Topic: Kerry: "I'm running for president because..." (Read 21203 times)

Rico · « **Reply #75 on:** July 28, 2004, 01:24:37 AM »

Welcome back! Always glad to see you.

THAT, gentlemen, is how you shoot a person down with style and still be respectful about it.

You're absolutely right. In many ways Kerry may be better for the military than Bush, and it's certainly true that he has a more intimate understanding of how we work when at war than our current President.

I'm afraid, however, that his party will not allow him to act as he may feel he should. Democrats have seemed to be typically against military pay raises and greater military funding. It's not always true, but in current politics your party seems to dictate how you vote(or veto) as much, or more, than anything. So that's one worry.

Also, Kerry used to associate with Jane Fonda, and the afore mentioned organization. I will grant you that I'm nursing a grudge that's not really mine to hold on to, but I see that as betraying all the men left behind in that horrible place. Those associations are nearly enough in themselves to cause me to be against him, but without his being more descriptive about how he plans to accomplish all his promises, and the fact that I really haven't heard enough from him how he plans to help the military, I just can't find enough reason to vote for him.

This is a question for all of you hard-liner Democrats out there: Our country is in a mess. We won't debate why, or how, hind-sight is 20/20. Has Kerry said anything about how he plans to get us out of it? We can't just turn around and walk away. I admit I haven't had as much time to follow the canidates as I would like, but I'm really currious what the plans are to get us out of two wars going against us.

The_FOO · « **Reply #76 on:** July 28, 2004, 06:59:45 AM »

It's my understanding that Until the DNC is over Kerry isn't officially a candidate for election right? He's just the front running (only?) Democratic nominee at this point.

Wouldn't it be a bit premature of him to speak for his party until he has that official nomination? I don't fault him for not voicing specific plans as of yet.

Technically I suppose the Republicans could nominate someone other than Bush as their candidate at this point too.

Binoboy · « **Reply #77 on:** July 28, 2004, 10:40:56 AM »

Quote from: Rico

Also, Kerry used to associate with Jane Fonda, and the afore mentioned organization.

Tell me you're not referring to a photo taken at a 1970 VVAW anti-war rally with Jane Fonda about 3 rows behind her. I know Drudge called that "rubbing elbows" but I call that " sitting 3 rows behind". Tell me you don't realize Jane Fonda didn't become "Hanoi Jane" until two years later, and that a veteran might have different opinions on spending time with her before then. How about we just start calling Donald Sutherland "Hanoi Don" and a raise a big stink, after all, he was there too (...or has WorldNetDaily already long-since beat me to nicknaming him that?). That'd be two irrational links-to-foster-emotional-reactions-in-the-public for the price of one! Donald S is one of those infernal Hollywood Liberals, after all.

If you want my honest opinion, and I'm sure you do, this has to be the absolute dumbest of all the Republican smear tactics for anyone to get their panties in a wad about. And even worse, being it's a VVAW rally, this load can be linked with your assertion of Kerry plotting to assassinate senators (despite him leaving the group before doing so) to just make one big steaming pot of "desperate attempt to smear the name of a wounded veteran of a foreign war". You'd think it ironic a bunch of neocons are the ones shitting on a veteran but really, a "neoconservative" is just a self-righteous liberal with business interests, no? Have we all forgotten that liberals HATE soldiers?

I'll end this tirade now because I have no clue where I ended up in relation to where I started. That and I have to leave.

Law · « **Reply #78 on:** July 28, 2004, 11:13:36 AM »

Quote from: Rico

Has Kerry said anything about how he plans to get us out of it?

I'm not a Democrat by any means, but I'll take a swing at the devil's advocate side. Has Bush said anything? Beside more tax cuts that damage the economy and threatening to invade more countries has either party actually put forward a plan for anything? No. Does it matter what each candidate says on the campaign trail? No. Neither has the ability to put any plan into action without Congress, and neither can foresee the future and how the economy, public, general welfare will react. Hardly a single President has accomplished what they set out to do on the campaign trail.

That and FOO is right, starting with this speech tonight the next few months are when Kerry-Edwards are supposed to put out their "plan" for the future. Right now they're trying to win the popularity contest called nomination.

Quote

THAT, gentlemen, is how you shoot a person down with style and still be respectful about it.

You can only respond with what you're given. You don't bring a tank to a sword fight.

Anonymous · « **Reply #79 on:** July 28, 2004, 11:58:43 AM »

Quote from: Law

You don't bring a tank to a sword fight.

Why not? You'd win for sure!

