Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on June 05, 2007, 04:08:50 PM

Title: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 05, 2007, 04:08:50 PM
is on.  You can pick it up on CNN.com. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: The Coach on June 05, 2007, 04:48:39 PM
is on.  You can pick it up on CNN.com. 

It's on CNN?  AAaaahahahahahahahahahah a!
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: BayGBM on June 05, 2007, 05:27:05 PM
We’re in a state of war.  We’re fighting radical Islamic fundamentalist.  Our military is stretched thin.  The military doesn’t have enough people who speak Arabic, Farsi, etc.  And the few we do have are being kicked out of the military because they happen to be gay or lesbian and willing to admit it.

During the debate, Wolf Blitzer posed this premise to all the candidates and asked them if they were willing to change don’t ask don’t tell to allow these linguists to serve.  Not one of them said yes.  :'(

Maybe some of the conservatives here can help me understand this.  Would you really rather be dead, than serve with or get help from a gay or lesbian who speaks the necessary languages over there?  I wonder what Dick Cheney would say if he were on that debate panel.

This is the kind of question that illustrates the difference between the Dems and the GOP.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: ribonucleic on June 05, 2007, 05:31:07 PM
Would you really rather be dead, than serve with or get help from a gay or lesbian who speaks the necessary languages over there?

Perhaps this will answer your question.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/32075
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 05, 2007, 06:13:27 PM
Watched and listened to most of the debate (online).  Some thoughts:

- Better cast of characters overall than the Democrats. 

- When looking and listening to McCain, the first word that popped in my mind was "corpse."   :-\  No way he comes out of the primary. 

- I was very impressed with Romney.  He's very likeable.  Solid positions.  I still want to hear more from him, but I could see myself voting for him.  He looks like the Republican's best candidate so far. 

- Thompson was okay.  Not impressed with him. 

- Paul was okay.  Articulate and sincere, but didn't impress me much. 

- Brownback stinks.  He should quit. 

- Gilmore has very good credentials, but is essentially irrelevant.

- Didn't like Giuliani.   

- I liked Hukabee a lot.  He gave a great answer to a set-up question.  They asked him whether he believed God created the earth in six days.  He said (if memory serves), "I'm running for president.  I'm not trying to implement an 8th grade science curriculum."  He said he believes God created us and that we didn't get here by accident.

- Hunter's son quit his job after 911, joined the Marines, has served two tours in Iraq, and is currently in Afghanistan. 

- Marked difference between Republicans and Democrats on taxes.  They all talked about cutting taxes. 

- They all said, either expressly or impliedly, that they would pardon Libby.  Said the prosecutor abused his discretion and that the prosecutor knew Richard Armitage outed Plame before they prosecuted Libby.  Giuliani said no underlying crime was committed.   

- Everyone except McCain said English should be the official language. 

- They all ran away from Bush. 

- Other than Romney and maybe Huckabee, I don't really like any of these candidates. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Eyeball Chambers on June 05, 2007, 09:11:00 PM
Ron Paul was excellent in my opinion, I don't know of any issue I disagree with him on.  I thought his response to the "Don't ask don't tell" question was dead on.  He's so well informed,  and articulate like BeachBum said, he just amazes me.

I also liked Huckabee.

Didn't/don't like Guliani either.

Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Eyeball Chambers on June 05, 2007, 09:20:54 PM
We’re in a state of war.  We’re fighting radical Islamic fundamentalist.  Our military is stretched thin.  The military doesn’t have enough people who speak Arabic, Farsi, etc.  And the few we do have are being kicked out of the military because they happen to be gay or lesbian and willing to admit it.

During the debate, Wolf Blitzer posed this premise to all the candidates and asked them if they were willing to change don’t ask don’t tell to allow these linguists to serve.  Not one of them said yes.  :'(

Maybe some of the conservatives here can help me understand this.  Would you really rather be dead, than serve with or get help from a gay or lesbian who speaks the necessary languages over there?  I wonder what Dick Cheney would say if he were on that debate panel.

This is the kind of question that illustrates the difference between the Dems and the GOP.

