SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   Politicsforeign affairs, unchaperoned


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: American Spirit who wrote (206)9/2/2004 11:44:28 AM
From: Karen Lawrence
   of 261
 
Why is Bush using 9/11 victims to support his cause. Isn't the fact we were attacked on HIS watch enough for the right to show his incompetence? And now we have almost 1,000 troops killed in Iraq, adding to the Bush body count.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (207)9/2/2004 11:49:15 AM
From: American Spirit
   of 261
 
Most 9-11 families are not happy with Bush at all. He tries to stop the 9-11 commission remember.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: American Spirit who wrote (208)9/2/2004 11:59:19 AM
From: Karen Lawrence
   of 261
 
He tried to stop the Commission, which went ahead anyway, now he says he supported it. Flip/flop Bush.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (209)9/2/2004 12:02:06 PM
From: American Spirit
   of 261
 
Flip-Flop Bush flops on everything but tas cuts for the rich. Look at Iraq. He's been fairly steady but this election season he has flip-flopped from his "Bring it on!" challenge to terrorists and appeased them, dropping back and disposing of the responsibility, handing it off to Iraqis. All so more bad stuff like Abu graib doesn't dirty his white shirt. But only Kerry can solve Iraq because we needs lots of international help and they just dont want to help Bush, they distrust him so much.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)


To: American Spirit who wrote (210)9/2/2004 12:09:54 PM
From: JakeStraw
   of 261
 
The Opening Salvo:

Last March, Demo National Committee loudmouth Terry McAuliffe (also in the tenacious grip of PMS) estimated that Kerry would have to win the hearts and minds of veterans in order to defeat George W. Bush. So he wrapped Kerry in his embellished war record and, a month later, took a cheap shot at President Bush, proclaiming that he was AWOL during his last year of service as an Air National Guard fighter pilot.

Right about now, McAuliffe and Kerry are wishing they'd never fired that shot. Much to their surprise, several Vietnam veterans groups had the audacity to take a gander at Kerry's service record--both his record of ''giving aid and comfort to the enemy'' by slandering his fellow veterans while they were still fighting or captive in Vietnam, and his contrived record of heroic acts as evidenced by his impressive list of military decorations. By early May, those veterans were firing back at Kerry and his cadre.

Initially, Kerry took the defensive: ''I think a lot of veterans are going to be very angry at a president who can't account for his own service in the National Guard...criticizing somebody who fought for their country and served.'' (Oops, another cheap shot at our National Guard and Reserve forces.)

Fortunately, President Bush can account for his service. He wanted to fly fighter jets, he earned his wings, and he logged many air defense hours in an F-102 Delta Dagger with the 147th Fighter Group and its subordinate 111th FIS, Texas ANG. Mr. Bush's unit was subject to rotation in Vietnam under the Palace Alert Program. In fact, 15 F-102 pilots were killed in Vietnam, but American involvement in that conflict was de-escalating by 1972, and Bush was honorably discharged from his service with the ANG.

Of course, as noted in The Patriot many times before, George Bush's most distinguished military service has been in his role as Commander-in-Chief since the 9/11 attack on our nation--one of the most difficult and challenging periods for any president since World War II.

Implicit in Kerry's warning, however, is the notion that he, himself, volunteered for service in Vietnam. Remember Bill Clinton's repetitive ''Send me'' paean at the Demo Convention? Try again. Kerry's anti-military sentiments were well known when he was a student at Yale. After graduating, Kerry petitioned his draft board for a student deferment so he could study in--where else?--Paris. His deferment denied, Kerry then calculated that he could avoid Vietnam by joining the Naval Reserves, where he'd likely be able to serve stateside even if his unit was activated. Kerry's service record indicates that on 18 February 1966 he enlisted in the USNR under ''inactive'' status. This puts the lie to any assertion that Kerry ''volunteered'' for dangerous swift boat duty while George W. Bush somehow slunk off to fly fighter-jets.

