TX Tom Wetzler (210) 533-4467 tomwetz@yahoo.com

Dear Marvin,
It is kinda strange to get a message from someone
who doesn't know me well enough to know what they'er
talking about when they use lables so freely.
O.K., that said... I enlisted the day after my
18th birthday. I was a medic with the 1st Inf. Div.,
attached to a rifle company. What I saw in Vietnam
and learned after, made the reasons we were supposed
to be there a lie. I understand your experience was
different. My father-in-law was USMC in Korea also.
My Dad and six uncles were in combat in WW2. We
pretty much all agree the war in Iraq was lied about
(what happened to the WMDs?-- the dog eat 'em?). Try
reading some History why don't you?
Fonda was one of a lot of people who gave money
to VVAW in 1970. I'm not aware that she supports us
with money now, or has in the last 25 years or so. I
don't think so; but if you want to send a donation it
is O.K. with me. These days most of what we do comes
out of pocket.
Regards, Tom

Look at the picture below, all looks the same. VVAW.

USMC-FO
03-05-04, 10:30 AM
"Fonda was the major financial support to one of the most damaging pro-Hanoi groups ......"

'Fonda was one of a lot of people who gave money
to VVAW in 1970..."

I am not sure the above comment from Tom Wetzler supports your use of the word 'major". Thus proves nothing as I see it.

Additionally for my 10 cents...who really cares what Jane Fonda did 30 plus years ago insofar as her money is concerned. Many of us have a low regard for her actions in NVN and properly so. But it was her right to do that no matter how lothsome. Real freedom of expression is NOT just for those with whom we agree, it is for those for whom we violently disagree.

Sadly we are a polarized nation right now, and it will lead to a very ugly campaign season with perhaps 5% of us really deciding who the next president will be. There will be ample amounts of sh*t flying around from both sides to stain all of us.

MAJMike
03-05-04, 10:39 AM
Well, OBVIOUSLY, if it's on the internet it must be true? Right! <br />
<br />
I would much prefer to have as my president a man who did his time honorably and served his country then a person who hid out in...

USMC-FO
03-05-04, 11:07 AM
Major Mike......

B R A V O !!

SEMPER FI !!!

USMC-FO
03-05-04, 12:31 PM
USMC 4669:

Marine...don't send me private correspondence that you lack the stones to put up here for everyone to see and comment on. I find that on many things we disagree--personally I find much of your thinking to be very fuzzy--but I am not bothered by my positions nor should you be by yours. After all that what all this is ultimately about. So no more PM's

usmc4669
03-05-04, 12:31 PM
liberals web sites.

For all to read, believe or not to believe.

http://www.tompaine.com/

http://www.hereinreality.com/

http://www.thetruthaboutgeorge.com/

http://www.njdc.org/readNews.php?show=6&subcat=3

http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york060303.asp

usmc4669
03-05-04, 12:45 PM
USMC-FO


Marine...don't send me private correspondence that you lack the stones to put up here for everyone to see and comment on. I find that on many things we disagree--personally I find much of your thinking to be very fuzzy--but I am not bothered by my positions nor should you be by yours. After all that what all this is ultimately about. So no more PM's

My PM reply was for you only, wasn't anyone's else business what I was sending you, I don't like to load personal replies on the post, maybe you do, that is your problem, you don't need to worry, I won't waste my time replying to you, I have better things to do than to answer brain damaged liberals like you Marine.

namgrunt
03-05-04, 12:46 PM
MajMike

[quote]
I would much prefer to have as my president a man who did his time honorably and served his country then a person who hid out in the Air National Guard and did not serve his time.
[end quote]

Why don't you send the President that message about 'hiding' in the Guard yourself? I'm sure you can flesh it out and tell him what a coward you consider him to be. Exercise the right to Freedom of Speech we all fought for. Please! Don't feel constrained or defensive.

You are right. We all fought for those rights, except, in your estimation, anyone who served in ANG units. While we are at it, we can also go back and research any and ALL guardsmen who somehow mistakenly got on the Viet Nam Memorial Wall, and have their names expunged. They must not have gone and died there. I'll start researching how many names on the wall belong to cowardly guardsmen. We cannot let them stand, since they all HID from combat service. We can also presume Guardsmen didn't participate in the OIF region. Good idea, MajMike.

White House website:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/

I'd be interested in any answer you would recieve to that e-mail, besides the automated "We Got Your Message" acknowledgement.

Semper Fi!
Javier Cascos a.k.a.: namgrunt
Sgt. E5, USMC, - Inactive ............Once, and Always, a MARINE!

USMC-FO
03-05-04, 12:56 PM
4669....

You don't know the first thing about me or my thinking. So if I am a "brain damaged liberal" then you are a fool, and I am more than satisfied that your thinking is as "fuzzy" as I previously noted.

usmc4669
03-05-04, 01:11 PM
You don't know the first thing about me or my thinking. So if I am a "brain damaged liberal" then you are a fool, and I am more than satisfied that your thinking is as "fuzzy" as I previously noted.

You know it really doesn't matter who you vote for, if George W. Bush gets reelected them the Democrat Party will have four more years to find all the dirt that they can to take back the White House, then on the other hand, if John Kerry gets elected the Rebublican Party will have four years to dig up all of the dirt so that they can take back the White House. Who knows maybe John Kerry would make a good President, I just don't believe in his agenda. Then that's my rights, you have yours. The only way to really know is to elect John Kerry to the White House, I won't be one that will help him.

yellowwing
03-05-04, 01:36 PM
I'll tell you what, at least he was there. He wasn't in England smoking dope or hiding in Texas and Alabama under his father's influence.

To me, if anyone has the right to protest Vietnam, it is someone that was there. I was not there and neither was George W. I was seven years old in 72, so I have plausible denial.

namgrunt
03-05-04, 08:48 PM
You are right, yellowwing. He was there. And when he came back, he painted us all as war criminals, and fostered the &quot;Winter Soldier&quot; hearings, to document the 'obvious' criminal activities US...

SheWolf
03-05-04, 09:29 PM
This is the major thing I always say in a discussion on Vietnam....

I don't think we should have been there,,,,, but once we were the politicians should have let the military do it's job, and then they could pick up the pieces later,,, they had to pick pieces up anyway,, I also say "I'd rather be da... for doing something than be da.... for doing nothing"

The US has always been in a basic no win situation,,, if we ignore another country's fight we are the big bad country who doesn't care,, if we don't ignore it we are the big bad bullies....

As for Iraq,,,, my son is there,, so do I support the troops,, YES,,
do I believe GWB nope,, he came in with an agenda to finish what Daddy started,,, (my opinion,, my right),,,,,

Will he be re-elected,,, (is Jeb still Governor of Florida???)...
I hope not,, I said from the beginning that I thought he would be another 4 year wonderboy like his daddy..... (again, my opinion)

Do I want Kerry,,, well,,, he wouldn't have been my first choice,,,
I'll have to wait and see come November...

:bunny:

usmc4669
03-05-04, 09:40 PM
SheWolf My 2.5 cents:

Your opinion

SheWolf
03-05-04, 09:50 PM
Originally posted by usmc4669
SheWolf My 2.5 cents:

Your opinion

um,,, I think you owe me some change Marine!!!! ;)

namgrunt
03-05-04, 09:56 PM
SheWolf
You have put the contest in good light. It is good to step back and take a breather once in awhile to assess the facts.
Which man do we trust. I trust one of the candidates, and not the other. You trust niether, but have to make a choice. I'm committed to my choice. I hope you find the answers you seek to achieve yours.

