9 out of 10 of Kerry's swift mates say he's a hero

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The 10th is a liar.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,599034,00.html

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Kerry saved the life of a Green Beret who is now volunteering full time for the Kerry campaign.
http://www.newhouse.com/archive/barnett072904.html

I can't see how bringing up Vietnam hurts Kerry.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

This is really @ssed up. Fantastic, he served his country. Wonderful, a new person comes out every now and then about it. But when is somebody going to ask the real hard question here about how his service is going to help him fight terrorism? Because he acts like 9/11 never happened. If I could put a call in to the GOP it would be to raise this question the next time Kerry brings up Vietnam to the American people and then mention that other than cutting Intelligence and military funding, KERRY HAS NO PLAN FOR FIGHTING TERRORISM. How about his votes in the Senate and what they mean? Jimmy Carter had military experience too, for goodness sakes! It's not a new thing, lots of people served in the military.

Interesting change of topic.
Anyways, Kerry has plenty to say about national security and fighting terrorism.
Read Chapter 1 of his plan here:
http://www.johnkerry.com/plan/

Read his position on National Security here:
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/

Until you read this, quit making attacking him for what he's supposedly not doing.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

This is really @ssed up. Fantastic, he served his country. Wonderful, a new person comes out every now and then about it. But when is somebody going to ask the real hard question here about how his service is going to help him fight terrorism? Because he acts like 9/11 never happened. If I could put a call in to the GOP it would be to raise this question the next time Kerry brings up Vietnam to the American people and then mention that other than cutting Intelligence and military funding, KERRY HAS NO PLAN FOR FIGHTING TERRORISM. How about his votes in the Senate and what they mean? Jimmy Carter had military experience too, for goodness sakes! It's not a new thing, lots of people served in the military.

Interesting change of topic.
Anyways, Kerry has plenty to say about national security and fighting terrorism.
Read Chapter 1 of his plan here:
http://www.johnkerry.com/plan/

Read his position on National Security here:
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/

Until you read this, quit making attacking him for what he's supposedly not doing.

Voting record. That's more important than what he says. He doesn't say the same thing two days in a row, please.

What's the specific charge? I know that the GOP has some talking points to try to make Kerry look bad that leave out critical facts.

As for the flip flopper meme, I don't see how you can argue that Kerry is a flip flopper and Bush isn't.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

This is really @ssed up. Fantastic, he served his country. Wonderful, a new person comes out every now and then about it. But when is somebody going to ask the real hard question here about how his service is going to help him fight terrorism? Because he acts like 9/11 never happened. If I could put a call in to the GOP it would be to raise this question the next time Kerry brings up Vietnam to the American people and then mention that other than cutting Intelligence and military funding, KERRY HAS NO PLAN FOR FIGHTING TERRORISM. How about his votes in the Senate and what they mean? Jimmy Carter had military experience too, for goodness sakes! It's not a new thing, lots of people served in the military.

Interesting change of topic.
Anyways, Kerry has plenty to say about national security and fighting terrorism.
Read Chapter 1 of his plan here:
http://www.johnkerry.com/plan/

Read his position on National Security here:
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/

Until you read this, quit making attacking him for what he's supposedly not doing.

Voting record. That's more important than what he says. He doesn't say the same thing two days in a row, please.

What's the specific charge? I know that the GOP has some talking points to try to make Kerry look bad that leave out critical facts.

As for the flip flopper meme, I don't see how you can argue that Kerry is a flip flopper and Bush isn't.

He's repeatedly voted to cut Intel funding, which is how this war on terror is going to be won. He's voted against defense systems. He was for the nuclear freeze, he backed the Carter and later Mondale plan of appeasing the Soviet Union. We don't need to rehash all this - it's not in dispute. He's trying to get people to overlook it by showing videos and pictures of himself as a naval officer.

But first and foremost, I want to hear him tell me why his military experience is applicable to the current situation since it's diametrically opposed to the kind of conflict Vietnam was. He didn't even think we should have been there. Clark volunteered for duty in Vietnam too; if military experience was really important to the Dems in this election they would have chosen him. Intelligent, distinguished... Clark started, before they drowned him out, with a plan for how to fight terror but he never really got to articulate it. Kerry was crowned basically right after Iowa. A shame, because we heard more from Clark in two weeks than we have from Kerry yet. I would have strongly considered voting for Clark.

The Republicans voted to cut the same Intel spending that you're talking about. He's voted for plenty of military increases. Carter boycotted the Moscow Olympics, and started the fight against the USSR in Afganistan. Appeaser, my ass.

The fact that he's a war hero who signed up for Vietnam and that Bush specifically checked the box "don't serve overseas" and was AWOL doesn't automatically mean that he'd be a better President, but I don't see how this can be used to attack Kerry instead of Bush.

Kerry wants to go after the terrorists who attacked us, not just some random Iraqis that we've pissed off.