The_FOO · « **Reply #80 on:** July 28, 2004, 12:22:43 PM »

Not if it was a samurai sword you wouldn't. OMGL!LOL!!!1!ROFL!!!@

pbsaurus · « **Reply #81 on:** July 28, 2004, 06:45:05 PM »

A pirate sword would be much better than a samurai sword.

hackess · « **Reply #82 on:** July 28, 2004, 06:49:51 PM »

Quote from: pbsaurus

A pirate sword would be much better than a samurai sword.

I completely agree. Pirates kick ass.

xolik · « **Reply #83 on:** July 28, 2004, 06:58:27 PM »

Ninja vs. Pirate vs. Samurai. Round one: FIGHT!

hackess · « **Reply #84 on:** July 28, 2004, 07:14:34 PM »

My pirate fetus could kick some serious ninja ass.

The_FOO · « **Reply #85 on:** July 28, 2004, 08:24:31 PM »

Quote from: catwritr

My pirate fetus could kick some serious ninja ass.

You don't know how disturbed I am that you have a pic of that handy.

hackess · « **Reply #86 on:** July 28, 2004, 08:32:32 PM »

Quote from: The_FOO

Quote from: catwritr
My pirate fetus could kick some serious ninja ass.

You don't know how disturbed I am that you have a pic of that handy.

http://bunnysnoog.cyborgcow.net/index.html

Get your own fetus!

The_FOO · « **Reply #87 on:** July 28, 2004, 09:18:25 PM »

*boggles*

Vespertine · « **Reply #88 on:** July 28, 2004, 09:44:24 PM »

Quote from: Rico

I'm afraid, however, that his party will not allow him to act as he may feel he should. Democrats have seemed to be typically against military pay raises and greater military funding. It's not always true, but in current politics your party seems to dictate how you vote(or veto) as much, or more, than anything. So that's one worry.

Again, I don't disagree with your point about Kerry's party. BUT, that sort of activity isn't specific to Democrats; it happens no matter what the president's political affiliation. Hell, the only person I've seen break party ranks recently has been John McCain, and he doesn't do it all that often. Anyway, I don't think it's fair to pigeonhole Kerry as being a patsy for the Democratic party. IMHO, pretty much all presidents are patsies for their parties.

hackess · « **Reply #89 on:** July 28, 2004, 09:48:06 PM »

Quote from: Vespertine

Again, I don't disagree with your point about Kerry's party. BUT, that sort of activity isn't specific to Democrats; it happens no matter what the president's political affiliation. Hell, the only person I've seen break party ranks recently has been John McCain, and he doesn't do it all that often. Anyway, I don't think it's fair to pigeonhole Kerry as being a patsy for the Democratic party. IMHO, pretty much all presidents are patsies for their parties.

Damn right. Welcome back, Vespertine.

Binoboy · « **Reply #90 on:** July 28, 2004, 10:55:43 PM »

This thread makes Baby Jesus Fetus cry.
And Emo Fetus too, but he cries at everything.

Rico · « **Reply #91 on:** July 29, 2004, 12:19:15 AM »

Quote from: Vespertine

Again, I don't disagree with your point about Kerry's party. BUT, that sort of activity isn't specific to Democrats; it happens no matter what the president's political affiliation. Hell, the only person I've seen break party ranks recently has been John McCain, and he doesn't do it all that often. Anyway, I don't think it's fair to pigeonhole Kerry as being a patsy for the Democratic party. IMHO, pretty much all presidents are patsies for their parties.

Certainly true. So, by voting Republican, I am voting for a party that has demonstrated a tendancy to be good to the military, as much as I'm voting for a guy that I think would better suit the time than the other.

I did mis-speak myself earlier, though. I said Kerry has been vague on promises, but that's not entirely true. I was reading some of his views on taxes today and he was pretty descriptive about how he intended to do somethings, and what I read sounded fine to me. I don't pretend to know much about finances, though; so I'm not one to advise on that point. Still, at the time I said it, I was refering to his foreign policy and how he plans to handle the wars. I still stand on that. It's easy to talk about strengthening alliances and stuff, but how do you do it? Allies are purely ecomomic and political. Just because you're a nice guy and have three purple hearts, that doesn't mean they'll just like you and become closer allies over it.

Bush has demonstrated that he'll go against the international community if he thinks that it's what we need for this country. Before some of you guys choke on your own tongues, realise that KERRY voted to go to war as well, so he's one of those evil people who believed that Iraq was a threat, too. We're in a bad spot, and we need some one who is pro-military and willing to go against the world if it's what's best for us. I'm also not saying that going against the UN is a good thing. I really would have rather there been another way to do it, and I think that a better President may have found it, but even had that route existed, it's still a by-gone.