Your former years of active service are testimony to the investment already given toward this nation. Now your son is in 'harm's way', and that increases your predicatment. I don't envy you the choices as you have outlined them. I hope we all choose wisely. For the country's sake as well as our own political hopes.

You have my prayers for your son's safety, and for success in all his missions. If it doesn't compromise his situation, how long of a wait do you have before you can expect his return?

Semper Fi!

SheWolf
03-05-04, 10:07 PM
You have my prayers for your son's safety, and for success in all his missions. If it doesn't compromise his situation, how long of a wait do you have before you can expect his return?

Semper Fi! [/B][/QUOTE]

well, we heard 6 months or 1 year,, but we heard that back when they kept yo-yoing him around about going,,,,,,

I do know that he arrived in Iraq safely.... but haven't heard anything else

thanks for asking:bunny:

SheWolf
03-05-04, 10:09 PM
[
Your former years of active service


hey! are you "dissing" my reserve time (active reserves)??? I did 12 active duty and 9 active reserves..:mad:

scarberry
03-06-04, 08:59 AM
right on

usmc4669
03-06-04, 12:28 PM
ivalis: <br />
QUOTE] i wanna see where GW made his money. <br />
You said that Jane Fonda was a major finanancial backer for the VVAW.

ivalis
03-06-04, 01:14 PM
Our soldiers already have the right to say they don't believe in this war. They also have the right to say they want to go home. Of course they can't because they are stuck.

4669 you are an old idiot, the worse kind.

An old idiot is one that is immune from logic, you sir, fit the bill perfectly.

By the way "rain" has always been free, moron.

namgrunt
03-06-04, 01:19 PM
SheWolf:
No 'dissing' intended, Sarge. You never mentioned how many years of reserve time you had, and I was too much of a gentleman to ask. I only had two years reserve myself, but consider myself worth answering the call if it came tomorrow. Just put me behind a rifle and point me in the right direction.

scarberry:
Amen to that! "Right on", indeed! OOHRAH! Amen!
(I clenched my left fist in the air too, since it is part of the procedure when saying the words 'right on'.):D

Semper Fi! ...Y'all:marine:

namgrunt
03-06-04, 01:26 PM
Immune from logic !!!
OMG, its a pandemic !!!
Nurse! Nurse! Get me a double scotch!!

usmc4669
03-06-04, 02:02 PM
Our soldiers already have the right to say they don't believe in this war. They also have the right to say they want to go home. Of course they can't because they are stuck.

Same as those who were sent to Bosnia.



4669 you are an old idiot, the worse kind.
An old idiot is one that is immune from logic, you sir, fit the bill perfectly.
By the way "rain" has always been free, moron.

Old true, old idiot far from it. Thanks for calling me Sir, shows that you respect your elders,"rain" has always been free, sometimes we get too much free rain that causes a lot of destruction, Moron, it take one to know one.

Did you read what I wrote? undoubtly you didn't.

SheWolf
03-06-04, 04:09 PM
To all of you, Should Sen. John Kerry get elected to the office of the President of the United States would that give our men in uniform the right to say, I don't believe in this war

they could say this,,,,

and I want to go home,

they could SAY this....
to burn the American flag

no this is illegal
and fly the Iraqis flag, lay down their arms and walk away;

not without disobeying a lawful order, or abandoning their posts


our Generals the right to bring our troops back home and them protest the war? Turn Saddam loose and tell him that we are sorry; put him back into power in Iraq, to run the country as he did before? Repay him the money that he lost when we put him out of power, rebuild Iraq, give the French, Germans and Russians free rain with Iraq again? Let the UN dictate to us what we can or cannot do? Would that be the right thing to do? If John Kerry gets elected then I would say yes.

But I don't necessarily believe that Kerry would go that far,,, I was actually starting to like Edwards,, but that's a moot point now


God bless America

namgrunt
03-06-04, 04:49 PM
SheWolf
I don't think it would ever get to a general mutiny in the armed forces should Kerry be elected. However, he was highly in favor of letting the UN decide matters which could or should remain under the umbrella of soveriegnty of the USA. I feel very uncomfortable with the UN deciding what our country should do next. Perhaps I'm wrong, but why would Kerry even consider such a thing?

Time will tell.

usmc4669
03-06-04, 04:58 PM
to burn the American flag


no this is illegal

Then why are they allowed to do it in the United States, Under the freedom of speech?

SheWolf
03-06-04, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by usmc4669




Then why are they allowed to do it in the United States, Under the freedom of speech?

the last I knew it was illegal to burn it, but no one bothers to prosecute,,, those that burn it try to claim it's covered under the 1st Amendment but.........

usmc4669
03-06-04, 06:01 PM
the last I knew it was illegal to burn it, but no one bothers to prosecute,,, those that burn it try to claim it's covered under the 1st Amendment but.........

Burning of the Amrrican flag is protected by freedom of speech, by the Supreme Court.

What We Believe

In 1989 the Supreme Court, in response to a flag burning by a communist, amended the Constitution by inserting flag burning in the Bill of Rights. Their decision took away a fundamental right of the American people, a right we possessed since our birth as a nation, the right to protect our flag. We believe that decision was an egregious error and distorted our Constitution. We do not believe the freedom to burn the American flag is a legacy of the freedoms bestowed on us by Madison and Jefferson and Washington and the other architects of our Constitution. To distort the work of these great men unable to defend themselves, to put flag burning side by side with pornography as protected speech is outrageous.

SheWolf
03-06-04, 06:04 PM
Originally posted by usmc4669


Burning of the Amrrican flag is protected by freedom of speech, by the Supreme Court.

What We Believe

In 1989 the Supreme Court, in response to a flag burning by a communist, amended the Constitution by inserting flag burning in the Bill of Rights. Their decision took away a fundamental right of the American people, a right we possessed since our birth as a nation, the right to protect our flag. We believe that decision was an egregious error and distorted our Constitution. We do not believe the freedom to burn the American flag is a legacy of the freedoms bestowed on us by Madison and Jefferson and Washington and the other architects of our Constitution. To distort the work of these great men unable to defend themselves, to put flag burning side by side with pornography as protected speech is outrageous.



WELL IT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL...... :mad:

ivalis
03-06-04, 07:58 PM
i did read your post 4669, i know the difference between reign & rain. uf da!

arzach
03-06-04, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by USMC-FO
"Fonda was the major financial support to one of the most damaging pro-Hanoi groups ......"

'Fonda was one of a lot of people who gave money
to VVAW in 1970..."

I am not sure the above comment from Tom Wetzler supports your use of the word 'major". Thus proves nothing as I see it.

Additionally for my 10 cents...who really cares what Jane Fonda did 30 plus years ago insofar as her money is concerned. Many of us have a low regard for her actions in NVN and properly so. But it was her right to do that no matter how lothsome. Real freedom of expression is NOT just for those with whom we agree, it is for those for whom we violently disagree.

Sadly we are a polarized nation right now, and it will lead to a very ugly campaign season with perhaps 5% of us really deciding who the next president will be. There will be ample amounts of sh*t flying around from both sides to stain all of us.

Figured there would be this krap going on over here...Hey FO...feed that bullsh!t to the families of the 58,000+ on that black granite slab.

