Kerry Was A War Hero And Bush Wasn't AWOL

[Marxist]

Can't we just concentrate on the election at hand? All this intellectual dishonesty is sad and hurting Bush's re-election.

 

[Marxist]

Is there another conservative on the board besides me who's sick of this petty shit?

It's like we've turned over Conservativism to a bunch of hacks all the while Edwards smiles and wins votes.

 

[catfish]

Are you channeling the ghost of Ronald Reagan?

 

[Marxist]

Are you channeling the ghost of Ronald Reagan?

No, Goldwater but I couldn't find a decent av.

 

[catfish]

Originally posted by Marxist
No, Goldwater but I couldn't find a decent av.

I like this one..
http://www.mccunetv.com/goldwater3.jpg

 

[Marxist]

I like this one..
http://www.mccunetv.com/goldwater3.jpg

He looks like Magoo.

I always thought his lapel pin was neat though. Y'know the one that said AuH20?

 

[catfish]

Originally posted by Marxist
He looks like Magoo.

I always thought his lapel pin was neat though. Y'know the one that said AuH20?

Never saw that but it is original.

 

[Marxist]

http://www.polanskywholesale.com/pb39.gif

 

[ruminator]

Maybe GWB has really been misunderestimated by his opposing constituents. It wasn't really his fault that the intel agencies pushed bad information on him.

Evidently he has little to do with the price of gas as well or it wouldn't be hitting record prices on the market today.

Somebody's making boatloads of money but I bet it's not him.

Good thing there's a push overseas for absentee ballots for Bush.

 

[Calamity Jane]

I'm not a conservative, but I agree that Bush's commercials are damaging him more than they're helping.

Sometimes, I hate living in a swing state. It seems like every other commercial on TV is a political ad. And they're ALL negative this year. Very few of them have anything to do with what a candidate plans, and everything to do with what the OTHER candidate will fuck up.

There's a presumption of ignorance that I find irritating as hell.

 

[miles]

Can't we just concentrate on the election at hand? All this intellectual dishonesty is sad and hurting Bush's re-election.

Intellectual dishonesty? That's what most people are calling the Democratic Convention. All those Liberals have suddenly undergone a conservative transformation. What a fraud! The same party who ranted against the Vietnam War 30 years ago are peeing all over themselves talking about their "war hero."

I'm more convinced than ever that Kerry is the Dem's sacrificial lamb. A 2004 Michael Dukakis. "Anyone but Bush" will only carry you so far, and he's getting close to the brick wall. He stands for nothing.

 

[ruminator]

Maybe Nancy Reagan will reconsider and agree to appear at the RNC. There's a lot of disappointed folks hoping she'll change her mind and make an appearance.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Re: Re: Kerry Was A War Hero And Bush Wasn't AWOL

Intellectual dishonesty? That's what most people are calling the Democratic Convention. All those Liberals have suddenly undergone a conservative transformation. What a fraud! The same party who ranted against the Vietnam War 30 years ago are peeing all over themselves talking about their "war hero."

I'm more convinced than ever that Kerry is the Dem's sacrificial lamb. A 2004 Michael Dukakis. "Anyone but Bush" will only carry you so far, and he's getting close to the brick wall. He stands for nothing.

Political parties, like people, change in 30 years, Miles. Even though you are still the same whiny petulant child you were 30 years ago, people by and large change with the times. The Democratic party of today is at least as conservative as the Republican party of 1970, while the Republican party has lurched even further right-ward to the outer fringes of political thought.

And while you're certainly welcome to your opinion, I think "Anyone but Bush" is going to carry an awful lot of weight this season...maybe in excess of 40% of the vote.

Oh, and there's no need to tell me that you have me on ignore, Miles. Your cowardice and "shit-n-run" posting style are well known to the majority of people here.

 

[miles]

Rob, I don't know what you said but I'm sure it's as enlightening as usual.

Find something important to do with your life other than using my av and following me around like a little puppy into every thread. You're making a fool of yourself, as you will by replying again.

Get a life, smegma breath.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Rob, I don't know what you said but I'm sure it's as enlightening as usual.

