View Full Version : The Kerry & Edwards Ticket
Sparrowhawk
07-07-04, 08:52 AM
WE NEED A POLITICAL FORUM
<HR><HR>
My two cents worth
Two John's and neither of them has ever burned a s hitter. Both are weathy ~ Edwards says he represents middle America.
EdwardsNet worth of between $14 million and $44 million, according to Senate records is not Middle America.
We already had an Attorney president with Clinton, Edwards is not running for relecetion in his own state because he would lose.
What to fear about this ticket?
They will sound great;
Say great things, the people will be mesmerized by their words and the delivery of those words, like the beasts of Revelation, they will promise to do great things, and will talk about sharing their power with the nations of the world and of bringing peace to the world and of sharing wealth with others and Edwards will praise and honor, almost worship Kerry and will deceive the people and the media will help.
SF
Cook
<hr>
<hr>
Two Men, One Ticket
July 6, 2004 5:28 p.m.
Here's how John Kerry's positions compare with those of running mate John Edwards:
IRAQ: Both supported the decision to go to war in Iraq, and both voted against the $87 billion package for Iraq and Afghanistan.
TRADE: One division was over the North American Free Trade Agreement: Mr. Kerry voted for Nafta, but Mr. Edwards campaigned against the legislation, which the Senate approved before he was elected. Mr. Edwards made trade, jobs and the economy the centerpiece of his campaign, questioning Mr. Kerry's vote on Nafta but not pledging to seek its repeal.
TAXES: Both called for rolling back the Bush tax cuts, but Mr. Kerry proposed eliminating the tax cuts for those who make more than $200,000 a year while Mr. Edwards set the ceiling at $240,000.
OUTSOURCING: Mr. Kerry has said he intends to remove "all" tax breaks benefiting companies that shift jobs to other countries and instead cut corporate taxes by 5% across the board, encouraging companies to stay put. Mr. Edwards, under a similar plan, proposed investing the resulting savings in college and job-training programs. The running mates actually are co-sponsors of Senate legislation to require a 90-day warning by companies moving jobs overseas.
HEALTH CARE: Both men pitched significant overhauls of the U.S. health-care system, though the plan that Mr. Edwards backed centered more on affordable health care for children. Mr. Kerry's plan is more sweeping, offering expanded coverage to almost all Americans.
ABORTION: Mr. Kerry voted against the ban on so-called partial birth abortion passed by Congress, but Mr. Edwards didn't vote.
DEATH PENALTY: A more clear-cut difference exists here, as Mr. Kerry opposes the death penalty and Mr. Edwards supports it.
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE: Both Messrs. Kerry and Edwards oppose Mr. Bush's proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. The candidates have both said they oppose same-sex marriage but believe it is a question that should be left to the individual states.
Phantom Blooper
07-07-04, 09:48 AM
Two Johns Don't Make A Right!" Semper-Fi!! Chuck Hall
Let's compare the tickets. First the men running for president
Bush- Yale Skull and Bones blueblood
Kerry- Yale Skull and Bones blueblood who is distant cousin to Bush
Now the VP candidates
Cheney- CFR member and war profiteer
Edwards- Bilderberg invitee
Not much of a choice if you ask me. No matter who wins we lose.
Dennis Kucinich is still running - vote for him Eddie!
It would seem to me that you would be Republican like most of us just because of your NWO theory.
Bush is attacking nations and giving the Governments back to the people. Then he's ****ing other nations off like France and Germany. He's been accused on more than one occassion of being an isolationist. Doesn't sound like a consolidated Government building to me.
Kerry wants to form tight relationships with these countries and "do whatever it takes to have them work with America" He's the one that doesn't think we should make a move without world approval.
Afghanistan and Iraq are puppet governments, They will never belong to the people of those nations. Karzai is a UNOCAL man and Allawi is the CIA's b i t c h. As for Bush being an isolationist, he has been looking for help from the UN for Iraq. He talked a good talk about doing things without the UN to look good for his conservative base. It was just talk though. I'll vote my conscience and go Libertarian come November because I can't vote for these scoundrels from the Demorats and Repugnants.
Kegler300
07-07-04, 01:09 PM
Yeah...flip-flop and mop-top.
marinemom
07-07-04, 01:57 PM
You have to give Kerry credit for one thing - he picked a running mate who is younger, better looking and who does not have the
problem when he smiles of looking like his face just cracked.
But I digress - each of them wears both his faces very well.