I ain't gonna bother reading the rest of this 'kiss kerry's ass' garbage...just one question fo ivalis....you and ron kovic pretty tight? Who gets the top? or do ya'll change now and then?

ivalis
03-06-04, 08:31 PM
anyone who comes home from war that isn't anti-war wasn't paying attention

usmc4669
03-06-04, 08:33 PM
i did read your post 4669, i know the difference between reign & rain. uf da!

You are a smart CS after all, all this time I had you peged for a LLSA. Marine

A picture of ivalis

usmc4669
03-06-04, 08:45 PM
Additionally for my 10 cents...who really cares what Jane Fonda did 30 plus years ago insofar as her money is concerned. Many of us have a low regard for her actions in NVN and properly so. But it was her right to do that no matter how lothsome. Real freedom of expression is NOT just for those with whom we agree, it is for those for whom we violently disagree.

Then who really cares what John Kerry did in Nam 30 years ago or what Bush did 30 years ago. Seems as if the left wants to go back 30 years, then why not tell the whole story, If I remember right John Kerry is the one who got this going, not Bush.


Sadly we are a polarized nation right now, and it will lead to a very ugly campaign season with perhaps 5% of us really deciding who the next president will be. There will be ample amounts of sh*t flying around from both sides to stain all of us.

This I will agree with you.

ivalis
03-06-04, 08:52 PM
sure!, s one c and you're a CS. eat one lousy foot and you're a cannibal, LOL

usmc4669
03-06-04, 09:47 PM
ivalis lets make a pack, you don't call me a gentleman anymore and I won't call you a SOB LOL

By the way I am a SOB Son Of a Bush LOL

namgrunt
03-06-04, 10:16 PM
It may be a person's right to burn our national ensign, but it is also another person's right to defend that flag by busting the burner in the mouth with closed fist. Too many Americans have paid the price for there to be no response.

As for coming home from war and being automatically anti-war. That may be understandable, but it is also a BullS*** generality. Anti-war sentiment has never negated war, or it would not exist in this century. If we don't fight to stay free, then we will live on our knees as slaves. Which of you wants to spend his or her life on your knees? Get Real!

usmc4669
03-06-04, 10:34 PM
In 1989 the Supreme Court, in response to a flag burning by a communist, amended the Constitution by inserting flag burning in the Bill of Rights.

I beleive that I said this before, the Supre Court has more power than anyone else in our government

A lovely group of people, don't you think?

greensideout
03-06-04, 10:38 PM
"If we don't fight to stay free, then we will live on our knees as slaves."

"Anyone that came home from war that isn't anti-war wasn't paying attention".


I have to agree with both of you. War sucks and being a slave sucks.

A season for all things---which do you choose?

namgrunt
03-06-04, 11:12 PM
It is one thing to be anti-war in a genuine form, and another to be anti-war to the detriment of one side only. True anti-war sentiment disavows the need for combat by all sides involved. This is genuine, though perhaps naive. This is the interpretation I attest to the label 'anti-war'.

It is quite another to say you are anti-war, yet only call for a cease fire by one side involved. Such action can only be called hypocritical. That is the case with too many of the 'anti-war vets' organizations from the past, and into the present.

Beginning in the early Vietnam antiwar protest marches, there were chants which went like this "Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh...NLF is gonna win!" That gave support to the Communist Vietnamese forces. There was never a chant for both sides to stop, only our side. This wasn't anti-war, it was anti-America/pro-National Liberation Front.

Kerry was involved in just such activities, and is proud of that to this day. He wasn't alone, and the men who stayed in that movement became hardcore leftists. They turned a war, which was fired to ignition by LBJ in the Gulf of Tonkin, into 'Nixon's War', which doesn't make sense, since Nixon ended it.

You might return from combat and be against the killing, but also realize that if the time comes, you would have to take up arms again to defend the life you have. Ask yourself how many attacks have succeeded against American targets in this country, since we took the fight over to Afganistan and Iraq? Can you name all the events that have been a result of foreign terrorists since 9/11?

The list would be small indeed. Why is that? If we just sat and did nothing, we would be waiting for the next blast at a busstop, or football game. We would not fly at all for fear of hijackers. Is there really a choice?

There would be no Marine Corps if anti-war sentiment was a workable solution to settling differences. It isn't a solution, and we exist to defend this nation.

Semper Fi!

USMC-FO
03-07-04, 06:09 AM
'In 1989 the Supreme Court, in response to a flag burning by a communist, amended the Constitution by inserting flag burning in the Bill of Rights...."


4669....You are F**King amazing !! The above comment of yours is perhaps the most ignorant single statement I have seen tossed up here in 2 1/2 years !

CONGRATULATIONS you are the master stupidity !!!

usmc4669
03-07-04, 12:19 PM
4669....You are F**King amazing !! The above comment of yours is perhaps the most ignorant single statement I have seen tossed up here in 2 1/2 years !

If the truth hurts, so be it, if you want to burn the American flag you have a right to do so, that's your right, but let me tell you something, you low life liberal, you try to burn my flag and I will wipe your liberal sh!t up with your face if you don't believe me, then bring your ass to Abilene, TX and lets go at it. Stupidity is your middle name, so why don't you go set on the pot and take a John Kerry.

arzach
03-07-04, 05:24 PM
Originally posted by ivalis
anyone who comes home from war that isn't anti-war wasn't paying attention

Nobody really likes war...but I'll not lay down to let some dirtbag walk all over me or my Country nor, will I allow my Brothers to have died in vain...crawl back in bed with fonda, kerry, clinton and kovic ivalis.

greensideout
03-07-04, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by namgrunt
It is one thing to be anti-war in a genuine form, and another to be anti-war to the detriment of one side only. True anti-war sentiment disavows the need for combat by all sides involved. This is genuine, though perhaps naive. This is the interpretation I attest to the label 'anti-war'.

It is quite another to say you are anti-war, yet only call for a cease fire by one side involved. Such action can only be called hypocritical. That is the case with too many of the 'anti-war vets' organizations from the past, and into the present.

Beginning in the early Vietnam antiwar protest marches, there were chants which went like this "Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh...NLF is gonna win!" That gave support to the Communist Vietnamese forces. There was never a chant for both sides to stop, only our side. This wasn't anti-war, it was anti-America/pro-National Liberation Front.

Kerry was involved in just such activities, and is proud of that to this day. He wasn't alone, and the men who stayed in that movement became hardcore leftists. They turned a war, which was fired to ignition by LBJ in the Gulf of Tonkin, into 'Nixon's War', which doesn't make sense, since Nixon ended it.

You might return from combat and be against the killing, but also realize that if the time comes, you would have to take up arms again to defend the life you have. Ask yourself how many attacks have succeeded against American targets in this country, since we took the fight over to Afganistan and Iraq? Can you name all the events that have been a result of foreign terrorists since 9/11?

The list would be small indeed. Why is that? If we just sat and did nothing, we would be waiting for the next blast at a busstop, or football game. We would not fly at all for fear of hijackers. Is there really a choice?

There would be no Marine Corps if anti-war sentiment was a workable solution to settling differences. It isn't a solution, and we exist to defend this nation.

Semper Fi!

I think that you covered it all and very well! :marine:

usmc4669
03-07-04, 05:59 PM
[QUOTE]anyone who comes home from war that isn't anti-war wasn't paying attention{/QUOTE]

You must be the one who is wearing the jackass blinders.

Sticks and stones may break me but words will never hurt me. So why don't you give up dumb nuts


A picture of ivalis and Kerry

thedrifter
03-07-04, 06:20 PM
WE DON'T TOLERATE PERSONAL ATTACKS ON MEMBERS...........TAKE IT TO PM'S AND/OR E-MAILS......IF IT CONTINUES APPROPRIATE ACTION WILL BE TAKEN.....

