Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Community Center > Breaking News

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10th August 2004, 07:28   #41
mikeflca
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: san diego, california.
Posts: 623
"True, but if my resume looked like his (or Bush's for that matter), I wouldn't be running for president."

agreed

I think that people completely exaggerate how bad of a senator Kerry was. And cabo, my logic was not that, but rather, "How will his acts of senator negatively affect how good of a President he would be?"

I support Kerry for:

1. stem cell research (but let's save the flaming for the other thread......)
2. doesn't appear to lie as much
3. anybody but bush attitude, and kerry's the only one who has a chance.
4.would use tax cuts that go to the super rich instead for growing businesses, that kind of stuff.
5. I think Bush's policies on education are stupid (ie "let's not talk about safe sex in sex ed class") and Kerry's would be better (the no child left behind plan also seems to sidestep the problem; it says, "if you are a failing school and need more money for better programs, we will give you less" or something along those lines).
6. Kerry's plans for Iraq, while looking about the same as Bush's, have one thing in particular that stands out: reliance on allies' help which would be nice.

mikeflca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th August 2004, 08:16   #42
MidnightViper88
Made In The USA
(Forum King)
 
MidnightViper88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The 502
Posts: 9,100
Send a message via AIM to MidnightViper88 Send a message via Yahoo to MidnightViper88
Quote:
Originally posted by mikeflca
1. stem cell research (but let's save the flaming for the other thread......)
Umm, ever since it was brought up by the Reagens, W. Bush has actually has funded the issue for stem cell research, and as far as I know, has been the only president to fund research...I don't think Bill Clinton funded any money into it...

Quote:
2. doesn't appear to lie as much
Read my responce in this thread...

He apparently bullshitted about his job as part of the Senate Intelligence during the Kerry-Edwards interview on the Stephanopolus show...And according to the people in the Swiftboat Vets for Truth group, he's also bullshitted about his "heroic" actions while fighting in Vietnam...Aside from lieing, he also covers up alot of himself, mainly his war atrocities and not mentioning much or nothing at all during his 19 years in the Senate...

Quote:
3. anybody but bush attitude, and kerry's the only one who has a chance.
You're using Bush, and you're cheating...This whole "anybody but Bush" attitude alone will get no one a Presidential rank...Using that as a reason to vote for Kerry is just plain childish...If that's the only reason you have to defend Kerry with, that's just sad...But it's understandable, since according to Kerry about his issues, he's keeping them a secret, and won't reveal what they are unless elected...

(Also from the Steph. show) "I know that as president there's huge leverage that will be available to me, enormous cards to play, and I'm not going to play them in public, George. I'm not going to play them before I'm president"

Confidence on Kerry, alright...

Quote:
4.would use tax cuts that go to the super rich instead for growing businesses, that kind of stuff.
I mentioned this elsewhere ont he forums, I think...I'm not sure, but I read this somewhere on the internet...

Quote:
Top 5% pay 53.25% of all income taxes (Down from 2000 figure: 56.47%). The top 10% pay 64.89% (Down from 2000 figure: 67.33%). The top 25% pay 82.9% (Down from 2000 figure: 84.01%). The top 50% pay 96.03% (Down from 2000 figure: 96.09%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.97% of all income taxes. The top 1% is paying more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 17.53 (2000: 20.81%) of all income. The top 5% earns 31.99 (2000: 35.30%). The top 10% earns 43.11% (2000: 46.01%); the top 25% earns 65.23% (2000: 67.15%), and the top 50% earns 86.19% (2000: 87.01%) of all the income.
The bottom 50% are paying a small portion of taxes, so you really can't give them a tax cut...The so-called "rich" are really the only ones paying taxes, so whatever tax cuts Kerry has for the rich isn't going to work...

Quote:
5. I think Bush's policies on education are stupid (ie "let's not talk about safe sex in sex ed class") and Kerry's would be better (the no child left behind plan also seems to sidestep the problem; it says, "if you are a failing school and need more money for better programs, we will give you less" or something along those lines).
What the hell are you talking about that "safe sex" stuff? All I can tell you is that there have been no cuts with the "No Child Left Behind" plan...By the president, we've increased education spending by more than 40% since 2001...Does Kerry even have an education plan?

Quote:
6. Kerry's plans for Iraq, while looking about the same as Bush's, have one thing in particular that stands out: reliance on allies' help which would be nice.
Kerry has no plans for Iraq...As far as terrorism goes, Kerry thinks you can simply make negotiations with the terrorists through the UN...That's apparently not possible, since you can't talk sense to a group of people that have no other mission with their lives than to cause harm and strike fear in peoples' lives...You think Bush would've called up members of the Taliban for a peace talk after a tragic event like September 11? These terrorists have no moral lives...When they kill 3000 of our own people in one day, the only responsible thing to do is go after these terrorists, wipe them out, and continue to do so to make sure another 9/11 doesn't happen again...On top of that, the UN didn't do shit in helping us out going after these terrorists...