Sparrowhawk
07-07-04, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by enviro
... Kerry wants to form tight relationships with these countries and "do whatever it takes to have them work with America" He's the one that doesn't think we should make a move without world approval.
America has never had to wait for world approval to defend ourselves.
We have sought peace more than any other nation in the world.
It's when we haven't acted to protect our interest taht we have been attacked.
I don't think terrorist go to the UN to get permission each time they attack us.
But I guess Kerry may want them to do that, if he gets elected, and if they don't Kerry has said, he would protest their attacks on our citizens and demonstrated against them if they attack our armed forces. Now, that takes real guts.
Sparrowhawk
If we seek peace, then why are we always meddling in other country's affairs? Our CIA has been involved in coup attempts all over Latin America and elsewhere around the world. Bush likes to say that our enemies hate us for our freedom. They hate us more for the atrocities done in our name by the CIA. From Pinochet to Saddam to our latest coup attempt in Venezuela our spooks bring terror to the rest of the world.
Educate us Eddie - give specifics on each coup and how the CIA was involved. I need the who, what, when, where, why before I pass judgement so easily.
And how many are we talking about - 2-3 or 200-300?
And if you don't think that there are many people out there that hate us because of our freedoms (either because they want it or they think it's bad) then you need to get out more.
And if you are going cite Pinochet, Saddam, and others like these two miserable sons-of-b|tches, don't even bother.
In other words, name one country we helped have a coup that was just minding it's own business and not torturing hundreds of thousands of people or threatening/defying the world.
It's none of our business when it comes to dictators torturing their own people. I really don't give a damn what North Korea, Syria, and Iran do to their own people. We're not the policemen of the world. As for CIA atrocities, just look it up on the internet. All the info is out there. I think people hate us more for what our government has done in our name than for our freedoms. To give you an example let's take the Iranians. They hate us because of our support for the murderous regime of the Shah. That's why they took our embassy in '79. America was the Shah's enabler so the people in our embassy paid for that. As for Pinochet and Saddam, our CIA helped to put those sons-of- b i t c hes into power.
The CIA and Pinochet
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20000919/
The CIA and Saddam
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030410-070214-6557r
CIA timeline of atrocities
http://www.thelawparty.org/CIATimeline.htm
HardJedi
07-08-04, 03:12 PM
NONE OF OUR BUSINESS? what kinda crap is THAT!?!?! as human frinking BEINGS we each have a MORAL RESPONIBILITY to intervene and help when we can if people are being tortured to DEATH!.
or would you just walk blindly by an alley where a woman was bieng raped by three men, and you saw and heard it, but what the HELL? she's not from YOUR town. so who gives a rats ass?
what kinda serlfish bull sh## is THAT.
as the only country with the power, the money, and the willingness to do so, it is OUR RESPONSIBILITY, to help when we can. who cares if we have been APPOINTED the policemen of the wordl? Eddie, sometimes you make me sick. I am not being hatefull or hurtfull, but people who think like that have allowed all the atriocities in the world from the crucifixion of Jesus to the murdering of 10million people in WWII.
WAKE THE F UP!:mad:
You're comparing apples and oranges with your woman getting raped scenario. It aint worth it to me to go and die for foreigners when they should be doing their own damn fighting. If that sounds cold so be it. World War 2 is also different in that we were attacked by the Japanese. We were doing the right thing by not getting our troops involved in Europe's business until Pearl Harbor. So when Germany declared war on us then we had to TCB in Europe. And by the way the dead of WW2 is on the hands of Americans who supported the Nazis like Henry Ford and Prescott Bush and other American elites that poured money into the Nazi war machine. I aint willing to get myself shot for the globalists' New World Order. F*** their damn empire! If our country had just heeded George Washington's warning to not get entangled in foreign affairs we'd be a whole lot better off today.
Sparrowhawk
07-08-04, 03:38 PM
Originally posted by eddief
It's none of our business when it comes to dictators torturing their own people.
First time I opened up in combat, I pulled the trigger because the NVA had killed my squad leader, I didn't care who send me there, our government or who ever. I didn't care about the Vietnamese people, I didn't open fire because of them it was pure vengeance on my part.
The second time I opened up in combat was because of the Vietnamese people for them, because by then I had seen what the NVA communist forces did to the women, children, old men and young boys in the villages.
I would go there and do it all over again.
You see the same thing in Iran, Iraq today.
Sometimes it takes a second look to understand the freedom that we all are entitled to, if we do nothing evil will prevail.