Sempers,

Roger

MAJMike
03-07-04, 07:43 PM
I'm with USMC-FO on this one.

Gunny, the Supreme Court CANNOT amend the Constitution. The Constitution can only be amended when a Contitutional Amendment is passed by a 2/3 vote of both the US House and US Senate, and then ratified by 38 of the 50 states.

The Supreme Court correctly (in the legal sense) stated that burning an American flag is freedom of expression and as so is covered under the First Amendment.

I am continually amazed that you fought to defend these rights and then chastise those who exercise them. I'm also amazed that you swore an oath to defend the Constitution that you have obviously never read.

Your inflammatory statements are neither a) true; b) insightful; c) constructive; nor do they contribute anything to this forum.

I will defend your right as an American to say whatever you want as ling as it is not treasonous or or slanderous.

namgrunt
03-07-04, 09:53 PM
Drifter...

Message received and understood.
Will comply.
Over and out

namgrunt


The Smoking Lamp is Lit! Take a break Marines!

Semper Fi!

greybeard
03-07-04, 11:57 PM
Deva Vu. I saw exactly this same thing take place last year on another Marine forum. For over a year, the liberal members were allowed to say anything they wished in the way of unproven accusation, slander, libel, innuendo, name calling, half truths, & outright lies about a sitting CiC, and other members. It was only when the conservative members began to counter, that TPTB decided it was improper.

Burning the flag a constitutional right? The Highest Court in the land says so, but they were neither elected by the people nor annointed by God. That makes them fallible and capable of making mistakes. It wouldn't be the 1st time by a long shot. Their rulings are always written as an opinion/interpretation, and like Uranus, everyone has one. They all smell-some just worse than others.

Osotogary
03-08-04, 05:55 AM
I don't like seeing the Flag of the United States of America burnt, soiled or abused in away shape or form...even if the law says that it is okay to do so. I really don't like seeing the flag on the ground and will pick it up if I can get to it...but that's just me and I am comfortable with how I feel about this matter.
Am I a liberal or a conservative? It really doesn't matter, does it?
Gary(osotogary)

greybeard
03-08-04, 06:11 AM
No it doesn't-you are an American. But in this particular flag context, I'd say you have a conservative line of thought.
(On a personal note-since you hail from S. Fla-I'm sure hoping you are conservative at the polls also) :D

namgrunt
03-08-04, 07:57 AM
It is not just the burning of American flags, both here and abroad, which is bothersome. It is the acceptance by society of the people who commit such acts. The original posting was a synoptic assessment of Jane Fonda and what has happened to her as a result of her activities in the 60s and 70s. The only people who have ostracized her are Vietnam Veterans and groups favorable to those Veterans. OF course, VVAW and its cohort organizations are excluded from this reference to non-supportive Veterans groups. Fonda didn't suffer financially nor psychologically from her decisions. She has apologized for the fact that people felt bad about what she did back then, but not for the very actions which made them feel bad. Her apologies were done as a ploy to overcome opposition and open filming opportunities, and not much else.

It might have been 30 or more years ago, but the sight of her seated at an AAA gun emplacement, looking through the sight, and clapping like a kid at a birthday party, still raised the hackles on the back of my neck. She has been given a pass by the liberal elements of this country. She is still considered a celebrity, and a Hollywood glamour girl by those persons. I'm sure rich leftist people, like Sean Penn, and Tim Robbins, gush over Jane's accomplishments as an actress AND activist. Fonda hasn't changed politically, from what I have seen released to the public. She doesn't have to change since she is accepted as is, warts and all.

Thats my opinion.
Semper Fi!
namgrunt

SheWolf
03-08-04, 09:44 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by greybeard
[B]Deva Vu. I saw exactly this same thing take place last year on another Marine forum. For over a year, the liberal members were allowed to say anything they wished in the way of unproven accusation, slander, libel, innuendo, name calling, half truths, & outright lies about a sitting CiC, and other members. It was only when the conservative members began to counter, that TPTB decided it was improper.


ok,, I guess that since I am basically a Democrat I would be considered a liberal here,, but I have seen the so-called conservative members here wreak havoc when someone says something they don't agree with....

on another note,, was half-listening to Tim Russert (sp?) the other day,, someone brought up a point that at one time GWB was pro-choice (or at least somewhat pro-choice) but has since CHANGED his view??? Interesting...........

Osotogary
03-08-04, 11:31 AM
greybeard,
Let me throw a wrench into my profile. I am living in Florida but was born and raised in the San Francisco Bay Area. Does that make your gears spin? LOL
Thanks for the smiling face. I needed that.
Adios.
Gary(osotogary)

usmc4669
03-08-04, 01:33 PM
Let me throw a wrench into my profile. I am living in Florida but was born and raised in the San Francisco Bay Area. Does that make your gears spin? LOL

You moved from CA to FL, My daughter moved from FL from CA.

namgrunt
03-08-04, 02:09 PM
SheWolf...

[ quote ]

ok,, I guess that since I am basically a Democrat I would be considered a liberal here,, but I have seen the so-called conservative members here wreak havoc when someone says something they don't agree with....

[ end quote ]

Not necessarily so, SheWolf. My brother is both a Democrat, and a Conservative, including a strong Pro-Life posture. One label doesn't automatically include the other. The same can be said of combining Republican and Conservative. As examples, I offer Democrat Senator Zell Miller(GA) and Republican Senator Arlan Spector(PA).

As for conservatives wreaking havoc, ....surely you don't refer to Moi? :D :rambo:

Semper Fi!

USMC-FO
03-08-04, 02:21 PM
I highly doubt NamGrunt that anyone here sees you as wreaking havoc.....Conservative, as you may see yourself, you have at least repeatedly shown you know what you're talking about and have made solid logical arguements to your point of view.

namgrunt
03-08-04, 03:31 PM
Oh I don't know, USMC-FO. I've been known to function like a bouncing betty AP mine, achieving just enough altitude to shred the kimshe out of opponents' tenderest parts.

I think its a Gift. :D

Semper Fi! :rambo:

Osotogary
03-08-04, 05:00 PM
usmc4669,
I guess she knew that I was coming. LOL

I hope that all is going well for her in California.

Osotogary
03-08-04, 05:05 PM
namgrunt,
When is the last time that you had Kimchee? There are some oriental markets down here in Florida that sell homemade kimchee, mostly in the Korean Markets.
Want me to send you some to kinda bring back the wonderfully pungent aromas of Mother Earth?
Gary(osotogary)

SheWolf
03-08-04, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by Osotogary
namgrunt,
When is the last time that you had Kimchee? There are some oriental markets down here in Florida that sell homemade kimchee, mostly in the Korean Markets.
Want me to send you some to kinda bring back the wonderfully pungent aromas of Mother Earth?
Gary(osotogary)

oh yummy love kimchee,, the oriental market I used to get it from closed down :mad:

usmc4669
03-08-04, 05:31 PM
Is that what we called fish heads and rice in Korea?LOL

Sure hope there isn't any Koreans on who may take this wrong, I'm trying to cover my a??.