As fate would have it, Kerry's reserve unit was activated, while the president's ANG unit remained stateside--yet both circumstances were far beyond the control of these two junior officers. As for Kerry's choice of Swift Boats, he told the Boston Globe last year, ''I didn't really want to get involved in the war. When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling....''

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: American Spirit who wrote (210)9/2/2004 12:33:22 PM
From: Karen Lawrence
   of 261
 
Bush has also been consistent in his
cowardice:

Bush's 9/11 Cowardice
by Kos

published by Daily Kos

Bush's 9/11 Cowardice

So what does it mean when Tucker Carlson and Andrew Sullivan both declare they can't vote for Bush in November? That they're whores? That they're reading the tea leaves and don't want to get stuck on the wrong side of history? That they're tools and hacks and don't matter?

Perhaps. But they do have their own sphere of relevance, and frankly, every right-wing pundit that turns away from Bush is a victory for us. And the latest Esquire magazine, in addition to running Ron Reagan's anti-Bush screed, also treats us to Carlson and Sullivan declaring their disappointment in the failed Bush presidency.

Carlson, in particular, is brutal on Bush, taking him to task for his cowardice on 9-11 (no free online version):

"... The attacks initially made me sorry I voted for him. For most of that day, as my wife and children stayed inside our house listening to the roar of fighter jets overhead, and black smoke from the Pentagon hovered above our neighborhood, Bush failed to return to Washington. My family sat unprotected a few miles from the scene of a terrorist attack; Bush hid in a bunker on some faraway military base.

"It infuriated me, as did the subsequent excuses from White House spokesman. There was a risk in coming back, they said. There was a risk in coming back, they said. Of course there was. That's the point: Leaders must take risks, sometimes physical ones. Bush should have elbowed his Secret Service detail out of the way and returned in a display of fearlessness to his nation's capital. I found it distressingly revealing that he didn't.
So did I. It was one of my earliest thoughts that fateful day. Say what you will about Giuliani, and most of what I would say is bad. But Rudi showed the type of leadership Bush only wishes he could muster."

What's worse, Rove knew how bad Bush's cowardice looked, so much the same way they handle any obstacle they face, they lied. Rove claimed they had received credible threats against Air Force One, a ludicrous assertion that was proven false days later. But in the chaos of the moment, both Bush's palpable fear and the lies used to cover it up were lost.

But as Carlson says, the incident was revealing. Just as Kerry's heroism half a world away is revealing. There's a reason the Swift Boat Liars are going after the story so hard. Kerry turned his boat into the danger he faced. Bush ran to Nebraska and cowered in fear.
progressivetrail.org

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: American Spirit who wrote (210)9/2/2004 1:55:08 PM
From: Karen Lawrence
   of 261
 
Three years ago, this is how turncoat, flip/flopper Zell Miller introduced Senator Kerry:

miller.senate.gov/press/030101jjdinner.htm

Introduction of Senator John Kerry

Democratic Party of Georgia's
Jefferson-Jackson Dinner

March 1, 2001

My job tonight is an easy one: to present to you one of this nation's authentic heroes, one of this party's best-known and greatest leaders – and a good friend.

He was once a lieutenant governor – but he didn't stay in that office 16 years, like someone else I know. It just took two years before the people of Massachusetts moved him into the United States Senate in 1984.

In his 16 years in the Senate, John Kerry has fought against government waste and worked hard to bring some accountability to Washington.

Early in his Senate career in 1986, John signed on to the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Reduction Bill, and he fought for balanced budgets before it was considered politically correct for Democrats to do so.

John has worked to strengthen our military, reform public education, boost the economy and protect the environment. Business Week magazine named him one of the top pro-technology legislators and made him a member of its "Digital Dozen."