The Iraqi people are like a fish that jumps out of the water for the first time and he discovers not the air above him, but the water he has been living in all this time.
cjwright90
07-08-04, 03:39 PM
CJ sits back and listens...
I'm sorry about what the NVA did to those people, but it wasn't worth sacrificing over 58,000 of our countrymen. Asian boys should have been fighting and dying for their freedom from the commies. If we're supposed to get rid of dictators all over the world, then we'll be in a perpetual state of war. Where the hell in the Constitution does it say that the President is supposed to save the world. How about taking care of the republic and leave it at that?
HardJedi
07-08-04, 03:51 PM
I have gotten on other people before for personal attacks Eddief, and I am sorry this is needed, but if you really think you have no moral responsibility towrds your fellow human beings, you feel no urge to help those less fortunate then you, then it will be a good day when your genes and personality are no longer around to contaminate the gene pool
HardJedi
07-08-04, 04:00 PM
and besides you saying it is two different things doesn't answer the question. probably just walk off to save your own behind, and leave the woman to suffer, huh?
I'm all for humanitarian aid to people of countries that are less fortunate than ours. I'm just not in favor of using our military for that purpose. As for passing on my genes, you already got your wish because I'm shooting blanks. So feel free to celebrate.
Eddie - this is exactly the reason why so many people hate Americans. There were so many times when we should have gotten involved and didn't. Even worse, there were so many times when we did get involved and then some wus of a President bowed down to the complainers and pulled out at the worst possible time.
Kennedy and Clinton have both done it. Bush, Sr. sort of did it. Reagan didn't want to but had to. And almost every other President since Washington.....
HardJedi
I would help a woman who is being raped even if it meant being killed. That situation however is not the same as using our military to fight battles that the people of that country should be fighting themselves.
enviro
We are hated because of the meddling that the CIA does in our name. The CIA has killed more people than Al Qaida.
Where the hell in the Constitution does it say that the President is supposed to save the world?
Right in the preamble:
"... To Provide for the Common Defense"
Even with its independence secured, the new nation faced very real dangers on many sides in the late 18th century. On the western frontier, settlers faced a constant perceived threat from Native Americans. To the north, the British still owned Canada, whose eastern provinces were jammed with vengeful American Tories, who had remained loyal to the British Crown during the Revolutionary War. The French owned the vast Louisiana Territory in the continental midwest. To the south, the Spanish held Florida, Texas, and Mexico. All three European powers had colonies in the Caribbean Sea, within striking distance of the American coast. Moreover, the nations of Europe were embroiled in a series of wars that spilled over into the New World.
In the early years, the constitutional objective of providing a "common defense" focused on opening up the territory immediately beyond the Appalachian Mountains and negotiating a peace with the Native American tribes who inhabited the area. Within a short time, however, the outbreak of war with the United Kingdom in 1812, skirmishes with the Spanish in Florida, and war with Mexico in 1846 underscored the importance of military strength.
As America's economic and political power increased, its defensive strength grew. The Constitution divides the defense responsibility between the legislative and executive branches: Congress alone has the power to declare war and to appropriate funds for defense, while the president is commander-in-chief of the armed forces and bears primary responsibility for the defense of the country.
The CIA has killed more people than Al Qaida.
Where are these facts? That's a bold statement without proof.
And another thing -we aren't hated because of the damn CIA! That's a bunch of crock!
Ask any foreign jackass why he hates us and I'll bet the farm he never says CIA.
Your damn paranoia and conspiracy theories are getting to be annoying today.
The CIA uses proxies to do their dirty work (many of them went to the notorious School of Americas), but their hands are bloody nonetheless. They were responsible for putting the butcher Allende into power in Chile. The blood of the people killed under his regime screams out against the CIA. These aren't Boy Scouts we're talking about. They do the dirty work of our government so American corporations can profit in these countries where the CIA leave their mark. I haven't even touched on their drug running. Mainstream articles during the '80s linked the CIA and contras to the cocaine trade.
enviro
I'll tell you more reasons why we're hated. Who makes the gunships that Israel uses that take out Palestinians on a daily basis? Imagine you're a Palestinian and your boy is killed by a rocket from these American made gunships. Won't you hate the USA as well as Israel? Palestinians know we are the main ally of Israel and everytime American weapons are used on them the hate grows stronger. Saying they hate us because of our freedom is just too damn simplistic. There is a whole lot more at play. Imagine you're a mother in El Salvador whose husband was taken away and killed by the CIA supported death squads. Wouldn't you hate the US for supporting the brutal thugs who took your husband's life. Now imagine you're an Iraqi who has lost his mother to the bombing that began in March of 2003. You also lost a brother in the first Gulf War to the Americans. Wouldn't you join up with an insurgent group to get vengeance on who you see as an invading army and occupier? We're hated for a lot more than just our freedom.
enviro
I've barely talked of conspiracy theory today. What I've talked about here is the true nature of our intelligence service that is supposed to be protecting us, but instead makes our world more dangerous with their meddlesome miscues.