Sparrowhawk
03-08-04, 05:53 PM
Originally posted by ivalis
anyone who comes home from war that isn't anti-war wasn't paying attention

The only time I have been anti-war, was when I ran out of ammo.

namgrunt
03-08-04, 06:45 PM
Osotogary
I've never had Kimchee, which is probably my loss. As you can see, I didn't even know how to spell it correctly. However, it was a much nicer thing to say, rather than "shred their bellies and t**ticles with murderous ferocity", which is exactly what a bouncing betty mine does. I was concerned for the young-uns (poolees) and the ladies present, who might read my glib description of a horrific fate, and lose their lunch. :D

I do thank you for the offer of free Kimchee through the mail. However, there is a large Asian Market about a mile from my house. I might check it out sometime and try Kimchee for myself. Thanks again.

Semper Fi!

SheWolf
03-08-04, 06:56 PM
Originally posted by namgrunt
Osotogary
I've never had Kimchee, which is probably my loss. As you can see, I didn't even know how to spell it correctly. However, it was a much nicer thing to say, rather than "shred their bellies and t**ticles with murderous ferocity", which is exactly what a bouncing betty mine does. I was concerned for the young-uns (poolees) and the ladies present, who might read my glib description of a horrific fate, and lose their lunch. :D

I do thank you for the offer of free Kimchee through the mail. However, there is a large Asian Market about a mile from my house. I might check it out sometime and try Kimchee for myself. Thanks again.

Semper Fi!

um,,, if you have a sensitive nose, wait till you are stuffed up to try it,,, 1. it'll clear your sinuses... 2. sometimes it's a bit tough to get past the nose but it tastes great :bunny:

namgrunt
03-08-04, 07:09 PM
SheWolf
Perhaps I should try some at a Korean restaurant before I start trying to cook some at home. I sure don't need my neighbors calling 911 about foul odors coming from my house. Does it smell bad? Or does it work like horseradish, and sounds General Quarters in your sinuses?

usmc4669
03-08-04, 07:24 PM
What does kimchee have to do with John Kerry's fellow Hanoi activist,; does it smell the same?LOL

namgrunt
03-08-04, 07:29 PM
I don't know Gunny. I've never had the chance to meet Hanoi Jane. Perhaps there is a similarity, but I can't verify it.

SheWolf
03-08-04, 07:51 PM
Originally posted by namgrunt
SheWolf
Perhaps I should try some at a Korean restaurant before I start trying to cook some at home. I sure don't need my neighbors calling 911 about foul odors coming from my house. Does it smell bad? Or does it work like horseradish, and sounds General Quarters in your sinuses?

you don't cook it, you just eat it,, it's made from various veggies etc,, my favorite is summer cabbage,,, in Korea they make it by putting the stuff add all the necessary spices and bury it for at least 6 months.. (at least that's what I've been told)...

and yes, it has a distinct odor,, took me over a year before I would even taste it,,, couldn't get it past my nose,, but one night the shift had a pot luck and since a lot of the guys were married to Oriental women,, they always brought kimchee,,, it so happened that I had a very nasty head cold and was really stuffed up so my platoon sergeant had me try it then... and I've loved it ever since...

in restaurants they usually bring you several bowls with different kinds of kimchee in it,,,,

usmc4669
03-08-04, 08:18 PM
Why don't someone put in a new thread on Kimchee

Osotogary
03-08-04, 08:18 PM
Ya gotta eat it cold! SheWolf is right in that there are many different kinds of kimchee. Sometimes it comes in the form of just vegetable like a sliced cucumber.
If you get to the Korean Restaurant ask for Be-Bim-Bob (me thinks)...It has been awhile. The last that I remember of this dish is that it was served in a large stainless steel bowl. The bottom part was filled with steamed rice. On top of the rice, in a circular fashion, was a green vegetable(spinach), some bean sprouts with sesame seeds on top and some wonderfully prepared Korean style Barbequed Beef strips. In the center of the bowl was a fried egg. A total meal usually served with soup and kimchee. Go with somebody and share the wealth and breath. LOL

Osotogary
03-08-04, 08:23 PM
Yeah! What ever happened to the blankety-blank liberals and the blankety-blank conservatives?
This is what is called an evolution of a thread. Full circle and onto something else.

SheWolf
03-08-04, 08:30 PM
Originally posted by Osotogary
Yeah! What ever happened to the blankety-blank liberals and the blankety-blank conservatives?
This is what is called an evolution of a thread. Full circle and onto something else.

The liberals went to the Korean restaurant,,,
The conservatives stayed home...

JBrac420
03-08-04, 08:37 PM
I couldn't agree more with the feeling Namgrunt got seeing pictures of Hanoi Jane sitting on gun enplacements... John Kerry did worse by testifying before Congress telling of alleged war crimes that took place... I can't remember the exact quote but he accused servicemen in Vietnam of raping and killing the South Vietnamese "in the tradition of Ghengis Khan"... many of these allegations were later proven false. Marines, soldiers and airmen were still over there fighting and dying when he gave this testimony.
The union I'm apart of endorsed John Kerry and have requested members hold signs and hand out bumperstickers... I asked my union president why the union endorsed him, he replied, "He's a big supporter of the firefighters." That's it. I told him GWB likes firefighters too... but he didn't believe me...
So long from the People's Republic of Taxachusetts

MAJMike
03-08-04, 09:04 PM
"I can't remember the exact quote, but...."

Boy, that's the kind of evidence that sways me.

Your boy, GWB

1) Lied about WMD.
2) Has no plans or idea how to get out of Iraq.
3) Just cut your veteran's bennies.
4) Just cut programs for schools, healthcare and spousal and family services for your fellow active duty Marines.

Oh, and his running buddy - Dick Cheney's former company, Haliburton, is being investigated by a Federal Grand Jury for ripping of DoD on gasoline and meals for the troops in Iraq.

Obviously, your kind of guy?

namgrunt
03-08-04, 09:22 PM
You nailed it MajMike. <br />
My kind of guy exactly! <br />
Any other questions? <br />
Other than regarding GWB's ANG records, of course. The jury hasn't come in on that yet, has it. <br />
<br />
By the way, did you ever get...

ivalis
03-08-04, 09:26 PM
MIke, don't forget the horrendous deficit, high oil prices ( which are related to the deficit), and all the jobs he promised, last month he was only off by 300,000.

By the way, the deficit figures don't even include Georgie's war.

namgrunt
03-08-04, 09:33 PM
LOL

usmc4669
03-09-04, 09:11 AM
Tuesday, March 09, 2004, FOX NEWS



WASHINGTON John Kerry lived two Vietnam experiences -- one as a decorated Navy lieutenant, the other as a staunch protester of the war.

Returning from his tour of duty, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971, in which he claimed it was U.S. policy in Vietnam to carry out atrocities and war crimes.

A number of Vietnam veterans consider this testimony slanderous and say Kerry had to know it was false. They accuse Kerry of lying about fellow soldiers and officers to push a political agenda, and say his words dishonored comrades in arms at a time of war.

"He knew as an officer that those were lies. It never happened," said Vietnam veteran Carlton Sherwood. "He was principally responsible for cementing the image of Vietnam veterans as drugged-out psychopaths who were totally unrestrained and who were a murderous hoard."

After Kerry's testimony, military and independent investigations found that many of the soldiers who told Kerry and others they committed such atrocities were either never in the service, never in Vietnam or couldn't provide more evidence of those horrific actions.

Kerry told Fox News this weekend that he has no regrets about his service or his protest.

"Now, if some veterans still can't accept that or they don't like the fact that I stood up and spoke my mind, I respect them, that is their choice," Kerry said.

Major Garrett.