Why even bring up your sexual preference in the Military?
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 05, 2007, 10:04:04 PM
Ron Paul was excellent in my opinion, I don't know of any issue I disagree with him on.  I thought his response to the "Don't ask don't tell" question was dead on.  He's so well informed,  and articulate like BeachBum said, he just amazes me.

I also liked Huckabee.

Didn't/don't like Guliani either.



I like Ron Paul.  I just don't think he can make it out of the primary. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Colossus_500 on June 06, 2007, 05:39:14 AM
I missed the debate last night.  :-\  I hope I can catch it later this week, if it's going to be re-run. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: militarymuscle69 on June 06, 2007, 06:09:18 AM
how many of these linguists have we lost because they were gay? I doubt it is many....
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Cap on June 06, 2007, 06:13:39 AM
Romney looks solid.  I like his stance on English only and immigration.

Ron Paul looks like a sad little man.  I would never vote for him.

McCain saying that Hispanic illegals have enriched this nation is a crock.  Maybe if he had some balls on this issue I would vote for him but he is alienating many Repub voters by going this route.

Giuliani seems like a good guy but does not follow Repub ideals enough to get elected.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: militarymuscle69 on June 06, 2007, 06:15:17 AM
from clips I heard I liked the actor guy...100% pro life, says this is our country and we should decide who gets to be here, will continue the GWOT etc..
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: AE on June 06, 2007, 06:33:07 AM
One of the questions was "How would you use President Bush?" and one of the idiots responded that they would put him on a lecture circuit.  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: BayGBM on June 06, 2007, 06:46:25 AM
Why even bring up your sexual preference in the Military?

Straight people (in and out of the military) bring up their sexual preference every day.  You display photos of your significant other, you talk about experiences with your wife or girlfriend, you talk about who got a letter from or who you have at home waiting for you... the list is endless.  But that’s all beside the point.

The country is at war--and losing!  We need Americans in the military who can who can speak Urdu, Farsi, and Arabic, and you’re going to expel the few we do have because they are gay or lesbian? 

240 what is your take on this?
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: militarymuscle69 on June 06, 2007, 07:00:42 AM
Straight people (in and out of the military) bring up their sexual preference every day.  You display photos of your significant other, you talk about experiences with your wife or girlfriend, you talk about who got a letter from or you have at home waiting for you... the list is endless.  But that’s all beside the point.

The country is at war--and losing!  We need Americans in the military who can who can speak Urdu, Farsi, and Arabic, and you’re going to expel the few we do have because the are gay or lesbian? 

240 what is your take on this?


I have tried to explain this before...a military units moral would suffer with OPENLY gay members. As much as we don't want to think so, there is still a majority in America that are homophobic. If you have 50% of the men in a unit that are that way, then it will create problems in the unit. I think we all are aware that there are gays currently in the military, no problem right..but when it becomes confirmed then it becomes a problem. This just isn't an issue that our conservative military is ready to take on.

You will have to show me that we are turning away hundreds of people that can speak these languages because of their sexual preferance for me to be concerned. Our linguistic schools can take any jo blow and teach them the language needed, but they are long schools (aprox. 15 months) and then until the attain a certain level of OJT they are limited to the tasks they can perform. Job shortages in the military usually take 3-5 years to be identified and corrected but we will correct our linguist problem without needing openly gay personnel. Remember though, if these people are just dying to be able to serve our country they are free to do it as long as they keep their sexuality to themselves.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: militarymuscle69 on June 06, 2007, 07:08:51 AM
Debate is replaying on XM 130 right now if interested, they are getting into the audience questions
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: 240 is Back on June 06, 2007, 07:16:58 AM
240 what is your take on this?

IMO - Definitely let homosexuals serve.  Anyone who has a beef with it can go and fight alone.  Ask any soldier in the field for 5 minutes if he'd rather have 2 straight guys on his team with AR15s, or 25 gay guys on this team with AR15s, I think we all know the answer.   Beggars cannot be choosy.  You are making guys do a 4th tour without a vacation... and you're turning down a million guys who want to fight... because they like different things in the bedroom?  it's just insane.  And the fact that not one repub candidate would say yesterday that they'd let gays serve... well, they're not the ones doing a 4th tour, I'd wager.

mm69, headhunter, and other military guys... would you mind some gays serving if it meant you'd have 6 more months each year to spend on US soil with your families?