As for Clark, maybe he'll be Sec. of State?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

This is really @ssed up. Fantastic, he served his country. Wonderful, a new person comes out every now and then about it. But when is somebody going to ask the real hard question here about how his service is going to help him fight terrorism? Because he acts like 9/11 never happened. If I could put a call in to the GOP it would be to raise this question the next time Kerry brings up Vietnam to the American people and then mention that other than cutting Intelligence and military funding, KERRY HAS NO PLAN FOR FIGHTING TERRORISM. How about his votes in the Senate and what they mean? Jimmy Carter had military experience too, for goodness sakes! It's not a new thing, lots of people served in the military.

Interesting change of topic.
Anyways, Kerry has plenty to say about national security and fighting terrorism.
Read Chapter 1 of his plan here:
http://www.johnkerry.com/plan/

Read his position on National Security here:
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/

Until you read this, quit making attacking him for what he's supposedly not doing.

Voting record. That's more important than what he says. He doesn't say the same thing two days in a row, please.

What's the specific charge? I know that the GOP has some talking points to try to make Kerry look bad that leave out critical facts.

As for the flip flopper meme, I don't see how you can argue that Kerry is a flip flopper and Bush isn't.

He's repeatedly voted to cut Intel funding, which is how this war on terror is going to be won. He's voted against defense systems. He was for the nuclear freeze, he backed the Carter and later Mondale plan of appeasing the Soviet Union. We don't need to rehash all this - it's not in dispute. He's trying to get people to overlook it by showing videos and pictures of himself as a naval officer.

But first and foremost, I want to hear him tell me why his military experience is applicable to the current situation since it's diametrically opposed to the kind of conflict Vietnam was. He didn't even think we should have been there. Clark volunteered for duty in Vietnam too; if military experience was really important to the Dems in this election they would have chosen him. Intelligent, distinguished... Clark started, before they drowned him out, with a plan for how to fight terror but he never really got to articulate it. Kerry was crowned basically right after Iowa. A shame, because we heard more from Clark in two weeks than we have from Kerry yet. I would have strongly considered voting for Clark.

The Republicans voted to cut the same Intel spending that you're talking about. He's voted for plenty of military increases. Carter boycotted the Moscow Olympics, and started the fight against the USSR in Afganistan. Appeaser, my ass.

The fact that he's a war hero who signed up for Vietnam and that Bush specifically checked the box "don't serve overseas" and was AWOL doesn't automatically mean that he'd be a better President, but I don't see how this can be used to attack Kerry instead of Bush.

Kerry wants to go after the terrorists who attacked us, not just some random Iraqis that we've pissed off.

As for Clark, maybe he'll be Sec. of State?

Carter's response to the USSR's invasion of Afghanistan was to boycott the Olympics and he asked Congress to postpone consideration of the SALT II Treaty, which was the Strategic Arms Limitations Talks. Yeah, the Soviets responded by giving him the finger. Carter screwed up the Iranian histage situation over which half of his cabinet resigned; that was bad, real bad. And because we appeared weak and did little more than shake our finger at the USSR, it made them bolder. Carter himself said, "we need to lower our expectations..." over which Reagan killed him at the debates, but I'm getting off topic. Maybe not because Kerry's way of thinking goes back to Carter's; they are very similar in lots of ways.

And there you go again on the AWOL business. That's ridiculous, he wasn't AWOL. But maybe that's libel now by Kerry's rules - with how he's trying to silence his critics.

Go after the terrorists, Kerry wants to do, huh? Specifically, THE terrorists. We're doing it now. Iraq is PART of that war, you guys haven't figured that out yet. When we went to war in WW II, who did we go to war with? JUST Japan? Hardly. We went to war with the Axis Powers - all of them, because they were all on the same damn side. Yes, they declared war on us first. But UBL declared war on us in 1996 (and we laughed at him), saying it's every Muslims duty to kill Americans. And plus, I have a whole 2-page list of quotes from Democratic senators and even people within the Clinton admin who specifically address Hussein's WMD's, programs, and desires. Nonsense Iraq isn't part of the war on terror. If you wait till you're attacked to attack somebody specifically, you're going to be toast. Take the fight to them, which is what we're doing now and what we need to keep doing.

Clark Sec. of state? Doesn't matter, I'm not voting for Kerry.

How are you going to argue that Reagan wasn't an appeaser? Under his command, 241 marines by a terrorist attack in Beiruit, and he promptly appeased the terrorists by leaving. He traded arms for hostages in the Iran contra scandal.

Not one person has said they've seen Bush in the time period in question, and Bush's military records include a report saying that he hadn't been seen in a while, and his payroll forms clearly show that he hadn't followed the rules in making up missed service (they had to be made up in 15 days).

Speaking of the Axis powers, Bush's grandfather got busted trading with them 10 months after the US entered the war.

Clinton was attacked by Republicans for going after OBL in 1998. Gary Hart and Richard Clarke warned the Bush admin repeated about terrorist attacks. Why do you just seem to blindly say that Republicans are better than Democrats at fighting terror?