Notice his ribbons?

JBrac420
03-09-04, 10:48 AM
Here's the quote, "American soldiers raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, ... cut off limbs, ... randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks and generally ravaged the countryside..." John Kerry before Congress, April 22nd, 1971

As for WMD's, the jury's still out on that one. It's a big country and who knows if he hid them in a mosque, a school, a hospital... I don't think it's wise to take Saddam for his word, especially when he has a history of using WMDs (on his own people).
You talk of an exit strategy... look in the news; the provisional government has put together the framework of a new constitution. The Iraqi's have come along way from a year ago when they were still under the totalitarian dictator.... basic services that we take for granted are being restored. Iraqi Police and military are being restored as well and are taking a bigger role in the hunt for remaining terrorists. But maybe someone else has a better plan.... maybe we should just leave now, like we did in 91' with the Shia uprising... or turn it over to the UN... oh but they fled at the first sign of trouble, didn't they.
You say GWB has cut all sorts of school, healthcare and family service programs for my fellow Marines.... I'll honest, I don't know of cuts in those programs... but Bush did give the military one of the largest raises in a long time shortly after coming into office. He has also (much to my dismay) increased federal spending on domestic programs which should be handled at the state and local level.
As for VA benefits, I don't understand the cuts made there... I've read through some of the changes and understand enough to know that I can't get a VA card... just too damned healthy I guess... but with all the increase in fed. spending on social and entitlement programs, why cut that one???
Gawd,this election year stuff drives me crazy... I'm burnt out of it already,and it's only March!!
Brac

usmc4669
03-09-04, 11:36 AM
Mar 9, 11:51 AM (ET)

By MIKE GLOVER]/b]

[b]TAMPA, Fla. (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry says he no longer considers Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to be a statesman, but rather "an outlaw to the peace process" in the Middle East who has been rightly shuffled aside.
In a 1997 book, Kerry described "Arafat's transformation from outlaw to statesman." But in an interview with The Associated Press, he said he no longer views Arafat favorably.
"Obviously, Yasser Arafat has been an impediment to the peace process," said Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee-in-waiting. "He missed a historic opportunity and he's proved himself to be irrelevant."
On Tuesday, Kerry visited a coffee shop in a Cuban-American neighborhood in Tampa before flying to Chicago for campaign appearances. He was awaiting results in four Southern states - Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas - with delegate elections.
In a wide-ranging interview Monday with the AP, Kerry said Arafat "blew his opportunity" to be effective in 1999 and 2000.
"He was (a statesman) in 1995," Kerry said, recalling frequent White House meetings between Israeli and Palestinian leaders in search of peace in the Middle East. "As far as I'm concerned, he's an outlaw to the peace process."
The Bush administration has ruled out dealing with Arafat, a veteran Palestinian activist, claiming he is tainted with terror against Israel, a close U.S. ally. In the peace process, the administration has dealt only with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and senior Palestinian officials appointed by Arafat.
Of the campaign against Bush, Kerry said, "It's not personal."
"He's an enjoyable person to be with," Kerry said. "He's funny and so forth, but he doesn't keep his promises."
Kerry added: "It has nothing to do with him being a good man, bad man. I'm not here to judge him personally, that's up to other people, that's up to God."
In discussing foreign policy, the Massachusetts senator said he couldn't guarantee that Saddam Hussein would now be out of power in Iraq if he had been president over the past year.
"I can't tell you that," said Kerry, who faults Bush for not allowing continued U.N. inspections in Iraq for weapons of mass destruction Saddam was said to be hiding.
"If we had exhausted that process and built a legitimate coalition and Saddam Hussein had not complied, I would not have hesitated to march with that coalition against him," said Kerry. "You don't know how an appropriate global coalition with the proper amount of patience might have coerced him into a different set of behaviors."

usmc4669
03-09-04, 11:45 AM
Mar 9, 11:41 AM (ET) <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
WASHINGTON (AP) - Secretary of State Colin Powell rejected as &quot;absolute nonsense&quot; Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's claim that Powell has been...

USMC-FO
03-09-04, 11:45 AM
"Gawd,this election year stuff drives me crazy... I'm burnt out of it already,and it's only March!! ...."

I hear ya Brac....by early November we'll have had so much smoke blown up our arses by both sides that we'll all be glassy eyed shell schocked !

usmc4669
03-09-04, 11:48 AM
Mar 9, 9:53 AM (ET)


LOS ANGELES (AP) - Approximately 7,000 Orange County voters were given the wrong ballots in last week's election by poll workers unfamiliar with a new electronic voting system, the Los Angeles Times reported Tuesday.

As a result, many people voted for candidates outside their legislative districts, the newspaper said.

However, "from what we have seen so far, we do not believe any of these instances where people voted in precincts they shouldn't have voted in would have affected any of the races," said Steve Rodermund, Orange County's registrar of voters.

Some precincts in the southern California county recorded more votes than they have voters and others had unusually low turnouts, according to the Times, which analyzed county election data. Five of the county's six congressional races, four of its five state Senate elections and five of its nine Assembly contests were affected, it said.

Elections officials said some poll workers gave voters incorrect computer access codes, which resulted in voters accessing electronic ballots for elections outside their districts.

An exact number of incorrect votes is impossible to determine because of steps taken to ensure voter confidentiality, said David Hart, chairman of Texas-based Hart InterCivic, which manufactured Orange County's voting system.

Under the new electronic system, voters arriving at their polling places were given tickets with their precinct number and party affiliation. They handed the tickets to poll workers who checked them against computer records and provided four-digit access codes to use in accessing the proper electronic ballots.

Several poll workers said they didn't know more than one precinct had been assigned to their polling places, however, and thus gave some people the wrong access codes.

"I was very upset about it," said Shirley Green, an Anaheim voter who discovered she received the wrong legislative district code.

usmc4669
03-09-04, 11:50 AM
Mar 9, 12:39 PM (ET)

By ALAN FRAM

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats proposed making it harder for lawmakers to approve tax cuts or boost spending as Senate debate on a $2.36 trillion budget turned Tuesday to the politically sensitive subject of protecting Social Security.

Under an amendment by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., 60 Senate votes would be needed for any tax reduction or increase in automatic benefits like Medicare for the foreseeable future. That margin can be tough to achieve in the narrowly divided 100-member Senate, where Republicans hold 51 seats.

The requirement would be waived if the government stops using cash collected by Social Security's trust funds for other programs. That probably won't happen for many years because of today's enormous federal deficits.

By law, the trust fund's huge surpluses are invested in Treasury bills. With few exceptions, the cash has been routinely used for other programs for many years.


Conrad's amendment faced an uncertain fate. But win or lose, eight months before Election Day, the proposal sought to juxtapose plans by President Bush and the GOP for more tax cuts with the shaky long-term solvency of the huge pension program.

Tax cuts "ought to be paid for ... until we stop taking Social Security funds and using them to pay other bills," Conrad said.

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Don Nickles, R-Okla., countered that "the real target of this amendment" is tax cuts, like those that will expire over the next few years. He said Conrad's proposal "demagogues a little bit on the issue of Social Security."

Republicans hope to push the budget through by week's end. To do it, they will have to deter Democrats who hope to rewrite it by luring support from moderate GOP senators.

Republicans argued that their proposal would respond to the needs to defend the country, spur the economy and shrink blossoming federal shortfalls. They contend their budget would halve this year's projected $477 billion deficit - a record in dollar terms - by 2007. That assumes that federal revenue will expand through economic growth.