Find something important to do with your life other than using my av and following me around like a little puppy into every thread. You're making a fool of yourself, as you will by replying again.

Get a life, smegma breath.

LOL...Unlike you, I'm not afraid to discuss political issues.

Once again, you've shown a noticeable lack of intellectual firepower in a political thread. You dish it out, but literally cannot take it.

That's why you are in therapy.

Go back to trolling for cyberskanks, Miles...p_p_man won't be on for a few hours.

 

[busybody..]

LOL...Unlike you, I'm not afraid to discuss political issues.

Once again, you've shown a noticeable lack of intellectual firepower in a political thread. You dish it out, but literally cannot take it.
.

Yes you are.

You dont answer legitimate questions posed to you based on your comments.

So cut the BS

 

[RobDownSouth]

Yes you are.

You dont answer legitimate questions posed to you based on your comments.

So cut the BS

*chuckle...that's because you keep asking stoopid questions over and over, whether or not they pertain to the thread in question.

I'll debate any issue, but I'm not going to play 20 questions with you over and over just because you got tired of cut and pasting.

 

[busybody..]

*chuckle...that's because you keep asking stoopid questions over and over, whether or not they pertain to the thread in question.

I'll debate any issue, but I'm not going to play 20 questions with you over and over just because you got tired of cut and pasting.

There you go.

When you wont answer a legit question, you turn on the questioner.

I askede a legit question.

Did you support the invasion of Afghanistan and why?

It was a question relavant to the thread.

You avoided the question. So dont give me BS about C & P.

 

[busybody..]

"During the Vietnam war, George Bush served in the Air National Guard. He flew a dangerous fighter, prone to catastophic engine failure. His job was to counter the very real threat of Soviet nuclear bombers --- which were making repeated incursions into US airspace at the time. Just another aspect of the Cold War."

 

[busybody..]

Now, I've said this before and I'm going to keep saying it. It's not right -- it's improper, unseemly, unethical and dishonorable -- for a party with a Bush-Cheney ticket to mock John Kerry's service.

Yes, I know the temptation is strong; and I know there are all sorts of respects -- including this latest one -- in which Kerry's military service is pretty darn mockable.

But when all is said and done, he served. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney didn't, and they should have done. I say this as a Bush-Cheney voter. I like the ticket, and I'll be voting for it. I wouldn't vote Kerry-Edwards at the point of a gun. Yet if you ask me: "Doesn't it take some of the luster off the GOP ticket to know that when it came time for your guys to put themselves in harm's way at the nation's call, they ducked it?" my honest answer would be: "Yes, it does."

And yes, of course I suspect Kerry's motives in going to VN just as much as you do. It is still the case that he went. It is still the case that if some NVA round had passed six inches further to the left, he would have been maimed or killed.

The honor that we accord to our serving men and women is, in my personal opinion, indivisible. John Kerry is just as entitled to it as anyone else who served. That's how I see it, anyway.

 

[busybody..]

*chuckle...that's because you keep asking stoopid questions over and over, whether or not they pertain to the thread in question.

I'll debate any issue, but I'm not going to play 20 questions with you over and over just because you got tired of cut and pasting.

And another thing

When you asked where the outrage was on the Repo side for the Shelby shit, I showed you.

I asked you to show me the Demo outrage over Wilson/Moore/Clarke lies, per 9/11 commission.......SILENCE.

So no BS, ok?

 

[RobDownSouth]

There you go.

When you wont answer a legit question, you turn on the questioner.

I askede a legit question.

Did you support the invasion of Afghanistan and why?

It was a question relavant to the thread.

You avoided the question. So dont give me BS about C & P.

Alright, I will try and speak slowly so you can understand...

I supported the Administration's decision to invade Afghanistan, even without the backing of the United Nations, because there was demonstrable proof that Afghanistan was (and still is) the headquarters for Al Qeada, which was a clear and present danger to the United States.

Also, I am saddened that we have subsequently forfeited almost all our hard-won victory in Afghanistan, as resources were pulled from Afghanistan to support American adventurism in Iraq.