And once again, read my responce, see link at the beginning of my post...I can't believe you think we're absolutly alone on the war against terrorism, because we're not, and you're much mistaken on that...It's not enough to hear Ted Kennedy say, "We're going to rebuild our alliances and make ourselves respected in the world"...I think we're very much respected...And Kerry isn't going to change the minds of the countries who aren't behind us (France and Germany)...

"I just want to lie in my own crusty filth, eating rancid egg sandwiches, until some unfortunate paramedic has to blow down my door to find my bloated and pasty corpse wedged between the nightstand and mattress stained with Bengay and Robitussin DM." - Greg Gutfeld on sex and seniors
"Syphilis does not stay in Vegas. Debt collectors do not stay in Vegas. Dead hookers stay in Vegas, but the guilt stays with you forever." - Bill Schultz
MidnightViper88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th August 2004, 08:50   #43
will
Nullsoft Newbie (Moderator)
 
will's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Sheffield, England
Posts: 5,569
And now, a one of a time performance, will doing gonzotek doing rm' doing Ralph Wiggum*:

My cats name is mittens...

DO NOT PM ME WITH TECH SUPPORT QUESTIONS
will is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th August 2004, 16:12   #44
Gonzotek
Gunslinger
 
Gonzotek's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Terminus
Posts: 4,693
Quote:
Originally posted by will
And now, a one of a time performance, will doing gonzotek doing rm' doing Ralph Wiggum:

My cats name is mittens...
LOL

I was away for a while.
But I'm feeling much better now.
Gonzotek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th August 2004, 18:47   #45
mikeflca
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: san diego, california.
Posts: 623
1. as for the stem cell stuff, Bush should give full governmental suppport for full stem cell research. He isn't doing so. Many say he is placing ideology before science and quite frankly they are right.
"President Bush is considering whether to continue a Clinton administration policy allowing federal funding of stem cell research." http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/p...oll010626.html


2. Agreed, Kerry lies too. But Bush still seems to do more cover ups. Remember how he opposed the 9/11 commission? And then opposed Condi rice testifying? It's that kind of stuff......

3. agreed, that was a bad argument in the good things for kerry category. still works for me though.

4. "The bottom 50% are paying a small portion of taxes, so you really can't give them a tax cut...The so-called "rich" are really the only ones paying taxes, so whatever tax cuts Kerry has for the rich isn't going to work..."

That didn't refute what I said.

5.the sex-ed stuff had to do with this (http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/31/news-ireland.php) there was a thread over at pabUK about it but i can't find it now :-\

http://www.ruraledu.org/issues/nclb.htm
Although yes, education spending has increased which is good
"Does Kerry even have an education plan?" http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/education/

7."Kerry has no plans for Iraq..."http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/iraq.html

"As far as terrorism goes, Kerry thinks you can simply make negotiations with the terrorists through the UN" http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/nati...terrorism.html

"When they kill 3000 of our own people in one day, the only responsible thing to do is go after these terrorists, wipe them out, and continue to do so to make sure another 9/11 doesn't happen again" agreed. unless doing so will cause more of them to spring up all around the world.

We are NOT alone in the warror on terror. I'd say that every civilized country in the world is against it. However, the war in IRAQ is a different story right now.

as for that link......pretty much the same stuff said here. By the way, you should stop considering the war on terror= to the invasion of Iraq. Realistically they are the same war NOW, but our alliance isn't so strong anymore....how many countries have pulled out already.....philllipines and Turkey or was it someone else.....?

mikeflca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th August 2004, 19:52   #46
papadoc
Comfortably Numb
(Forum King)
 
papadoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,612
Quote:
Originally posted by spiderbaby1958
You know, I really am firmly in the anyone-but-Bush camp. John Kerry, Al Sharpton, Lyndon Larouche, Joan Rivers...
So would you support Osama Bin Laden if he
were running against Bush?
papadoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th August 2004, 20:02   #47
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
How about that. I'm firmly in the anyone-as-long-as-it-is-Badnarik camp.

[edit]I'm also in the anyone-but-Bush-Kerry-or-Nader camp.[/edit]

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 00:48   #48
spiderbaby1958
Major Dude
 
spiderbaby1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Binghamton, NY
Posts: 789
Why isn't saying negative things about Bush allowed? Isn't that relevant? Doesn't actually being in a war provide some insight?

I'll freely admit that not being Bush is my favorite kerry attribute. HOWEVER, I do have and answer. What I find most hopeful about John Kerry is the same thing that I find kind of irritating about him... his habit of parsing things down the middle. I want a president who is capable of considering everybody's point of view. There's a slight chance that we can get united behind a leader who can make us feel like we all matter.