As part of a deficit-cutting plan that Nickles says should affect most programs, the budget from his committee would slice $7 billion off the $421 billion for defense that Bush proposed last month. Nickles has conceded the Senate is likely to erase the reduction, with members of his own party leading that fight, either during the budget debate or on a future military spending bill.

Other Democratic amendments would emphasize their call for creation of more U.S. jobs and increase spending for veterans and education.

Democrats could prevail on another amendment, which would require future tax cuts and spending increases to be paid for with other budget savings, unless opponents could marshal 60 Senate votes to prevent passage.

Congress' budget designates targets for taxes and spending, although the bulk of its details carry political clout but are advisory only. Changes in federal revenues and expenditures are made in later bills.

The Republican-run House Budget Committee plans to vote this week on its version.

usmc4669
03-09-04, 11:56 AM
Mar 9, 12:08 PM (ET)

By JENNIFER LOVEN




HOUSTON (AP) - President Bush, in painting his Democratic presidential rival as someone who waffles on national security issues, says John Kerry "is trying to have it both ways" on matters of intelligence.

At a re-election fund-raiser Monday, Bush contrasted the Massachusetts senator's oft-stated support for intelligence gathering as a crucial component of the war on terror with his support - two years after a deadly 1993 bombing at the World Trade Center - for cutting intelligence funding by $1.5 billion.

"Once again, Senator Kerry is trying to have it both ways. He's for good intelligence, yet he was willing to gut the intelligence services," Bush told 1,100 donors at a Houston event that raised $1.5 million for his campaign. "And that is no way to lead our nation in a time of war."

The salvo was the result of a methodical mining by the Bush campaign of the long trail of votes and speeches from Kerry's 19 years in the Senate. Bush didn't limit himself to national security issues, and also criticized Kerry's shifts in position on the Patriot Act, trade legislation and an education reform bill.


"My opponent clearly has strong beliefs, they just don't last very long," Bush said.

Kerry's campaign said Bush's accusations have no merit and are misleading.

Advisers to Bush are focusing on national security and terrorism in hopes of bolstering their claims that Kerry would be a weak wartime leader who can't stick to one position. The president's team also aims to capitalize on poll results showing those are Bush's strongest areas with voters.

Bush held a more than 20-point lead over Kerry, 57 percent to 36 percent, among voters who were asked which one would do a better job prosecuting terrorism, according to an ABC-Washington Post poll of 936 registered voters released Monday. The poll was taken March 4-7 has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Bush said Kerry's bill to cut intelligence funding was "so deeply irresponsible that he didn't have a single co-sponsor in the United States Senate," drawing laughter from the GOP crowd.


Yet, an idea similar in size and purpose to Kerry's won Senate approval on a bipartisan voice vote - a procedure reserved for non-controversial measures - as an amendment to a larger bill sponsored by one Republican and one Democrat, said Kerry spokesman Chad Clanton. The move came after the collapse of the Soviet Union, when there was wide recognition that intelligence spending needed to shift away from efforts to thwart the Cold War opponent and toward measures to combat terrorism, drug trafficking and weapons of mass destruction.

Kerry's bill would have stripped $90 billion from the overall budget to end programs he called "pointless, wasteful, antiquated or just plain silly," including $1.5 billion in cuts aimed at ending "bloat" in an intelligence budget that had become "essentially a slush fund for defense contractors," Clanton said.

"You bet, John Kerry voted against business as usual in our intelligence community," Clanton said.

Kerry, who has suggested that Bush is impeding a federal commission's investigation into the events leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, played more than just defense on Monday.

"If the president of the United States can find time to go to a rodeo, he can spend more than one hour before he commission," Kerry said in Florida, referring to Bush's appearance at a rodeo in between Dallas and Houston fund-raisers. Both events added $3 million to his $160 million-plus campaign war chest.

The White House says Bush is cooperating with the investigation.

usmc4669
03-09-04, 12:05 PM
Mar 8, 11:25 PM (ET)

By SIOBHAN McDONOUGH


WASHINGTON (AP) - The head of a civil rights and legal services advocacy group wants Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry to apologize for saying he wouldn't be upset if he could be known as the second black president.

"John Kerry is not a black man - he is a privileged white man who has no idea what it is in this country to be a poor white in this country, let alone a black man," said Paula Diane Harris, founder of the Andrew Young National Center for Social Change.

Last week, Kerry told the American Urban Radio Network: "President Clinton was often known as the first black president. I wouldn't be upset if I could earn the right to be the second."

Kerry's spokesman Chad Clanton said: "This was intended as a light-natured remark about President Clinton's strong legacy with African Americans. It is a legacy that John Kerry would like to build upon if elected president. John Kerry has a record of fighting for civil rights and as president he will continue this fight."


Harris also criticized civil rights leaders who "sit back and ignore these types of comments, a practice that further insults African Americans."

"It seems that all these leaders care about is their personal agendas in how a 'John Kerry' will keep up their personal causes," she said.

Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., who is black, was asked by the Kerry campaign to weigh in on the issue. He said Kerry's remark shouldn't be taken as a jab at blacks.

"He is saying that he wants to be an activist president resolving many issues that are important to the African American community," Meeks said. "Kerry was simply stating that he wanted to follow in the footsteps of Clinton in addressing issues that are important to African Americans."

The Andrew Young National Center for Social Change, based in Harrisburg, Pa., provides legal services to the poor.

---

yellowwing
03-09-04, 12:55 PM
""If the president of the United States can find time to go to a rodeo, he can spend more than one hour before he commission," - Today in response the administration finaly agreed to spend as much time as necessary. It looks like GWB is starting to listen and take notice of the American People. The latest polls has JK 52% GW 44%.

usmc4669
03-09-04, 01:22 PM
yellowwing
Like Senator John Kerry, I believe the President is campaigning, he has a right to do that; after all this is an election year. I remember that President Bill Clinton did the same thing when he ran for reelection. All Presidents in the past have done the same thing, it is their right to travel to difference parts of the country and talk to as many American citizens that they can to get votes. The President like the common Americans what we call the down to earth people, his kind of folks. As for polls they change from day to day and it also depends on which poll you look at. We really won't know for sure until all of the vote are counted and please don't come with that popular vote thing again, it's the electoral vote that counts.

yellowwing
03-09-04, 02:32 PM
Do you mean what Davis Letterman said..."Latest polls show that if the election were held tomorrow, alot of people would taken by surprise."

MAJMike
03-09-04, 02:35 PM
The Bill that Kerry voted against was for more satellite and electronic intelligence. The senator stated at that time that he did this because he felt that more HUMAN intelligence and resources were needed rather than relying on satellite and electronic eavesdropping.

The post 9/11 security analysis all agree with this. That during the 1990s the intelligence agencies relied too heavily on hogh tech electonic and satellite intelligence and neglected HumInt (himan intelligence) and therefore lost track of what was going on in the middle east.

Seems tome that he was on the mark.

namgrunt
03-09-04, 03:16 PM
Hmmm
Let me see if I have this straight,:
That during the 1990s the intelligence agencies relied too heavily on hogh(??) tech electonic(??) and satellite intelligence and neglected HumInt (himan(??) intelligence) and therefore lost track of what was going on in the middle east.

Someone refresh my memory.
Who was President in the 1990's?
GW Bush(41)? Yes, for the first two years.
And after that?? WJ Clinton!