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: marcos who started this subject9/2/2004 2:02:31 PM
From: teevee
   of 261
 
Bush or Kerry? I don't think it matters because the issues are tribal. Look at how native North American and African tribes have treated each other. There is no difference when considering the outcome between the USA tribe and the Arab tribes. The strong prevail and the weak die. That is what history teaches.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Karen Lawrence who wrote (213)9/2/2004 3:10:20 PM
From: American Spirit
   of 261
 
Zell goes wild

Maybe Zell Miller was just strung too tight following his wild-eyed attack on John Kerry Wednesday night. But following his prime-time convention address, he made the rounds on the cable TV circuit and stole the show -- and not in a good way. Miller's speech was so over-the-top (he essentially questioned Kerry's loyalty to America), it prompted mild-mannered talking head David Gergen to compare Miller to racist demagogue Lester Maddox, while Time's Joe Klein had to pick his jaw up off the ground before he could analyze it. But Miller's post-speech cable performance was even more jaw-dropping, as he first badly fumbled questions from CNN anchors, then lost it with "Hardball's" Chris Matthews, repeatedly challenging the MSNBC host to a duel and telling him to "shut up."

On CNN, he came under respectful but close questioning from Wolf Blitzer, Judy Woodruff and Jeff Greenfield, who pressed the wayward Democrat about why he mocked Kerry for using the phrase "occupiers" when describing U.S. troops in Iraq (Miller prefers "liberators"), when President Bush has himself used the same phrase for the same U.S. troops. Miller clearly had no idea that was the case and passed on giving a response. He was also asked why just three years ago he had introduced Kerry in Georgia as an American hero who had worked hard for our nation's security (the speech is still up on Miller's Web site). Miller suggested he was new to the Senate at the time and basically didn't know what he was talking about.

And about those weapons system votes that Miller criticized Kerry for making over a decade ago -- wasn't it true that while as secretary of defense Dick Cheney raised similar doubts about those very same systems? Miller said he'd let Cheney answer that himself. Finally, Blitzer asked Miller why he looked so angry during his speech, and couldn't that hurt the cause he was pushing? Miller, who in fact looked like he was suffering from flashback Atlanta road rage at the podium periodically, said he was sorry if he came across as angry because he didn't mean to.

But that was just the warm-up. Next it was over to Chris Matthews' "Hardball" on MSNBC where Miller, perhaps still bruised by his wobbly CNN showing, just plain lost it. Actually, Miller appeared from Madison Square Garden, while "Hardball's" set was over in Herald Square. And when Miller was announced he was greeted with a chorus of "boos" by the crowd of local Democrats assembled behind the "Hardball" taping area. Things went downhill for Miller from there.

Matthews asked Miller to defend his speech, and particularly his allegations that John Kerry voted "against" various defense appropriations. (As both Matthews and Miller know, voting against a large appropriations bill doesn't necessarily mean that you disapprove of every part of the bill). Miller got progressively angrier as Matthews persisted in holding him to his statement, telling Matthews several times that he wished he was in the studio so he could "get up in your face."

As Miller steamed, Matthews asked him if he thought that he was helping the political discourse in the country, and then, whether he even thought he was helping the Republicans by what he was saying. At that point Miller's meltdown peaked. He started waving his arms around, demanding Matthews "shut up" and let him answer the question. Miller then lapsed into a dialogue with himself wondering, "I don't know why I even came on this program," before returning to Matthews and announcing he wished they lived in a previous era because he would have "challenged you to a duel."

Thursday morning, Miller may deny he was serious when he said all of that, but the semi-deranged expression on his face at that moment suggested he'd truly lost control. Matthews, slightly embarrassed by the whole thing, laughed off Miller's left-field explosion, and invited him back tonight in person for a "more civil discussion." More important, Matthews insisted the show would get great ratings because everybody would be waiting to see if Miller was going to "beat me up."

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: American Spirit who wrote (215)9/2/2004 3:14:00 PM
From: Karen Lawrence
   of 261
 
The Zell Miller show would be a hoot.

He'll probably retract his retraction about his stance against "negroes".

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10