Now, can someone please tell me exactly what war crimes John Kerry testified to, because, let me say it again, there is a Senator BOB KERREY from NEBRASKA who actually testified to commiting war crimes, and I'm not yet convinced that you haven't gotten it wrong.
spiderbaby1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 03:21   #49
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313
Quote:
What do you democrats have to say about Kerry being a war-criminal?
I really dislike Kerry, but all I have to say is this:
Nam was Nam: shit happened all the time, I Can't really blame the guy


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 03:26   #50
spiderbaby1958
Major Dude
 
spiderbaby1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Binghamton, NY
Posts: 789
But aren't you changing the subject? This discussion isn't about whether Kerry would make a great president. I'm convinced that he'd be an improvement, but that's about as much as I'd be willing to bet real money on. The truth is there's no way of knowing. This discussion is about whether he's a war criminal who lied about his military record. This discussion is about character assasination.

I've been researching this Swift boat veterans thing and there's a lot of problems with it. There are contradictions and evasions. This is dirty politics, just muddying the water.

I'll have more to say about that when I've examined all the documents, which you can find yourself at factcheck.org, a site which is incredibly informative and REALLY nonpartisan. You'll also find lots of stuff you can use in a argument against guys like me, , e.g, an interesting article on "Kerry's Dubious Economics".

If we all went to factcheck.org, we might be able to have a discussion about real issues instead of trading insults and innuendo. There really are more important things at stake here than Kerry's War alleged war record, and even Bush's alleged coke habit.
spiderbaby1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 05:36   #51
ShyShy
Amazon Bush Woman
Forum Queen
 
ShyShy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Sticks, Queensland
Posts: 8,067
Quote:
Originally posted by mikeflca
5.the sex-ed stuff had to do with this (http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/31/news-ireland.php) there was a thread over at pabUK about it but i can't find it now :-\
Here you go
ShyShy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 05:37   #52
horse-fly
Account Closed
 
horse-fly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,360
I rather have someone who is already a war criminal than someone who is working their way to becoming one.
horse-fly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 17:42   #53
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
Quote:
Originally posted by mikeflca
5. I think Bush's policies on education are stupid (ie "let's not talk about safe sex in sex ed class") and Kerry's would be better (the no child left behind plan also seems to sidestep the problem; it says, "if you are a failing school and need more money for better programs, we will give you less" or something along those lines).
Quote:
Originally posted by ShyShy
Here you go
ShyShy's link proves one thing... Bush has nothing to do with it.
Quote:
Thursday, August 5, 2004 Posted: 6:52 PM EDT (2252 GMT)
DALLAS (Reuters) -- The lesson for Texas teens is that the only safe sex is no sex, and that may be a lesson that heads nationwide.

Texas educators are debating what will be taught in new sexual education textbooks for its high school students.
It hasn't been decided yet, as of August 5th. So, unless W. heads up the school Board in Texas, I fail to see how this relates to him.
Oh but I forgot, its Texas, so it has to be Bush's fault! These arguments against Bush are really getting lame.

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 18:17   #54
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Bush previously advocated this kind of sex education, and any national scheme of it would almost certainly get his approval, which is why he's being brought up.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 18:54   #55
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
"Previously advocated" and "would almost certainly get his approval" simply means "unrelated to now" and "speculation". This is what I mean about lame arguments.

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 19:11   #56
mikeflca
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: san diego, california.
Posts: 623
Cabo, did you read my link? regardless of bias, this was favored by right wingers who were making an incredibly stupid decision. And also I took health about a month back and they said that because of new regulations form the CDC, they could not talk about as much as they should have been able to.

Quite frankly, If President Bush doesn't like it, then why does he seem content to sit back and watch?

zootm's arguments make perfect sense. Also, if now Bush is against this kind of education, that makes him what right wingers have been trying to depict Kerry as......a flip-fliopper!

mikeflca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 19:31   #57
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
Its laughable that you equate the president's inaction on a local matter to mean that he supports it. Do you really think he has time to spend looking into matters of policy in each of the school districts in the country?

Also, how exactly does this make him a flip-flopper? If, as you say, he supported it then and he supports it now, where did he change his mind?

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 21:29   #58
mikeflca
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: san diego, california.
Posts: 623
so you didn't read my link. It is about FEDERAL GUIDELINES FROM THE CDC. that is not just a LOCAL matter.

when I say that you should read my link, I actually mean it.

edit: I was saying that if he supported it then but now doesn't support it, as you were trying to insinuate in your post before, that would make him a flip-flopper.

mikeflca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 23:01   #59
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
Your right, I didn't read it... I thought you were saying the link was broken. I was responding to shyshy's link.