We should also consider using prisoners, illegal immigrants, and other groups in some capacity.  Put prisoners on building the mexico wall.  use illegals to build infrastructure in iraq for 2 years in exchange for citizenship.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: OzmO on June 06, 2007, 07:21:46 AM
I have tried to explain this before...a military units moral would suffer with OPENLY gay members. As much as we don't want to think so, there is still a majority in America that are homophobic. If you have 50% of the men in a unit that are that way, then it will create problems in the unit. I think we all are aware that there are gays currently in the military, no problem right..but when it becomes confirmed then it becomes a problem. This just isn't an issue that our conservative military is ready to take on.

You will have to show me that we are turning away hundreds of people that can speak these languages because of their sexual preferance for me to be concerned. Our linguistic schools can take any jo blow and teach them the language needed, but they are long schools (aprox. 15 months) and then until the attain a certain level of OJT they are limited to the tasks they can perform. Job shortages in the military usually take 3-5 years to be identified and corrected but we will correct our linguist problem without needing openly gay personnel. Remember though, if these people are just dying to be able to serve our country they are free to do it as long as they keep their sexuality to themselves.


Not to open up a can of worms here......well maybe a little.....I agree with the points you made in both paragraphs. That's the current reality, but i see it as no different then the reality that existed in 1947 or whatever when Truman integrated blacks into the military (off hand i don't remember the exact year and maybe have the wrong president).  While race and sexual orientation are distinctly 2 different things the complaints by the military were very similar.   And what ended up happening?  They got over it and still maintained a cohesive fighting force.  Of course not without growing pains, but it worked out fine.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 06, 2007, 07:23:01 AM

... Other than Romney and maybe Huckabee, I don't really like any of these candidates. 

You don't have a problem with Romney's excessive flip-flopping on the issues?

He's flipped on abortion  http://conservativesagainstromney.com/2007/05/06/romney-flip-flops-during-gop-debate/

He's flopped on the Bin Laden issue (like Bush did)  http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000605.htm

He's flipped on his view of military service  http://www.eyeon08.com/2007/05/11/romney-panders-with-religion-and-military/

He's flopped on his party allegiance http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/jan/24/romney_gave_three_contributions_to_democrats

He's flipped on campaign finance  http://mormonsagainstromney.blogspot.com/2007/02/romney-flip-flops-on-campaign-financing.html

He's flopped on immigration policy  http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/05/latest_ad_drive.php

He's flipped on gun control  http://pundits.thehill.com/2007/05/21/romney-is-ultimate-flip-flopper-peter-fenn/

He's flopped on his "hunting background"  http://pundits.thehill.com/2007/05/21/romney-is-ultimate-flip-flopper-peter-fenn/

These are not evolving position changes like with Kerry on the $87 billion vote.

This is out and out political grandstanding showing that Romney will say anything to become president.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: militarymuscle69 on June 06, 2007, 08:06:39 AM
IMO - Definitely let homosexuals serve.  Anyone who has a beef with it can go and fight alone.  Ask any soldier in the field for 5 minutes if he'd rather have 2 straight guys on his team with AR15s, or 25 gay guys on this team with AR15s, I think we all know the answer.   Beggars cannot be choosy.  You are making guys do a 4th tour without a vacation... and you're turning down a million guys who want to fight... because they like different things in the bedroom?  it's just insane.  And the fact that not one repub candidate would say yesterday that they'd let gays serve... well, they're not the ones doing a 4th tour, I'd wager.

mm69, headhunter, and other military guys... would you mind some gays serving if it meant you'd have 6 more months each year to spend on US soil with your families?