Who let the human intelligence assets shrivel and dry up?
Why was the same intel given to WJC and GWB(43)?
.....Because it was the best available from the sources left by the Clinton administration.
Who restricted human intelligence sources?
....WJ Clinton, when his administration applied a theory in place of common sense, and prohibited US agents from recruiting from among ''less trustworthy criminal types' (my words) with access to foreign agencies and governments. How could we develop agents in radical terrorist organizations if our people were not allowed to recruit from those cells we wanted to penetrate? All we had left was high tech assets in orbit and elsewhere. The new President could not rebuild or change the intelligence system within 8 months before 9/11 happened. Its not like buying a new set of tires for your car.

Now then, who was at fault for the intelligence snafu?
..............I rest my case.

Semper Fi!

usmc4669
03-09-04, 03:28 PM
namgrunt

GW Bush(41)? Sorry but that was GH Bush, GW's father.LOL

namgrunt
03-09-04, 03:31 PM
Roger, Gunny

I stand corrected. GHW Bush(41) is correct.

usmc4669
03-09-04, 03:47 PM
MAJMike
The Bill that Kerry voted against was for more satellite and electronic intelligence. The senator stated at that time that he did this because he felt that more HUMAN intelligence and resources were needed rather than relying on satellite and electronic eavesdropping.


Maj Mike, did you hear this from the Senator, or did you read it, would you please tell me where I can read the same information that you have just replied with unless the Senator told you this personally.

I wouldn't want to treat you the way that you have treated me in the past when I have posted articles that you don't agree with, I would like to check them out to see where they come from and to see if there's any truth to them.

yellowwing
03-09-04, 03:55 PM
RE: David Letterman, he's a talk sow host/comedian. Read it again, its a joke.

It's a long time until November. If we can't lighten up now and then, we're gonna have heart attacks!

Besides, what do you mean ignore the polls. Try telling that to the Republican National Committee.

usmc4669
03-09-04, 05:08 PM
Besides, what do you mean ignore the polls. Try telling that to the Republican National Committee.

Didn't we go through this poll thing back in 2000? The Republicans said they didn't put any faith in polls and the Democrats said the same thing when when the polls wasn't going there way, now if the poll was taken on everyone that was going to vote in Nov. maybe you could go by the poll that is if nobody died before they voted and those who voted didn't make a mistake and vote for the wrong person that he had planed on voting for, does happen, did happen, will happen.

Yes we should lighten up some, maybe it is time to close this post and move on to something else.

ivalis
03-09-04, 05:24 PM
4669, you've never let facts get in the way before, are ya turning over a new leaf?

namgrunt
03-09-04, 05:35 PM
Hmmm. Chat room must be empty.



Yep. It is. It figures.

usmc4669
03-09-04, 07:10 PM
4669, you've never let facts get in the way before, are ya turning over a new leaf?

Thedrifter ask us to be more polite to each other, and somewhere in the Bible (and I do read the Bible) it says to love your enemies and ivalis in that case I love your more than anyone.

BIGFISH
03-09-04, 11:54 PM
I don't want to vote for Kerry eather but I see no other way.I'm hoping he will review the Patriot Act. and restore the Bill Of Rights.

I'm a 100 % service connected Disabled Veteran Combat Wounded, Vietnam 1967-1969.

usmc4669
03-10-04, 09:34 AM
I don't want to vote for Kerry eather but I see no other way.I'm hoping he will review the Patriot Act. and restore the Bill Of Rights.


I'm a 100 % service connected Disabled Veteran Combat Wounded, Vietnam 1967-1969.

That's your right, to vote for whoever you want.

I am also 100% disabled due to the Vietnam push and shove war.

If any vet would tell me he went to Vietnam because he loves war, then I feel sorry for him. I sure didn't want to go, still I went, really had no choice, was ordered to go. Did I like this war? No way, did I protest it when I came home? No way. Do I like this war in Iraq? No way. Am I protesting it? No way. Do I blame the President? No way. Do I support the President? Yes.Do I have a comment about Senator John Kerry in this reply? No way.

arzach
03-10-04, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by usmc4669




That's your right, to vote for whoever you want.

Do I have a comment about Senator John Kerry in this reply? No way.

Just throwin' this out there...FYI..

EDITORIAL EXEGESIS


"When voters are asked to evaluate their choices for President next November, they will have to weigh carefully the temperament, judgment and instincts of the man who will hold that office. Nowhere will these qualities be of greater consequence than with respect to the execution of his duties as Commander-in-Chief. John Kerry's long record of extremely liberal Senate votes on national security-related matters offer ample grounds for concerns on all three scores. Unfortunately for Senator Kerry, those concerns will only grow as the electorate learns more over the coming months about the temperament, judgment and instincts his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, brings to such matters, as reflected in the choices she has made in the course of years of multimillion dollar philanthropy. Of particular concern is one of the beneficiaries of substantial largesse from foundations controlled by the would-be First Lady: The San Francisco-based Tides Foundation and a spin-off called the Tides Center. These entities in turn help distribute funds to and operate as clearing houses for policy-networking and coordination between a veritable Who's Who of radical Leftist organizations. The recipients share a hostility to what most Americans understand to be our country's security interests and the capabilities needed to protect them. According to publicly available information, in recent years, Ms. Heinz Kerry's foundations have given at least $5.9 million to these entities. ...More troubling still is the fact that the investment Ms. Heinz Kerry has made in organizations who provide large sums -- and, in some cases, probably life-support -- to such groups is paying off for her husband's campaign. Notably, when President Bush unveiled his opening salvo of political advertisements containing fleeting images of 9/11, a Tides-associated outfit called 'September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows' led a caucus of press-amplified denunciations of their exploitative 'insensitivity' to the victims. The political impact was all the more extraordinary since, as the Post reported on March 9, '...[Peaceful Tomorrows] admits ... [it] has only a few dozen members and represents relatives of no more than 1 percent of the 9/11 victims.' When the Soviets were running Left-wing influence operations, they used to call such things 'active measures' -- a term used to describe the spectrum from low-level propaganda and disinformation to covert operations, all designed to subvert one's opponents and advance your own agenda. Themes that benefit Candidate Kerry's run for the White House have also been promoted by far more sophisticated, visible and better-funded active measures campaigns run by Tides-supported operations like MoveOn.org and International ANSWER, two of the prime-movers behind opposition to President Bush's War on Terror. This is not to say that Senator Kerry or even his wife are directly running the operations supported by one of her favorite charities. ...Unless and until Senator Kerry formally disassociates himself from radical Leftist groups and agendas like those supported by his wife, it is not unreasonable to conclude that his public record on defense and foreign policy matters is only part of the problem with his bid to become Commander-in-Chief. For such a renunciation to be credible, however, it should come now -- not towards the end of a campaign influenced by the active measures of his wife's political allies and philanthropic beneficiaries." --The Center for Security Policy


:no:

0351teufelhund
03-10-04, 06:02 PM
i was not even a "twinkle in my mother's eye" during the Vietnam War. but seeing Hanoi jane's picture makes me wanna puke. she should have been taken out back and shot as soon as she returned from Vietnam. i may not have personally experienced the damage she so enthusiastically dealt to American soldiers and Marines, but my uncle has definitely filled me in. he did 2 and 1/2 tours in 'Nam with Marine Recon and despises the woman like no other. fonda's treachery is not lost on today's youth. she will be haunted by her treasonous actions until she dies. maybe that's the best punishment she can receive...then again, i'm sure there are some other opinions out there regarding this matter :)