About your link... The aticle said that educational materials created by HIV and AIDS researchers that funded by the government are the targets, not schools. Looking around at the site, it is quite obvious it is a very left wing publication. I would like to read the original transcript from the CDC before I comment any more.

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th August 2004, 23:49   #60
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by CaboWaboAddict
"Previously advocated" and "would almost certainly get his approval" simply means "unrelated to now" and "speculation". This is what I mean about lame arguments.
How's it unrelated to now? As far as people can tell, it's his stance - it is - to the best of our knowledge - how he'll decide, given the choice. If he didn't note the blindingly obvious then, it's unlikely he'll note it now.

It's perfectly relevant, until Bush publically changes his stance, which he hasn't. I take it it's out of line to talk about his stance on Gay Marriage, since he made that statement a few days/weeks/whatever ago and he might have changed his mind now?

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th August 2004, 02:51   #61
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
No, its not out of line and I don't think he'll change his stance on it.

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th August 2004, 18:21   #62
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
I don't think he'll change his mind on cloning, either.

It continues to be relevant.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th August 2004, 20:04   #63
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
Stem Cell Research Report

I'm not saying anything - one way or the other. You decide.

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th August 2004, 14:56   #64
Semantics
Senior Member
 
Semantics's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 123
Not to re-hash old news here, but since we are talking about Bush's safe sex policies...

His administration is the only one who has either severed ties with or cut funding from organizations like International Planned Parenthood. These organizations promote safe sex and womens rights (no-no's in Dubiya's world). So...its absurd to think that his international policies will not reflect how he handles sex education at home.

...final note...he's a flaming idiot. I know that undermines anything I could say on the matter of Bush, but it feels good saying it.
Semantics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th August 2004, 16:09   #65
protegechris
Forum Queen
 
protegechris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,635
Damn I hate when people start threads on topics like this, they always lead to flaming, and people are too dumb to realize arguing on the internet is pointless. We all know John Kerry is going to win, and I personally don't like either of them. Whoever wins, we lose.

yeah, i'm back.
protegechris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th August 2004, 21:08   #66
Namelessv1
Forum King
 
Namelessv1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,757
The alternative would be what? Mindless, frivolous topics? Political zeal is much better than politcal lethargy.
Namelessv1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2004, 01:15   #67
mikeflca
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: san diego, california.
Posts: 623
I find it rather hard to believe that Bush was the first one to approve any govt funding for stem cells when you can find out about Clinton funding stem cell research by searching through google. This appeared to be one of the best link there.

http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/ste...ppendix_d.html

Also, Bush's policy applies only to stem-cell lines created before August ......like, 8th?....2001. As a result, those are now extremely hard to get to....and old. On the other hand, Kerry offers full funding for stem cell research There isn't much comparison as far as I am concerned. While I am relieved that Bush didn't try to illegalize stem cell research, Kerry's proposed funding, as compared to Bush's, would do far more to advance this important field of research.

One thing I find funny: The right wing (esp. the religious part) is against abortion. They were the ones who got those CDC guidelines passed. Don't you find it ironic that they are trying to ban education that would crack down on abortions being needed? Why fight contraceptive education and then fight abortions? It is very contradictory......in many ways similar to the way they are trying to portray Kerry......

mikeflca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2004, 03:15   #68
MidnightViper88
Made In The USA
(Forum King)
 
MidnightViper88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The 502
Posts: 9,100
Send a message via AIM to MidnightViper88 Send a message via Yahoo to MidnightViper88
Quote:
Originally posted by mikeflca
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/terrorism.html[/url]
I thought Kerry was trying to make out our actions in Iraq as useless as the Vietnam war...Why would he contradict himself by negativly slamming Bush's efforts there, and then wanting to continue them once he's president?

Quote:
Realistically they are the same war NOW, but our alliance isn't so strong anymore....how many countries have pulled out already.....philllipines and Turkey or was it someone else.....?
Philippines and Spain...But to what cost? Spain fearfully pulled their troops out of Iraq when Zapatero was elected as the new Prime Minister over Aznar after the Madrid bombing that killed 200 people on May 11, 2004, the worst terrorist attack on the western world since the US' 9/11...Philippine troops pulled out after they gave in to terrorists demands that they pull out after taking a Philippine soilder hostage...Both instances are sending clear and false messages that we're (Allies on the war against terrorism) easily gullable to fall at the terrorists demands...It's unfortunate that those 2 countries gave up easily...

But that's been awhile ago...Read the news lately?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...International/

Quote:
Thousands of U.S. troops and Iraqi soldiers launched a major assault Thursday on militiamen loyal to a radical Shiite cleric in Najaf, with explosions and gunfire echoing around the holy city's revered Imam Ali shrine and its vast cemetery.