We should also consider using prisoners, illegal immigrants, and other groups in some capacity.  Put prisoners on building the mexico wall.  use illegals to build infrastructure in iraq for 2 years in exchange for citizenship.

me personally no I don't have a problem, but again if you have 50% that care and 50% that don't care, the 50% that do care will bring down the rest...When I give graduation speaches I talk about the 80-20 rule...briefly 80% of the people do the work to pick up the slack of the 20% and the 20% fuck up everything the 80% work hard for....Unfortunately, as the military currently stands there is a large majority that would let gays affect the the unit effectiveness.

OzmO, race is still a major player in the military......here in one of my schools, I had a supervisor coem to me with 2 troops that had been shitbags, underage drinking, failing tests, disrespecting NCOs etc...so I had him do up the proper documentation to discharge the troops...it was an open and shut case, even went to legal to make sure all the Is were dotted and Ts crossed...took it to my CC and his first question....what color are these kids....well sir they are both black...He said sorry, can't allow it, our ratio of black to white discharges is out of whak the FY....until we kick more whites out we can't get rid of more blacks....

You want more race stories just ask...again it isn't Air Force wide but there are still alot of problems....
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: OzmO on June 06, 2007, 09:08:14 AM
I'm sure you have millions of them.  nothing is perfect and to think it would be is pure fantasy.   i agree AA is not perfect.  But, we are the top dog integration and all and will continue to be even with open gays.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: w8tlftr on June 06, 2007, 09:09:05 AM
Straight people (in and out of the military) bring up their sexual preference every day.  You display photos of your significant other, you talk about experiences with your wife or girlfriend, you talk about who got a letter from or you have at home waiting for you... the list is endless.  But that’s all beside the point.

The country is at war--and losing!  We need Americans in the military who can who can speak Urdu, Farsi, and Arabic, and you’re going to expel the few we do have because the are gay or lesbian? 

240 what is your take on this?


Gay or straight it doesn't matter to me. The mission should always come first and the durka durka mohammed jidad shitbags will gladly kill a gay American as much as a straight one.

Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: headhuntersix on June 06, 2007, 09:18:51 AM
My take..I hada gay soldier in Afghanistan...He came out hoping I would either send him home or make some remark that could get us in trouble. I told him point blank that he could gay it up as much as he wanted but that he was going to do his fucking job and we were not going to hold our tongues about saying fag or anything and that this was a combat invironment and suck it up. I told him that if he went super gay that we would ensure UCMJ charges were filed but if he just did his job he would be ensured that we would get him out as soon as we returened, which was the end of his enlistment. He would have stayed in the Service longer and lost his GI Bill. He went along and I had no issues with him. i don't want openly gay soldiers. I had more problems with 1 black female then i ever did with him..or any other race or orientation.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Victor VonDoom on June 06, 2007, 09:43:05 AM
Straight people (in and out of the military) bring up their sexual preference every day.  You display photos of your significant other, you talk about experiences with your wife or girlfriend, you talk about who got a letter from or you have at home waiting for you... the list is endless.  But that’s all beside the point.

The country is at war--and losing!  We need Americans in the military who can who can speak Urdu, Farsi, and Arabic, and you’re going to expel the few we do have because the are gay or lesbian? 

fool (fõõl) n.
1. One who is regarded as deficient in judgment, sense, or understanding.
2. One who acts unwisely on a given occasion.
3. One who has been tricked or made to appear ridiculous; a dupe.

Fools!
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Eyeball Chambers on June 06, 2007, 10:11:55 AM
Straight people (in and out of the military) bring up their sexual preference every day.  You display photos of your significant other, you talk about experiences with your wife or girlfriend, you talk about who got a letter from or you have at home waiting for you... the list is endless.  But that’s all beside the point.