Today we hold ONLY the captial city of Kabul, and opium warldrds control the rest of the country. And Osama Bin Laden is most likely still in Tora Bora....laughing at us.

Now bookmark this thread, because I am not answering this question again.

 

[busybody..]

There was NO evidence that the Taliban, the government of Ganistan was a threat to us, NONE.

How do YOU know OBL was in Gannistan?

Cause the INTEL guys said so, so you and the Pres relied on that INTEL!!!!!!!!!

But when the same INTEL guys said that SH had WMDs and was a threat, an assertion agreed to by ClitMan and KommieKerry in 98 all the way thru 02..........

You chose to say it was wrong!

Why right on Afghanistan and wrong on Iraq?

BTW, I could give 2 fucks about Gannistan, as long as they are no threat to us!

Why did it take 3 weeks for an answer?

Cause you knew the answer couldnt stand scrutiny.

But I like you anyway, Wanna FUCK?

 

[busybody..]

BTW, Robbie

The UN did give the "go ahead" for the Ganny invasion.

Fuck the UN

Blow the shithole up.

 

[busybody..]

Robbie

1) Wrong about the UN and Gannistan

2) Avoid answering the follow up question, no surprise

3) Wrong on the situation is Ganistan


4) Didnt answer the "outrage" question.....I wont hold breath for 2 and 4

But I still love you, can I see your PUSSY?


OPTIMISM IN AFGHANISTAN

By RYAN SAGER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OPTIMISM IN AFGHANISTAN

By RYAN SAGER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

July 27, 2004 -- THERE'S good news from the forgotten front of the War on Terror: The first-ever public opinion poll in Afghanistan shows that people there are optimistic about the future and excited about upcoming elections.
But you wouldn't know it from the mainstream press, which received the poll with a level of skepticism usually reserved for Yeti sightings and money transfers originating in Nigeria. The most coverage given to the poll so far: a five-sentence news brief in The Washington Post.

Perhaps some folks worry that the news is a bit too convenient for President Bush.

With the situation in Iraq seen by many as a mess, Afghanistan has a constitution, is registering voters and is moving toward holding a presidential election in October. And the survey of 804 randomly selected male and female Afghan citizens, commissioned by the Asia Foundation notes that:

* 64 percent say the country is heading in the right direction.

* 81 percent say that they plan to vote in the October election.

* 77 percent say they believe the elections will "make a difference."



* 64 percent say they rarely or never worry about their personal safety, while under the Taliban only 36 percent felt that way.

* 62 percent rate President Hamid Karzai's performance as either good or excellent.

This was no pro-Bush put-up job. The polling firm, Charney Research, is a partisan Democratic polling firm. And superstar Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, who's read the study — and who has worked on similar polling in developing countries — calls it "very reliable."

Perhaps the media skepticism comes from the notion that it is simply too difficult to conduct a poll in a war-torn state like Afghanistan.

But if there's an expert in polling in the midst of turmoil, it would be the principal of Charney Research, Craig Charney. He's done opinion research everywhere from Nicaragua to East Timor to Lebanon — with results that were borne out when voters went to the polls.

The job is a lot tougher than polling in the United Sates. First, Afghanistan's a tough country in which to get around — for logistical and security reasons, Charney says three of the country's 32 provinces, with some 6 percent of the population, were inaccessible.

Second, Afghanistan hasn't had an official census since the 1970s. One's underway, but not complete, so Charney and his team had to rely on U.N. estimates to determine where population centers were.

But Charney Research, in accordance with international standards, randomly selected villages — and then families within those villages, and then members within those families — for in-depth interviews in the appropriate language, Dari or Pashtu.

Participants overwhelmingly said they felt free to speak, and plenty of them exercised that right by criticizing their government. Security and the economy were the greatest national concerns.

"It's mixed news," said a former legal adviser to Afghanistan's constitution commission, Alexander Thier of the Hoover Institution. After 30 years that represented "one long, unremitting descent into chaos," he said, "people have seen that there really is a possibility that the long downward spiral is over."

What Thier finds worrying in the report is that, while Afghans are looking forward to voting, only 37 percent were confident that elections would be free and fair.