The coalition forces were trying to crush an uprising led by cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, whose fighters have been battling U.S. troops in Shiite strongholds across Iraq for a week. Hundreds of people have fled in the last few days, moving in with relatives and friends in quieter neighbourhoods, or out of Najaf entirely.

...

U.S. commanders say interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi would have to approve any operation at the shrine itself, and operations that involve entering the shrine would likely involve Iraqi national guard troops instead of U.S. forces.
Basically, the United States military, in coordination with the Iraqi military, has launched an assault on the home of Muqtada al-Sadr in Najaf, although he (al-Sadr himself) wasn't at home at the time (Don't you just hate it when that happens? Muqtar al-Sadr has to be holed up in the mosque with his renegades, and the purge there is underway...About operating with the shrine? It looks like we'll have to send in Iraqi troops if necessary to "respect" the shrine, and it looks like we'll have to do that...What else on fighting on the holy grounds?

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=5953327

Quote:
Iraq's most influential Shi'ite cleric urged Shi'ite rebels and U.S. forces fighting in Najaf to respect the holy city and its shrines, an aide said on Thursday.

"Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani is pained and very sad about what is happening in holy Najaf," Murtada al-Kashmiri told Reuters.

"We call for the holy soil and holy sites of this city to be respected," he added, speaking by telephone from London where Sistani is being treated for a heart problem.
Notice how al-Sistani says (In the 3rd paragraph) to basically "respect the holy soil/sites of the city", but doesn't condemn the military forces within the city? That's meaning he's pretty much saying "As long as you respect Najaf's holy shrines, I don't care if you take out Moqtada al-Sadr's guys"...Many in Iraq hold Sistani in the highest religious regard; He and Iraq's troops are on our side...

Quote:
What spiderbaby1958 said...
Why isn't saying negative things about Bush allowed? Isn't that relevant? Doesn't actually being in a war provide some insight?
1. I don't care what you have to say about Bush...I bet I could make 89%-accurate predictions on what you would say about Bush...What I want to hear instead is why you would support Senator John Forbes Kerry and Senator John Reid Edwards for President and Vice-President based off the issues that they support and why they would be better than President George Walker Bush based off logical information and facts...

2. John Kerry's 19 years as part of the Senate Intelligence makes more a difference and gives us better background on how he would run as President and why he should truthfully be given the chance to run, because as his job as President will be more reliavent with that he did in those 19 years in the Senate instead of what he did in those 4 months in Vietnam that he participated in over 30 years ago...

"I just want to lie in my own crusty filth, eating rancid egg sandwiches, until some unfortunate paramedic has to blow down my door to find my bloated and pasty corpse wedged between the nightstand and mattress stained with Bengay and Robitussin DM." - Greg Gutfeld on sex and seniors
"Syphilis does not stay in Vegas. Debt collectors do not stay in Vegas. Dead hookers stay in Vegas, but the guilt stays with you forever." - Bill Schultz
MidnightViper88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2004, 06:21   #69
grumpyBB
Senior Member
 
grumpyBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 359
Send a message via AIM to grumpyBB
Well, here's more proof Kerry was lying all along about Cambodia. The Swift Boat Vets were right.
Quote:
Kerry damage control on Cambodia story
Senator's supporters now saying trip in January 1969, not Christmas 1968

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 13, 2004
3:00 p.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

John Kerry continues to play damage control on his decades-long contention he was on a secret mission in Cambodia on Christmas Eve 1968, as word comes the author of a positive account of his Vietnam duty is preparing a column to explain the candidate's suspect story.

According to the Drudge Report, historian Doug Brinkley, author of "Tour of Duty," is writing a piece for the New Yorker saying it was actually January 1969 when Kerry was sent into Cambodia, not December 1968.

Kerry spent four months in Vietnam as skipper of a SWIFT Boat before returning to the U.S. and becoming a vocal leader of the anti-war movement.


As WorldNetDaily reported, the authors of the best-selling book "Unfit for Command," which refutes many of Kerry's war stories, claim that despite the senator's 1986 speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate mentioning spending Christmas Eve in Cambodia, the candidate was never in Vietnam's neighboring country. Rather, they say he was over 50 miles from the Cambodian border at Sa Dec.


"I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting in a gunboat in Cambodia," said Kerry on the Senate floor. "I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the president of the United States tell the American people I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have the memory which is seared – seared – in me. … "


Other references to the Cambodia trip appeared in the Boston Herald in 1979, a 1992 Associated Press story and a 2003 piece in the Washington Post.

Several analysts have pointed out inconsistencies in Kerry's accounts, one being the fact that he references President Nixon in the Senate floor speech even though Nixon wasn't sworn into office until January 1969.

After repeated attempts by this and other media outlets to seek a response from the Kerry campaign, the national director of Veterans for Kerry, John Hurley, told Fox News this week Kerry simply got the date of the Cambodia trip wrong.