HardJedi
07-08-04, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by eddief
. World War 2 is also different in that we were attacked by the Japanese. We were doing the right thing by not getting our troops involved in Europe's business until Pearl Harbor. So when Germany declared war on us then we had to TCB in Europe. And by the way the dead of WW2 is on the hands of Americans who supported the Nazis like Henry Ford and Prescott Bush and other American elites that poured money into the Nazi war machinebe a
Ok, using your own Analogy then. The TERRORISTS HAVE DECLARED WAR ON US! so is it not then our duty to hunt them all down? and don't even THINK of telling me that they have NOT declared open season on Americans.
As for American people supporting the Nazis? well yeah, they WERE individuals who did. what of it ? what does that have to do with societies responsibilities?
If you ask me we're going after the wrong people. The Mossad has a history of false flag operations. What country benefitted most from the attacks on 9/11? Do you remember Israelis arrested because they were celebrating while they videotaped the WTC?
Here's some more info about their adventures here in the states and in Mexico.
www.whatreallyhappened.com/hundreds.html
More info on false flag ops by the Mossad. What's interesting in this article is that it says that the Mossad was most likely the culprit in the 1986 bombing of the German disco that led to the bombing of Libya.
www.americanfreepress.net/09_26_01/U_S__Army_Officers_Say___Mossa/u_s__army_officers_say___mossa.html
possible Mossad link to '93 WTC bombing
www.americanfreepress.net/09_16_01/Mossad_Link_to_First_WTC_Bombi/mossad_link_to_first_wtc_bombi.html
HardJedi
07-08-04, 07:21 PM
ahhh so it's all the jews fault. I see.
Eddie-- I've been setting here reading your postings and it sounds to me like you are about as full of S*** as a Christmas Goose and I certianly Hope you NEVER need help from anyone. I'm glad you have all the answers. You have it ALL under control.
Sparrowhawk
07-08-04, 08:43 PM
Originally posted by eddief
Here's some more info about their adventures here in the states and in Mexico.
www.whatreallyhappened.com/hundreds.html
www.americanfreepress.net/09_26_01/U_S__Army_Officers_Say___Mossa/u_s__army_officers_say___mossa.html
www.americanfreepress.net/09_16_01/Mossad_Link_to_First_WTC_Bombi/mossad_link_to_first_wtc_bombi.html
ROTFLMAO
I'm sure glad those stories written by "an independent left-wing New York weekly" are so believable.
I am just glad I read the National Enquire and the Star to find out what is really going on in the world.
eddief,
Now if you really want to be brainwashed try these two magazines...
http://store1.yimg.com/I/supersuscriptions_1797_2131664
http://www.magazines.com/magcom/covers/0/06/299/0062991.jpg
HardJedi
07-08-04, 10:07 PM
Right on, Sparrowhawk! LOL
Sparrowhawk
American Free Press is not liberal. They're just not neocons lapping at Bush's heels. They wish there was a real conservative in the White House. If you think American Free Press is liberal then you must think the Pope is Baptist.
HardJedi
I knew someone would try to insinuate I was anti-Semetic. I have no problems with the Jewish people. The Mossad's actions don't represent what the Jewish people are about just like the actions of the CIA don't truly represent us. I don't blame the Jewish people for what their intelligence service does.
Back to the subject....
Lloyd Garver of CBS news said it all in his article title, "Two Johns, No Waiting."
Ya'll have a great day!
foxman
I believe you have been SITTING unless you're playing table tennis while reading this forum.
CMyr
You have a great day as well. I'll get back on subject as well. The choices suck. Both the demorat nominees and repugnant nominees supported the war in Iraq and the Patriot Act. As for who I see winning the election, I can't really tell who the global elites want. It's a tossup. If they want more wars to subjugate nations to the NWO then it will be Bush. If they want the UN to gain more of a foothold here then it will be Kerry.
You sound like the Conspiracy Theorist's official spokesman with all your blab about the CIA and the Mossad.