I never even considered that.  :o
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Colossus_500 on June 06, 2007, 10:12:37 AM

Not to open up a can of worms here......well maybe a little.....I agree with the points you made in both paragraphs. That's the current reality, but i see it as no different then the reality that existed in 1947 or whatever when Truman integrated blacks into the military (off hand i don't remember the exact year and maybe have the wrong president).  While race and sexual orientation are distinctly 2 different things the complaints by the military were very similar.   And what ended up happening?  They got over it and still maintained a cohesive fighting force.  Of course not without growing pains, but it worked out fine.
Something to think about though in your argument....how would "don't ask, don't tell" have worked in the situation back in the 40's?  I'm not saying don't let homosexuals serve, but "don't ask, don't tell" is the best solution that we have to date?  
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: OzmO on June 06, 2007, 10:18:33 AM
Something to think about though in your argument....how would "don't ask, don't tell" have worked in the situation back in the 40's?  I'm not saying don't let homosexuals serve, but "don't ask, don't tell" is the best solution that we have to date? 

Well, it's hard not to know if a person is black or not so i don't know what you are getting at there.  But I'm basing things on reality.  Reality is there are gays serving right now in the military with the full knowledge of those in it.  Of course they don;t flaunt the lifestyle but they know.   
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 10:25:27 AM
You don't have a problem with Romney's excessive flip-flopping on the issues?

He's flipped on abortion  http://conservativesagainstromney.com/2007/05/06/romney-flip-flops-during-gop-debate/

He's flopped on the Bin Laden issue (like Bush did)  http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000605.htm

He's flipped on his view of military service  http://www.eyeon08.com/2007/05/11/romney-panders-with-religion-and-military/

He's flopped on his party allegiance http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/jan/24/romney_gave_three_contributions_to_democrats

He's flipped on campaign finance  http://mormonsagainstromney.blogspot.com/2007/02/romney-flip-flops-on-campaign-financing.html

He's flopped on immigration policy  http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/05/latest_ad_drive.php

He's flipped on gun control  http://pundits.thehill.com/2007/05/21/romney-is-ultimate-flip-flopper-peter-fenn/

He's flopped on his "hunting background"  http://pundits.thehill.com/2007/05/21/romney-is-ultimate-flip-flopper-peter-fenn/

These are not evolving position changes like with Kerry on the $87 billion vote.

This is out and out political grandstanding showing that Romney will say anything to become president.

No I don't have a problem with him changing his opinion or his views.  I've done it and continue to do so.  I change my mind all the time.   
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: militarymuscle69 on June 06, 2007, 10:31:27 AM
My take..I hada gay soldier in Afghanistan...He came out hoping I would either send him home or make some remark that could get us in trouble. I told him point blank that he could gay it up as much as he wanted but that he was going to do his fucking job and we were not going to hold our tongues about saying fag or anything and that this was a combat invironment and suck it up. I told him that if he went super gay that we would ensure UCMJ charges were filed but if he just did his job he would be ensured that we would get him out as soon as we returened, which was the end of his enlistment. He would have stayed in the Service longer and lost his GI Bill. He went along and I had no issues with him. i don't want openly gay soldiers. I had more problems with 1 black female then i ever did with him..or any other race or orientation.

the most powerful person in the military is the black woman
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 10:34:43 AM
the most powerful person in the military is the black woman

How so?
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 06, 2007, 10:35:45 AM
No I don't have a problem with him changing his opinion or his views.  I've done it and continue to do so.  I change my mind all the time.   
Frankly, I don't care about a candidate's flipflopping either.  His current position is what matters.  

I just wanted to have some fun....  

Did you see through the flip-flopping accusations attributed to Kerry in '04?
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 10:46:32 AM
Frankly, I don't care about a candidate's flipflopping either.  His current position is what matters.  

I just wanted to have some fun....  

Did you see through the flip-flopping accusations attributed to Kerry in '04?

Don't recall?  Which accusations?
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 06, 2007, 10:48:23 AM
Don't recall?  Which accusations?
"I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it."

Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 10:51:05 AM
"I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it."