"I think the date is what's inaccurate, that it was just not Christmas Eve Day," he told the news channel.

Another defense claims Kerry was near the border at Christmastime but not actually in Cambodia.

Columnist Norman Tucker writes about the January adjustment of the story:


In an attempt at damage control of Kerry's "seared in me" memory, the revelation has just now been made that he had misspoken and that it is now "seared" in him that he was really in Cambodia not on Christmas of 1968 but in January 1969. His four-month "tour of duty" does not leave much of a time frame for adjustment.
The problem for Kerry is that President Nixon did not even begin to bomb Cambodia until March of 1969 and did not send in troops there until April of 1970. It is hard to imagine just how Kerry got "ordered" there over two years before that date.

Kerry left Vietnam in March 1969 after receiving his third Purple Heart.

Retired Foreign Service Officer Andrew Antippas wrote today in a Washington Times op-ed piece:

"I served as a Foreign Service officer in the American embassy in Saigon from March 1968 to February 1970 and subsequently at the American embassy in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, from 1970 to 1972. My job in the political section of our embassy in Saigon was to be the 'Cambodia Man.' My principal tasks were to follow border incidents involving U.S. forces along the Cambodian border."

Antippas adds, "As U.S. forces in 1966 and 1967 progressively pushed the Vietnamese ... U.S. commanders sought permission for 'hot pursuit' operations against Communist forces attacking from Cambodian territory. This always was denied, much to the military's frustration." He notes that "concerning the assertion that Mr. Kerry was shot at by the Khmer Rouge during his Christmas 1968 visit to Cambodia, it should be noted that the Khmer Rouge didn't take the field until the Easter Offensive of 1972."

Concludes Antippas: "The bottom line of all this is that ... between 1961 and 1975, there was ongoing attention and scrutiny paid to the border because of the political sensitivities over the neutrality of the Cambodians. While things may have happened that no one ever found out about in Saigon, the Cambodians yelled bloody murder to the world press and the ICC whenever they found Americans trespassing."
Four days ago Fox News asked Kerry's campaign about his Cambodia story and they siad that he had never said he was in Cambodia, just near it. When they were presented with his 1979 letter to the editor of the Boston Herald and with the transcript of his 1986 speech in the senate, they said they could not answer but would have a reply by the end of the day. Three days later his campaign put out a story that said:
Quote:
Mr Kerry had been in the Mekong Delta "between" Vietnam and next-door Cambodia...
- a geographical zone not found on maps, which show the Mekong river running from Cambodia to Vietnam.
oops!

When that didn't fly they put another spin on the story and today said that it happened during Janurary 1969, not Christmas-eve 1968 like he's told all along. You'd think for somebody who has said that this event was "seared - seared in me" that he'd be able to remember the date this took place.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=39943

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ixnewstop.html

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=39966

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,128561,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,128744,00.html
grumpyBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2004, 07:11   #70
MidnightViper88
Made In The USA
(Forum King)
 
MidnightViper88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The 502
Posts: 9,100
Send a message via AIM to MidnightViper88 Send a message via Yahoo to MidnightViper88
Well, it's not often when history is re-written like this...

"I just want to lie in my own crusty filth, eating rancid egg sandwiches, until some unfortunate paramedic has to blow down my door to find my bloated and pasty corpse wedged between the nightstand and mattress stained with Bengay and Robitussin DM." - Greg Gutfeld on sex and seniors
"Syphilis does not stay in Vegas. Debt collectors do not stay in Vegas. Dead hookers stay in Vegas, but the guilt stays with you forever." - Bill Schultz
MidnightViper88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2004, 19:02   #71
mikeflca
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: san diego, california.
Posts: 623
On kerry's War record: it still is better than Bush's but I don't really care about it. Actually when it comes to war, he an Bush have a lot in common....they can't tell who is/was doing what, where.....Bush in Iraq, Kerry in "Nam (or [lack of] Cambodia)......

"I thought Kerry was trying to make out our actions in Iraq as useless as the Vietnam war...Why would he contradict himself by negativly slamming Bush's efforts there, and then wanting to continue them once he's president?"

The action of invasion did not help us, hence the uselessness. However, if we just pull out now, that woud truely give the terrorists a new taining ground in Iraq, so we have to at least make an attemp to make sure the new govt. can handle that.

"...It's unfortunate that those 2 countries gave up easily..."
agreed.

"But that's been awhile ago...Read the news lately?" yes. as long as nothing happens to the shrine because then we will really be fucked....

"Notice how al-Sistani says (In the 3rd paragraph) to basically "respect the holy soil/sites of the city", but doesn't condemn the military forces within the city? That's meaning he's pretty much saying "As long as you respect Najaf's holy shrines, I don't care if you take out Moqtada al-Sadr's guys"...Many in Iraq hold Sistani in the highest religious regard;
good.