There are people on this board that have REAL problems to deal with. It must be nice to be able to live in such a fantasy world in your parents basement.
You're not going to convince the adults around here that the world is coming to an end via the CIA and Mossad.
You hate the very things that will keep you free and alive. President Bush had to make up for time lost. If previous administrations had done a little more in terms of showing strength, we wouldn't be in this big of a mess now. You believe just the opposite - you want us to do nothing. You'd rather the CIA be disbanded, all the troops come home, and let the world rot around us.
Whether you see it or not, but we do live on the same damn planet as these extremist morons. What they do "over there" effects us "here".
You're not liberal, republican, libertarian, independent, or any other label. You're alone. Even other Conspiracy Theorists are going, "Damn Eddie - you're too far out there"
HardJedi
07-09-04, 09:21 AM
Originally posted by eddief
As for who I see winning the election, I can't really tell who the global elites want. It's a tossup. If they want more wars to subjugate nations to the NWO then it will be Bush. If they want the UN to gain more of a foothold here then it will be Kerry.
sigh..........
I shudder to think that I am ACTAULLY going to ask this.........morbid curiosity I guess.............kinda like a train wreck........or 18 car pile up.......but...herer goes.
WHO are these globabl elite? I am sure you must know em by name. So Who are they? Maybe if I knew too, then I could be more warry of them.
and you DO realize the the UN is the closest thing there is to a world Government, correct? and by placing Bush in with the world gov, and Kerry with the un, it's the same thing, right? maybe thats why no one takes you seriously.
HE SHOULD HAVE READ THE HEADLINES OF THE BOSTON HERALD THE DAY AFTER KERRY PICKED EDWARDS-" FARTHER TO THE LEFT THAN TEDDY"--LIBERALS RIGHT DOWN TO THEIR TAX PROGRAMS-------LORDY DO THEM LIBERALS LOVE TO SPEND MY DOLLARS
Sparrowhawk
07-09-04, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by eddief
Sparrowhawk
American Free Press is not liberal. They're just not neocons lapping at Bush's heels. They wish there was a real conservative in the White House. If you think American Free Press is liberal then you must think the Pope is Baptist.
The American Free Press is not liberal?
Of course not, it just publishes the same stories as the Liberal Press does. the AFP is a new org based on issuing disinformation and publishes rumors as fact with such a twist that it makes the Enquire look like the Washington Times.
Al-Qaeda Not Involved, Says bin Laden was one of their published stories, which they passed off as believeable.
In it he accusses the CIA and Mossad as being responsible for 9-11.
CIA and Israel reponsible for 9-11 Bin Laden says (http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_22_01/Al-Qaeda_Not_Involved__Says_bi/al-qaeda_not_involved__says_bi.html)
Michael Collins Piper connects just about everything he writes to an Israeli connection including the murder of JFK. As far as the pope goes if you ask Collins, he'll tell you that the Pope is a mossad agent.
What ever intel we receive, via CIA or other sources is only as good as we allow those agecies to operate. The Clinton administration hangcuffed the CIA so much that they were unable to obtain the information we needed to prevent 9-11.
The info we obtained on Iraq we now know was based on some false information that was obtained because we didn't give the CIA the freedom and resources to obtain creditable information.
Because we were given faulty M16 in NAm, we lost Marines in battle, they had to improve those weapons and still the enemy had a better weapon, the AK47.
Its the same thing with our intel agencies, give them the tools to do the work they are suppose to do, and we'll get results. These are Americans protecting American interest.
Sometimes when we received incoming from a hooch we opened fire and in the home we would find not only the enemy but dead civilians killed in the cross fire. That is what war is all about. That is what we are engaged in today. We don't have all the info we need, but can we afford not to take action to protect ourselves?
Iraq had WMD, where are they now? Who knows... if we hadn't dealt with Saddam now, we would have had to deal with him later.
As far as being conservative, Rush Limbaugh is far to the left compared to how I look at things.
I won't trouble this forum with my conspiracy theories anymore. Semper Fi to all and I wish everyone nothing but the best. We don't see eye to eye in what's going on in the world but I care about this country just like all of you do. Take care everyone and God bless.
Sparrowhawk
07-09-04, 11:04 AM
There is a conspiracy theory, and it is a very serious issue but its not in the physical realm, or in a way we look at things.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Four Horseman of the Apocalypse have been released and their influence is having a great impact on our time.
However, that knowledge and intel escapes human reasoning.