Kerry's sister speaks out

[fintstone]

Kerry's sister is quoted as saying the following regarding her brother:

"He responds well to challenges and has the reputation of fighting well from behind,"

Does anyone know if she was refering to the badly wounded vietnamese teenager he shot in the back to get a silver star

or his sexual preferences?......

He and John Edwards have been reportedly hugging a lot lately.

[flyenby]

EASIER to stab someone in the back ,when your fighting from behind............

[CamB]

Or... posting on a bulletin board about a guy you've never even met.

[flyenby]

YOU dont need to meet him to know him...his actions speak of what he is.........and isnt........

[952]

At least he got close enough to the enemy to fight. Unlike the other guy.

[Bleyseng]

Oh yeah that other guy who never showed up and is buddy buddy with the guy who didn't serve at all. But THEY know how to fight a WAR and Kerry has no clue.....

[fintstone]

Sheesh...that is like saying that a guy who played a couple downs in a football game 30 years ago (and lied about the results), should be better qualified to coach a pro team than the person who has successfully coached it for the last 4 years.

[flyenby]

KERRY sold out Vietnam combat veterans, like myself and smeared us across the board, what gives him that right??? Maybe he is jealous that he never really saw any real combat........ OR he is just a wannabe hero

[jyl]

Successfully coached? If you consider the war in Iraq a success, maybe . . .

[bryanthompson]

(tapps fingers together)

Do you know that that is?

It's the world's smallest tamberine... and it's playing some kind of song... or something.

Get over it lefties, jump ship now. it's over for you clowns.

[A Quiet Boom]

Originally posted by Bleyseng
Oh yeah that other guy who never showed up and is buddy buddy with the guy who didn't serve at all. But THEY know how to fight a WAR and Kerry has no clue.....

The man who never showed up? Hmmm, he somehow managed to get nearly enough points in his first two years for nearly 12 years of service. W got 253 points his first year and 340 his second, he went on to get well over the minimum 50 in his next two years and recieved 56 for each of his last two years. After basic training he spent 53 weeks (not weekends) in flight school. He was given an honorable discharge and never commited the atrocites that his opponent admitted to commiting after returning from the war. Let's also not forget that as an active reserve pilot his unit could have been called to Vietnam at anytime, he was fortunate enough that didn't happen yet now he's accused of never showing up.

Most importantly it's the character of the two men that concerns me. I do NOT want a president who changes his position every other day in a time of war. Can you imagine the chaos in the military if Kerry were elected? "So Mr. President, what's the plan today?" Effective leadership must be flexible to be certain, but more importantly it must be steadfast in it's goals and principles, especially when lives are on the line.

What's Kerry's plan for Iraq this week? I'm having a hard time keeping it straight. Oh wait, it's the old "the President lied to get us into war" thing. Funny, in 1998 Kerry was hawkish on going after Saddam. At least six major intelligence foreign agencies told Bush that Saddam had WMD, heck even Clinton told Bush there was WMD. In fact Clinton sent cruise missiles into Iraq, targeting suspected sites.

I guess he's got his panties in a bunch now that memogate didn't work.

[CamB]

Most importantly it's the character of the two men that concerns me. I do NOT want a president who changes his position every other day in a time of war. Can you imagine the chaos in the military if Kerry were elected? "So Mr. President, what's the plan today?" Effective leadership must be flexible to be certain, but more importantly it must be steadfast in it's goals and principles, especially when lives are on the line.

But GWB is steadfast and wrong.

[A Quiet Boom]

Originally posted by CamB


But GWB is steadfast and wrong.

In your opinion, not mine. Sure he's wrong about a few things but overall I agree with him. On the other hand I have no clear idea of where Kerry stands and I don't think he does either.

[CamB]

Yeah, I know.

While Kerry takes the opposite position to the extreme , there are a lot of people who consider Bush's simpleminded stubbornness to be a problem. Others see exactly the same traits as focussed and determined.

The debate is further polarised because the first group of people are generally liberal (the world is a million exciting shades of grey) annd the second group conservative (everything is black or white).

[fintstone]

Originally posted by CamB
Yeah, I know.

While Kerry takes the opposite position to the extreme , there are a lot of people who consider Bush's simpleminded stubbornness to be a problem. Others see exactly the same traits as focussed and determined.

The debate is further polarised because the first group of people are generally liberal (the world is a million exciting shades of grey) annd the second group conservative (everything is black or white).

Let's rephrase that a bit more simply:

... for the liberal (the world is never black and white) and the second group conservative (everything is black or white).

IMHO, some things are clearly black and white...like animals that behead innocent civilians ..or fly aircraft full of innocents into building full of the same...or those who shoot hundreds of children in the back in a school yard.
The differences between good and evil are quite simple...and certainly black and white.

[CamB]

I agree - those are at the ends of the spectrum and easy to categorise.

What about the Russian army's efforts in Chechnya? Black or white?
Abu Graib? Black or white?
A US strike on a suspected terrorist target which kills civilians? Black or white?

[fintstone]

You cannot take things with thousands of events and define them as such...but if you break them into the thousands of events that they are made up of.....you probably can.
As far as the last one..a single event...if the US military strikes a military target and there is collateral damage because the enemy is operating from the civilian infrastusture....the answer is clear. The enemy has commited the evil by doing so. The US , if taking as much precaution as possible..accidently kills some civilians when attacking a legitimate target...once again the answer is clear.

[CamB]

You're guilty of breaking things with thousands of events down. Plus, I can't believe you dodged the question on Abu Graib.

There is some stuff that is not black or white, and watching the mental anguish of NIMBY conservatives is interesting. The best example I can think of right now is Dick Cheney and gay marriage. It's extremely easy to say "gay marriage is wrong". It's even easy to say "homosexuality is wrong". It's even somewhat possible to say "homosexual people are bad" (because things are either black or white). It all falls apart when you realise this includes family members and friends.

(quick edit) - I'm not trying to imply Cheney said the things in quotes - I'm more highlighting that he is pretty quiet on this issue compared to his GOP compatriots.

[fintstone]

Originally posted by CamB
You're guilty of breaking things with thousands of events down. Plus, I can't believe you dodged the question on Abu Graib.

All major events are comprised of many discrete events. If you combine them all...it makes everything grey and obscures the truth of the single event.

As to Abu Graib; you were not specific enough ...what about the prison do you refer to?

[CamB]

Originally posted by fintstone
As to Abu Graib; you were not specific enough ...what about the prison do you refer to?

Don't be facetious, or I will....

...There were a few news items about it a couple of months ago --> a couple of prisoners were made to stand for a long time .

It was unquestionably outside the bounds of decency (not good, hence evil) but Donald Rumsfeld (along with posters on this Board) were not so sure.