"He and Iraq's troops are on our side..."
agreed, at least for now. Once again we have to be careful about that damn shrine....

mikeflca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2004, 00:40   #72
grayclay
Member
 
grayclay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: why would U want to know that?
Posts: 69
Send a message via AIM to grayclay
the one thing everyone here has to watch if ur interseted in politics is at www.jibjab.com
grayclay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2004, 15:12   #73
Semantics
Senior Member
 
Semantics's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 123
Why does a military record - or lack of - matter in a presidential race? Personally, I don't give two shits about it. It all about the issues. Someone a few posts ago said

Quote:
What I want to hear instead is why you would support Senator John Forbes Kerry and Senator John Reid Edwards for President and Vice-President based off the issues that they support and why they would be better than President George Walker Bush based off logical information and facts...
The enviroment...Bush has little respect for it, and proven by his policies of easeing clean air, etc. policies for companies. In my wonderful state of Michigan, the is mercury contamination in some bodies of water because Bush eased policies. He also wants to log more...like one of the last virgin forests out West, and wants to drill for oil in a vast national park in Alaska. He hasn't even come close to working hard enough to get hybrid cars put out en masse.
Strip mining the future of my kids...he not getting my vote

He wants to constitutionally ban gay marriage. What the fuck, its reason enough not to vote for him

Women's rights and health care (abortion). He is against it, and has made clear he will appoint Supreme Court Justices that would help him achieve his goals...Roe v. Wade anyone? Internationally, its more of the same. His answer for the EXTREMELY bad AIDS problem in Africa? Abstinence...which works about as well as a broken clock. He has cut ties and reduced funding for safe sex institutions like International Planned Parenthood (the only President to do that.)

Stem Cell research...doesn't want it. Could it all be a failure in the end, I guess it could be, but how are you going to know if you don't find out. Its like saying this could be a cure for cancer...but, fuck it, lets not do shit about it cause I don't agree with it. If his ass were paralized, I wonder what he'd say.

The Patriot Act...enough said

His diplomacy skills are less the average. He has damaged ties with the world. A "my way or the highway" attitude DOES NOT work in world politics. It takes someone with a brain to run America, and he ain't got it.

Finally...alot of people say he is a great leader, because he has all those bullshit traits. Do those traits make you a good leader? Yes, but he doesn't have them. He is not decisive, he's stubborn and hardheaded. If I was a manager of a retail store, and I was hard headed and didn't listen to the people under me, who can see things more clear than me, I'd fail as a leader. Conviction...well, Dubiya is more zealous. A extreme leader leads to polorization...hmm, thats strange, our nation is split because of his politics. People say he's brave, and I'll give him that on occasion, but there is a fine line between brave and stupid, and he crosses that line too much. Intellegence...Bush isn't smart. Just because you went to Ivy League insitutions, doesn't make you smart (in Yale by the way, Bush didn't do too well, just ask Garry Trudeau, author of the Doonesbury comic and classmate of Bush)

In four years, there is little positive that has come out of his adminstration. From education to the economy, nothing...and I voted for him four years ago. Never again.

And one more thing...Kerry isn't so great either, but he's no Junior, and thats good enough. Plus he doesn't have Cheney (sp.) or Rumsfeld.
Semantics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2004, 18:40   #74
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
Semantics, a lot of what you have said is true, a lot is opinion. I wish to take issue with this...
Quote:
Originally posted by Semantics
In my wonderful state of Michigan, the is mercury contamination in some bodies of water because Bush eased policies.
There has been mercury, PCBs, PBBs, DDT, and a lot of other bullshit in Michigans waters for years. I remember my fishing licenses from 30+ years ago that said to not eat certain fish or limit your intake of fish from most of the lakes and rivers in the lower penninsula. So don't pin that one on him.

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th August 2004, 19:47   #75
Semantics
Senior Member
 
Semantics's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 123
Your right about the opinions, some of them are just that, but they are founded on my perceptions of his actions...I'm gonnatry and find the news paper article on read on the mercury....the damn Free Press site is not cooperating
Semantics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2004, 05:47   #76
grumpyBB
Senior Member
 
grumpyBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 359
Send a message via AIM to grumpyBB
Quote:
Originally posted by Semantics
Why does a military record - or lack of - matter in a presidential race? Personally, I don't give two shits about it. It all about the issues.
Blame Kerry, he's the one that's campaigning on his 4 months of Vietnam service by running commercials, running radio ads and dragging vets on stage with him at the convention. Kerry is the one keeping mum on his 20 years of senate service that took place after he got back home. There's one person to blame for this and that person is John Kerry!
grumpyBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2004, 15:23   #77
CaboWaboAddict
Forum Sot
(Major Dude)
 
CaboWaboAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Marietta, Ga. U.S.A.
Posts: 3,915
Quote:
Originally posted by Semantics
Your right about the opinions, some of them are just that, but they are founded on my perceptions of his actions...I'm gonnatry and find the news paper article on read on the mercury....the damn Free Press site is not cooperating
How are things with the Detroit papers now? Before the merge the Free Press was liberal and the News was conservative. I haven't read them in a long time (over 10 years) are they still struggling with their identity, or are they now both leaning one way or the other?