Ah so.  That didn't bother me.  I was more focused on what he did to his fellow soldiers after he left Vietnam. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: militarymuscle69 on June 06, 2007, 10:52:56 AM
How so?

because in the MEO community blacks and women are the most protected 2 classes...if you belong to both you can get away with murder and no one ever says anything to you
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 11:01:12 AM
because in the MEO community blacks and women are the most protected 2 classes...if you belong to both you can get away with murder and no one ever says anything to you

What's MEO? 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 06, 2007, 11:03:25 AM
Ah so.  That didn't bother me.  I was more focused on what he did to his fellow soldiers after he left Vietnam. 
I understand.  You realize that the accusations of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were thoroughly discredited?

http://www.factcheck.org/article244.html

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/kerry.asp

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 11:07:41 AM
I understand.  You realize that the accusations of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were thoroughly discredited?

http://www.factcheck.org/article244.html

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/kerry.asp

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp

I wasn't referring to Swift Boat.  I was referring to what he did after he returned.  Threw his fellow soldiers, including POWs, under the bus.  Watch the Stolen Honor documentary if you get the chance.  Hard to come away respecting the man after seeing what he did. 

http://stolenhonor.com/
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: The Enigma on June 06, 2007, 11:08:52 AM
Watched and listened to most of the debate (online).  Some thoughts:

- Better cast of characters overall than the Democrats. 


- They all ran away from Bush. 



This coming from a 25%er. Hahahahahahahaha

The only people NOT running from Bush are outcasts like BeachBum.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 06, 2007, 11:13:11 AM
I wasn't referring to Swift Boat.  I was referring to what he did after he returned.  Threw his fellow soldiers, including POWs, under the bus.  Watch the Stolen Honor documentary if you get the chance.  Hard to come away respecting the man after seeing what he did. 

http://stolenhonor.com/
The link to enter the web site doesn't work.

So Kerry flip flopped on his comrades by asking the politicians to end what was and is viewed as an unjust/illegal war?

At the Dem Convention, there was a dozen or so of his fellow soldiers that spoke highly of him.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: BayGBM on June 06, 2007, 11:17:08 AM
I never even considered that.  :o

 :'(
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 11:17:31 AM
This coming from a 25%er. Hahahahahahahaha

The only people NOT running from Bush are outcasts like BeachBum.

 ::)  Dr. Strangelove with another thought-provoking comment.  You ought to just submit blank posts.  Wouldn't be much different than what you say everyday.  
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 11:19:26 AM
The link to enter the web site doesn't work.

So Kerry flip flopped on his comrades by asking the politicians to end what was and is viewed as an unjust/illegal war?

At the Dem Convention, there was a dozen or so of his fellow soldiers that spoke highly of him.

Works for me:  http://www.stolenhonor.com/

Actually, what Kerry did was accuse our boys of murder, etc. while some were being held as POWs.  The Vietnamese used Kerry's comments to interrogate our POWs.  Treacherous IMO. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 06, 2007, 11:27:39 AM
Works for me:  http://www.stolenhonor.com/

Actually, what Kerry did was accuse our boys of murder, etc. while some were being held as POWs.  The Vietnamese used Kerry's comments to interrogate our POWs.  Treacherous IMO. 
The 'enter site' button just is not working.  Oh well.  I would like to see those quotes you attribute to Kerry. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: headhuntersix on June 06, 2007, 11:28:34 AM
the most powerful person in the military is the black woman

Don't get me started..he's right.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: militarymuscle69 on June 06, 2007, 11:39:04 AM
What's MEO? 

Military Equal Oppurtunity
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 11:40:43 AM
The 'enter site' button just is not working.  Oh well.  I would like to see those quotes you attribute to Kerry. 

Click on the links to the left after you enter the site.

His comments (I believe to Congress) are well documented.  The Stolen Honor documentary focuses on interviews of the former POWs and their wives and the impact Kerry's comments had on them.  I called him a traitor after watching that documentary.  Powerful stuff.  
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 11:44:11 AM
Military Equal Oppurtunity

Thanks. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 06, 2007, 12:41:43 PM
Click on the links to the left after you enter the site.

His comments (I believe to Congress) are well documented.  The Stolen Honor documentary focuses on interviews of the former POWs and their wives and the impact Kerry's comments had on them.  I called him a traitor after watching that documentary.  Powerful stuff.  
Thanks.

So they are going after his 1971 testimony, some of which is found here:
http://www.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/JohnKerryTestimony.html

I suggest you read that in its entirety and tell me that Kerry is doing anything but the honorable thing.  He saw what was going on in VN first hand and, as a conscientious human being, he had to voice his opposition to what he saw and what he learned of.

He certainly didn't lie in his testimony did he?

Disagree or agree with him but disparaging what he said as a deliberate shot at the troops is unfair and undeserved.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 06, 2007, 02:47:45 PM
Thanks.

So they are going after his 1971 testimony, some of which is found here:
http://www.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/JohnKerryTestimony.html

I suggest you read that in its entirety and tell me that Kerry is doing anything but the honorable thing.  He saw what was going on in VN first hand and, as a conscientious human being, he had to voice his opposition to what he saw and what he learned of.

He certainly didn't lie in his testimony did he?

Disagree or agree with him but disparaging what he said as a deliberate shot at the troops is unfair and undeserved.

What he did was dishonorable.  Assume everything he said was true.  That information was used to interrogate our POWs and jeopardized their lives.  I side with the POWs and their wives on this one. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Colossus_500 on June 06, 2007, 03:16:40 PM
Well, it's hard not to know if a person is black or not so i don't know what you are getting at there.  But I'm basing things on reality.  Reality is there are gays serving right now in the military with the full knowledge of those in it.  Of course they don;t flaunt the lifestyle but they know.   
that was my point. 

plus, it's just a hunch, but i'm guessing that there have always been homosexuals in the military whether we knew it or not.  so, the other point that i'm trying to make is that the "don't ask, don't tell" policy speaks directly to this notion. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 07, 2007, 07:38:52 AM
What he did was dishonorable.  Assume everything he said was true.  That information was used to interrogate our POWs and jeopardized their lives.  I side with the POWs and their wives on this one. 
I guess we will just disagree on the value judgment made here.

In my opinion, helped shut down the meat grinder in Viet Nam which mean fewer POWS.  If the enemy interrogator used his words to help break the spirit of the POW that is unfortunate but out of Kerry's hands.

The alternative of keeping your mouth shut while having your government run roughshod (including breaking the law) over its own people and foreign countries is very bad policy in a democratic republic.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 07, 2007, 08:03:53 AM
I looked into "Stolen Honor" a bit and from what I've read of it, it is nothing more than a political hit piece produced by rightwing opponents of Kerry.

http://www.wesupportthevets.com/obrientoday.htm

Stolen Honor: the Moon Connection

http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2004/10/12/stolen-honor-the-moon-connection/

Stolen Honor - A Dishonor: Vietnam Veterans oppose Sinclair Broadcast smear even in reduced format

http://www.vvaw.org/commentary/?id=462

Forget about the anti-Kerry fantasy film Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal. That comic attempt at a documentary is nothing more than a 42- minute "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth"-style television commercial produced by a former longtime employee of Tom Ridge, the secretary of George W. Bush's Department of Homeland Security--an agency that pays daily homage to Orwell with everything from its name to those color-coded terrorism warnings.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=1912

Apparently the old saw about the anti-war movement's negative effect on the outcome of Viet Nam is being pinned on one man:  John Kerry.

More swiftboating crap that has nothing to do with what type of president Kerry would have been.

It is propaganda.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 07, 2007, 09:54:10 AM
I guess we will just disagree on the value judgment made here.

In my opinion, helped shut down the meat grinder in Viet Nam which mean fewer POWS.  If the enemy interrogator used his words to help break the spirit of the POW that is unfortunate but out of Kerry's hands.

The alternative of keeping your mouth shut while having your government run roughshod (including breaking the law) over its own people and foreign countries is very bad policy in a democratic republic.

The alternative is don't put the lives of your fellow soldiers and POWs in jeopardy. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 07, 2007, 09:55:31 AM
I looked into "Stolen Honor" a bit and from what I've read of it, it is nothing more than a political hit piece produced by rightwing opponents of Kerry.

http://www.wesupportthevets.com/obrientoday.htm

Stolen Honor: the Moon Connection

http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2004/10/12/stolen-honor-the-moon-connection/

Stolen Honor - A Dishonor: Vietnam Veterans oppose Sinclair Broadcast smear even in reduced format

http://www.vvaw.org/commentary/?id=462

Forget about the anti-Kerry fantasy film Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal. That comic attempt at a documentary is nothing more than a 42- minute "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth"-style television commercial produced by a former longtime employee of Tom Ridge, the secretary of George W. Bush's Department of Homeland Security--an agency that pays daily homage to Orwell with everything from its name to those color-coded terrorism warnings.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=1912

Apparently the old saw about the anti-war movement's negative effect on the outcome of Viet Nam is being pinned on one man:  John Kerry.

More swiftboating crap that has nothing to do with what type of president Kerry would have been.

It is propaganda.

lol.  You found some liberal blogs, undoubtedly Kerry supporters, that criticize a documentary you haven't seen?  And now it's propaganda?  Puh-leaze.  I've heard Kerry's comments.  I heard the impact of those comments from the former POWs and their wives.  Those are facts, not propaganda. 
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 07, 2007, 10:13:59 AM
lol.  You found some liberal blogs, undoubtedly Kerry supporters, that criticize a documentary you haven't seen?  And now it's propaganda?  Puh-leaze.  I've heard Kerry's comments.  I heard the impact of those comments from the former POWs and their wives.  Those are facts, not propaganda. 
I've read quotes from the "documentary".

So the North Vietnamese said to these POWs that J"ohn Kerry says you guys are bad???"

Help me out here Beach Bum, I haven't seen the "documentary", I've just read excerpts.

I've also seen who orchestrated and financed the project.  Another Bush black bag special.

So Veterans Against The War is a liberal blog?

It's propaganda b/c it deals with opinions about a war that ended in 1975.

How do those opinions (slanted as they are) bear upon Kerry's ability to be president?
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 07, 2007, 10:20:05 AM
I've read quotes from the "documentary".

So the North Vietnamese said to these POWs that J"ohn Kerry says you guys are bad???"

Help me out here Beach Bum, I haven't seen the "documentary", I've just read excerpts.

I've also seen who orchestrated and financed the project.  Another Bush black bag special.

So Veterans Against The War is a liberal blog?

It's propaganda b/c it deals with opinions about a war that ended in 1975.

How do those opinions (slanted as they are) bear upon Kerry's ability to be president?

They used transcripts from Kerry's statements to interrogate our POWs.  I heard that straight from former POWs.  You can assume they were lying.  I believe them, and their wives. 

This is important to me, because Kerry used his military service, and in particular his war record, in support of his presidential campaign.  When he came on stage at the Democrat convention, he saluted and said he was "reporting for duty."  Makes me want to puke knowing what did to his fellow soldiers.  I would have never respected him as commander in chief.

By using his military record to run for president, he opened the door to this kind of criticism.  It is fair game.   
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Decker on June 07, 2007, 10:59:05 AM
They used transcripts from Kerry's statements to interrogate our POWs.  I heard that straight from former POWs.  You can assume they were lying.  I believe them, and their wives. 

This is important to me, because Kerry used his military service, and in particular his war record, in support of his presidential campaign.  When he came on stage at the Democrat convention, he saluted and said he was "reporting for duty."  Makes me want to puke knowing what did to his fellow soldiers.  I would have never respected him as commander in chief.

By using his military record to run for president, he opened the door to this kind of criticism.  It is fair game.   
I'm not accusing the POWs of lying.  Kerry's military record is impeccable.  His criticism of the war after he left the forces was something else.

We just fall on different sides of the fence on how Kerry's statements about the war are to be taken, that's all.

From your side, his testimony hurt POWs.

From my side, his testimony helped end the war.
Title: Re: Republican Presidential Debate
Post by: Dos Equis on June 07, 2007, 11:02:09 AM
I'm not accusing the POWs of lying.  Kerry's military record is impeccable.  His criticism of the war after he left the forces was something else.

We just fall on different sides of the fence on how Kerry's statements about the war are to be taken, that's all.

From your side, his testimony hurt POWs.

From my side, his testimony helped end the war.

Understood.  I see your point.