Of course, I'm not saying that Kerry will be a BAD President, just that I think that Bush would be better at this time. Should Kerry be elected, I can only hope that his experience in Vietnam will have taught him that allowing politics to dictate how you wage war is as great a folly as we could commit. That would be his one credit over Bush with me. Where Bush told other nations to take a flying leap, he (or the party itself) has not allowed us to wage this war as it should be waged. Kerry may know better, and let those who want to win do the fighting.

That's too long, and too preachy by far. Sorry about that. And btw, don't take disagreement, or a different opinion to be for lack of respect. I have a different idea of how I feel the country should be run than some of you. I would like to point out, that I have never acted as if your opinion was stupid, or that you were unintelligent because yours differed. I find it amazing that intelligent people can become so easily agrivated when faced with an opposing view, as I myself have been guilty of more than once (most often because of Daria over at HN).

Binoboy · « **Reply #92 on:** July 29, 2004, 09:04:25 AM »

Quote from: Rico

Bush has demonstrated that he'll go against the international community if he thinks that it's what we need for this country. Before some of you guys choke on your own tongues, realise that KERRY voted to go to war as well, so he's one of those evil people who believed that Iraq was a threat, too. We're in a bad spot, and we need some one who is pro-military and willing to go against the world if it's what's best for us. I'm also not saying that going against the UN is a good thing. I really would have rather there been another way to do it, and I think that a better President may have found it, but even had that route existed, it's still a by-gone.

I know I should be saying more than just this but: You're kidding me, right? Please, scan that paragraph and just rebut it yourself because I don't even want to start now.

Quote

I would like to point out, that I have never acted as if your opinion was stupid, or that you were unintelligent because yours differed.

You say this now. I'll agree there's a difference between disrespecting the opinion and disrespecting the person though.

phyre · « **Reply #93 on:** July 29, 2004, 11:41:22 AM »

Quote from: Binoboy

I know I should be saying more than just this but: You're kidding me, right? Please, scan that paragraph and just rebut it yourself because I don't even want to start now.

I haven't commented in this thread, so please don't take this the wrong way- but I'm tired of reading this kind of comment. You cannot automatically assume that your opponent in a debate will understand your objections to something he's said. Please have the courtesy to define your arguments for the purpose of discussion, or don't say anything at all.

I'm sorry if this causes offense. Please take it as a constructive criticism, and nothing more.

hackess · « **Reply #94 on:** July 29, 2004, 05:38:28 PM »

Quote from: Rico

Certainly true. So, by voting Republican, I am voting for a party that has demonstrated a tendancy to be good to the military, as much as I'm voting for a guy that I think would better suit the time than the other.

The likely benefits to the military seem to be only point you're arguing. Is that really the only reason you vote for a particular candidate?

pbsaurus · « **Reply #95 on:** July 29, 2004, 05:45:42 PM »

Quote from: catwritr

Quote from: Rico

Certainly true. So, by voting Republican, I am voting for a party that has demonstrated a tendancy to be good to the military, as much as I'm voting for a guy that I think would better suit the time than the other.

The likely benefits to the military seem to be only point you're arguing. Is that really the only reason you vote for a particular candidate?

Plus there's a difference between being good to the soldiers and being good to the defense contractors.

Vespertine · « **Reply #96 on:** July 31, 2004, 04:47:52 PM »

Quote from: phyre

Quote from: Binoboy
I know I should be saying more than just this but: You're kidding me, right? Please, scan that paragraph and just rebut it yourself because I don't even want to start now.
I haven't commented in this thread, so please don't take this the wrong way- but I'm tired of reading this kind of comment. You cannot automatically assume that your opponent in a debate will understand your objections to something he's said. Please have the courtesy to define your arguments for the purpose of discussion, or don't say anything at all.

I'm sorry if this causes offense. Please take it as a constructive criticism, and nothing more.

w00t! You go girl:!: uh..i mean, uh...

Really though, excellent point. You can't just tell someone that they should realize that their argument is self-contradictory or invalid or whatever. That kind of thing will never fly as a rebuttal. You should explain why you think someone needs to rethink their viewpoint.

The_FOO · « **Reply #97 on:** July 31, 2004, 05:40:39 PM »

Quote from: Vespertine

w00t! You go girl:!: uh..i mean, uh...

Really though, excellent point. You can't just tell someone that they should realize that their argument is self-contradictory or invalid or whatever. That kind of thing will never fly as a rebuttal. You should explain why you think someone needs to rethink their viewpoint.

In the real world, sure. But this is the Interpronwebnet. You can do/say anything you want on here and there are no consequences.

News:

Recent Forum Posts

Shout Box

Author Topic: Kerry: "I'm running for president because..." (Read 21203 times)

Anonymous