In a country with a history of civil war, this could spell trouble. "If most Afghans aren't confident about elections, it will be easy for people who are unhappy to turn others against the results," Thier said.

But since the presidential election will be held first — followed by parliamentary elections next spring — there's a chance for things to go smoothly, Thier said.

Karzai is very popular — Bush can only wish he had Karzai's numbers — and there's no serious opposition to him this October. So, in effect, that election can serve as a dry run before the potentially more divisive elections in 2005.

"Afghans would like to see democracy in their country after decades of war," Charney said. "Even those who say they are dissatisfied say they want more aid, not the return of the Taliban."

"Many people said, 'Thank you for asking,' " he said. "No one's ever asked."

E-mail: rsager@nypost.com


July 27, 2004 -- THERE'S good news from the forgotten front of the War on Terror: The first-ever public opinion poll in Afghanistan shows that people there are optimistic about the future and excited about upcoming elections.
But you wouldn't know it from the mainstream press, which received the poll with a level of skepticism usually reserved for Yeti sightings and money transfers originating in Nigeria. The most coverage given to the poll so far: a five-sentence news brief in The Washington Post.

Perhaps some folks worry that the news is a bit too convenient for President Bush.

With the situation in Iraq seen by many as a mess, Afghanistan has a constitution, is registering voters and is moving toward holding a presidential election in October. And the survey of 804 randomly selected male and female Afghan citizens, commissioned by the Asia Foundation notes that:

* 64 percent say the country is heading in the right direction.

* 81 percent say that they plan to vote in the October election.

* 77 percent say they believe the elections will "make a difference."



* 64 percent say they rarely or never worry about their personal safety, while under the Taliban only 36 percent felt that way.

* 62 percent rate President Hamid Karzai's performance as either good or excellent.

This was no pro-Bush put-up job. The polling firm, Charney Research, is a partisan Democratic polling firm. And superstar Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, who's read the study — and who has worked on similar polling in developing countries — calls it "very reliable."

Perhaps the media skepticism comes from the notion that it is simply too difficult to conduct a poll in a war-torn state like Afghanistan.

But if there's an expert in polling in the midst of turmoil, it would be the principal of Charney Research, Craig Charney. He's done opinion research everywhere from Nicaragua to East Timor to Lebanon — with results that were borne out when voters went to the polls.

The job is a lot tougher than polling in the United Sates. First, Afghanistan's a tough country in which to get around — for logistical and security reasons, Charney says three of the country's 32 provinces, with some 6 percent of the population, were inaccessible.

Second, Afghanistan hasn't had an official census since the 1970s. One's underway, but not complete, so Charney and his team had to rely on U.N. estimates to determine where population centers were.

But Charney Research, in accordance with international standards, randomly selected villages — and then families within those villages, and then members within those families — for in-depth interviews in the appropriate language, Dari or Pashtu.

Participants overwhelmingly said they felt free to speak, and plenty of them exercised that right by criticizing their government. Security and the economy were the greatest national concerns.

"It's mixed news," said a former legal adviser to Afghanistan's constitution commission, Alexander Thier of the Hoover Institution. After 30 years that represented "one long, unremitting descent into chaos," he said, "people have seen that there really is a possibility that the long downward spiral is over."

What Thier finds worrying in the report is that, while Afghans are looking forward to voting, only 37 percent were confident that elections would be free and fair.

In a country with a history of civil war, this could spell trouble. "If most Afghans aren't confident about elections, it will be easy for people who are unhappy to turn others against the results," Thier said.

But since the presidential election will be held first — followed by parliamentary elections next spring — there's a chance for things to go smoothly, Thier said.

Karzai is very popular — Bush can only wish he had Karzai's numbers — and there's no serious opposition to him this October. So, in effect, that election can serve as a dry run before the potentially more divisive elections in 2005.

"Afghans would like to see democracy in their country after decades of war," Charney said. "Even those who say they are dissatisfied say they want more aid, not the return of the Taliban."

"Many people said, 'Thank you for asking,' " he said. "No one's ever asked."

E-mail: rsager@nypost.com