Idiot's Advocate
My site (under construction)
CaboWaboAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2004, 17:27   #78
spiderbaby1958
Major Dude
 
spiderbaby1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Binghamton, NY
Posts: 789
Quote:
Originally posted by MidnightViper88
Umm, ever since it was brought up by the Reagens, W. Bush has actually has funded the issue for stem cell research, and as far as I know, has been the only president to fund research...I don't think Bill Clinton funded any money into it...



Read my responce in this thread...

He apparently bullshitted about his job as part of the Senate Intelligence during the Kerry-Edwards interview on the Stephanopolus show...And according to the people in the Swiftboat Vets for Truth group, he's also bullshitted about his "heroic" actions while fighting in Vietnam...Aside from lieing, he also covers up alot of himself, mainly his war atrocities and not mentioning much or nothing at all during his 19 years in the Senate...



You're using Bush, and you're cheating...This whole "anybody but Bush" attitude alone will get no one a Presidential rank...Using that as a reason to vote for Kerry is just plain childish...If that's the only reason you have to defend Kerry with, that's just sad...But it's understandable, since according to Kerry about his issues, he's keeping them a secret, and won't reveal what they are unless elected...

(Also from the Steph. show) "I know that as president there's huge leverage that will be available to me, enormous cards to play, and I'm not going to play them in public, George. I'm not going to play them before I'm president"

Confidence on Kerry, alright...



I mentioned this elsewhere ont he forums, I think...I'm not sure, but I read this somewhere on the internet...



The bottom 50% are paying a small portion of taxes, so you really can't give them a tax cut...The so-called "rich" are really the only ones paying taxes, so whatever tax cuts Kerry has for the rich isn't going to work...



What the hell are you talking about that "safe sex" stuff? All I can tell you is that there have been no cuts with the "No Child Left Behind" plan...By the president, we've increased education spending by more than 40% since 2001...Does Kerry even have an education plan?



Kerry has no plans for Iraq...As far as terrorism goes, Kerry thinks you can simply make negotiations with the terrorists through the UN...That's apparently not possible, since you can't talk sense to a group of people that have no other mission with their lives than to cause harm and strike fear in peoples' lives...You think Bush would've called up members of the Taliban for a peace talk after a tragic event like September 11? These terrorists have no moral lives...When they kill 3000 of our own people in one day, the only responsible thing to do is go after these terrorists, wipe them out, and continue to do so to make sure another 9/11 doesn't happen again...On top of that, the UN didn't do shit in helping us out going after these terrorists...

And once again, read my responce, see link at the beginning of my post...I can't believe you think we're absolutly alone on the war against terrorism, because we're not, and you're much mistaken on that...It's not enough to hear Ted Kennedy say, "We're going to rebuild our alliances and make ourselves respected in the world"...I think we're very much respected...And Kerry isn't going to change the minds of the countries who aren't behind us (France and Germany)...
Man, this forum sucks. Am I really supposed to respond to this elaborate study in ignorance. I'll keep it brief. You can get specifics for Kerry's programs by going to his website by going to his website. The idea that he's "keeping positions a secret until he's elected is a fantasy", and this idea of getting the UN to neotiate with terrorists is plain silly. He wants to bring the UN into the process of stabilizing Iraq, not negotiating with Al Queda. Confused, are we?

I could go on with some of your other dumb assertions, but this is about all the effort you're worth. This forum really sucks.
spiderbaby1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2004, 18:23   #79
Semantics
Senior Member
 
Semantics's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 123
Quote:
How are things with the Detroit papers now? Before the merge the Free Press was liberal and the News was conservative. I haven't read them in a long time (over 10 years) are they still struggling with their identity, or are they now both leaning one way or the other?
The Free Press is liberal still (thank god)...I don't read the News too much, so I really don't know.
Semantics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2004, 18:24   #80
zootm
Forum King
 
zootm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the nether reaches of bonnie scotland
Posts: 13,375
Quote:
Originally posted by CaboWaboAddict
Stem Cell Research Report

I'm not saying anything - one way or the other. You decide.
I did. Already. I wish you wouldn't assume that I was ignorant just because I don't agree with your point of view.

zootm is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Community Center > Breaking News

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump