| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/27/2004 07:57:39 PM · #101 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by bdobe:
You'll find this [see image in previous post] and the rest of Mr. Kerry's military records at JohnKerry.com. |
Well, not really "the rest", just "some" of the rest. For example, you won't find his request for deferment there, or the medical reports that purportedly support his medals. |
Ron,
Many Republicans, including some posters on this board (i.e., EddyG), claim that Mr. Bush has released "all" his military records. However, I can't find any trace of them in Mr. Bush's official campaign web site (//www.georgewbush.com/). This is not a gotcha, I'd just like your help -- anyone's, really -- finding Mr. Bush's military records, if they are -- indeed -- in his web site. I'd like to compare, on my own, Mr. Kerry's military records with Mr. Bush's. Any help is appreciated.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2004 11:32:23 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by bdobe:
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by bdobe:
You'll find this [see image in previous post] and the rest of Mr. Kerry's military records at JohnKerry.com. |
Well, not really "the rest", just "some" of the rest. For example, you won't find his request for deferment there, or the medical reports that purportedly support his medals. |
Ron,
Many Republicans, including some posters on this board (i.e., EddyG), claim that Mr. Bush has released "all" his military records. However, I can't find any trace of them in Mr. Bush's official campaign web site (//www.georgewbush.com/). This is not a gotcha, I'd just like your help -- anyone's, really -- finding Mr. Bush's military records, if they are -- indeed -- in his web site. I'd like to compare, on my own, Mr. Kerry's military records with Mr. Bush's. Any help is appreciated. |
I don't believe that Bush's military records are posted anywhere on his web site. However, all of them ( that could be found ) were released - including press access to all of his medical records ( except that he only permitted the press to view them - not remove them or make copies of them ). Most, though probably not all, of his military records can be found on a USAToday link here.
Ron |
|
|
|
08/28/2004 03:10:25 AM · #103 |
Ron, thanks for pointing to that source.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2004 09:26:54 PM · #104 |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 11:09:22 AM · #105 |
As several of the Iraqi team have been quoted as saying they plan to go home and take up arms against the US army, it doesn't seem like the best example for Bush to use in his campaign ads anyway.
Message edited by author 2004-08-29 11:09:32. |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 12:52:11 PM · #106 |
an interesting photo montage of soldiers who have died in Iraq
|
|
|
|
08/29/2004 01:11:51 PM · #107 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
As several of the Iraqi team have been quoted as saying they plan to go home and take up arms against the US army, it doesn't seem like the best example for Bush to use in his campaign ads anyway. |
But of course, he wont remove the ad. |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 03:05:31 PM · #108 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Originally posted by Gordon:
As several of the Iraqi team have been quoted as saying they plan to go home and take up arms against the US army, it doesn't seem like the best example for Bush to use in his campaign ads anyway. |
But of course, he wont remove the ad. |
Do I detect yet another double standard?
John Kerry was asked by 11 Swift Boat Veterans, back in May, to remove a photograph containing their images from one of his television ads ( see the story here Veteran's to Kerry: Stop Using Photo ), but, of course, he didn't. But the ad, called Lifetime, is still posted on his web site - ref here ).
Ron |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 03:27:25 PM · #109 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Do I detect yet another double standard?
|
From who ? The US Olympic Committee ? The Iraqi soccer team ? Or just the US congress who said that the olympic games "shall be nonpolitical and may not promote the candidacy of an individual seeking public office."
Message edited by author 2004-08-29 19:59:14. |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 05:35:55 PM · #110 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by RonB:
Do I detect yet another double standard?
|
From who ? The US Olympic Committee ? The Iraqi soccer team ? |
Are you really that dense - or do you just like playing the fool?
Of course I don't mean the USOC or the Iraqi soccer team. I mean the Anti-Bush crowd who are quick to point out charges aimed at the Bush-Cheney campaign, but do not likewise find fault when the Kerry-Edwards campaign face the same types of charges. Just like last week when they ( and the liberal press ) quickly made headlines about a lawyer who worked for the Bush campaign who also did work for the Swift Boat Veterans 527 group, but blithely ignored the fact that at least two lawyers working on the Kerry campaign also work for anti-Bush 527 groups.
That double standard.
Message edited by author 2004-08-29 17:50:41. |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 08:00:24 PM · #111 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Of course I don't mean the USOC or the Iraqi soccer team. I mean the Anti-Bush crowd who are quick to point out charges aimed at the Bush-Cheney campaign, but do not likewise find fault when the Kerry-Edwards campaign face the same types of charges. Just like last week when they ( and the liberal press ) quickly made headlines about a lawyer who worked for the Bush campaign who also did work for the Swift Boat Veterans 527 group, but blithely ignored the fact that at least two lawyers working on the Kerry campaign also work for anti-Bush 527 groups.
That double standard. |
Yes, its amazing how blind many people are to the frequent abuses of their "own team". So rather than being like that, what do you feel about the republican party using the Olympics in their advertising, in violation of an act of Congress, against the wishes of the US Olympic committee and against the wishes of the Iraqi soccer team that they feature in the advert ? Instead of talking about anti-Bush groups, or Kerry for a change, why not comment on this ? You wouldn't want to be considered one of these people you are directing your comments at after all I'm sure. And while you are at it, it would be pleasant if you could drop the rude and irrelevant personal insults.
Message edited by author 2004-08-29 20:13:58. |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 09:39:55 PM · #112 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by RonB:
Of course I don't mean the USOC or the Iraqi soccer team. I mean the Anti-Bush crowd who are quick to point out charges aimed at the Bush-Cheney campaign, but do not likewise find fault when the Kerry-Edwards campaign face the same types of charges. Just like last week when they ( and the liberal press ) quickly made headlines about a lawyer who worked for the Bush campaign who also did work for the Swift Boat Veterans 527 group, but blithely ignored the fact that at least two lawyers working on the Kerry campaign also work for anti-Bush 527 groups.
That double standard. |
Yes, its amazing how blind many people are to the frequent abuses of their "own team". So rather than being like that, what do you feel about the republican party using the Olympics in their advertising, in violation of an act of Congress, against the wishes of the US Olympic committee and against the wishes of the Iraqi soccer team that they feature in the advert ? Instead of talking about anti-Bush groups, or Kerry for a change, why not comment on this ? You wouldn't want to be considered one of these people you are directing your comments at after all I'm sure. |
I feel that the USOC has every reason to protect its naming rights, is well within its rights to request that its image, name, etc. not be used in political advertising - or any advertising, for that matter - without their explicit permission. I feel that the members of the Iraqi soccer team are also within their rights to request that their images not be used in political advertising. I feel that the Bush campaign erred in not clearing the usages ahead of time, and in not discontinuing them when requested.
Originally posted by Gordon:
And while you are at it, it would be pleasant if you could drop the rude and irrelevant personal insults. |
I'll try, if you will. It was you, after all, who posted THIS
Originally posted by Gordon:
and here was me thinking you'd be able to handle the concept of time. |
and THIS
Originally posted by Gordon:
For someone who makes a pretense to be so logical |
in response to a couple of MY posts ( earlier in this very thread, I might add ).
Ron
Message edited by author 2004-08-29 21:48:12. |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 10:12:57 PM · #113 |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 10:19:01 PM · #114 |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 10:22:13 PM · #115 |
President Bush joins the National Guard and gets training to become a pilot. I assume that's a big commitment of money and time by the military to train him. A war is going on. Where was our fearless leader when he was needed in Viet Nam? Business school ?
Message edited by author 2004-08-29 22:23:05. |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 10:30:44 PM · #116 |
The people
United
Will never be defeated ! |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 10:40:09 PM · #117 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
The people
United
Will never be defeated ! |
Looking at tbe latest polls, you will.
:) |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 10:43:46 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by Riggs:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
The people
United
Will never be defeated ! |
Looking at tbe latest polls, you will.
:) |
***I thought you would have wanted Bush for a second term, Riggs...am I wrong? |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 10:48:04 PM · #119 |
Roughly 1,000 coffins representing U.S. dead in Iraq.
Message edited by author 2004-08-29 22:57:45.
|
|
|
|
08/29/2004 10:49:54 PM · #120 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
President Bush joins the National Guard and gets training to become a pilot. I assume that's a big commitment of money and time by the military to train him. A war is going on. Where was our fearless leader when he was needed in Viet Nam? Business school ? |
Get over it Olyuzi... everyone serves in their own way and as they see fit... some not at all. Is this the one most significant criteria you use in considering a candidate for office? Even Kerry only served a mere four months, compared to the majority of citizens who served, including many who served several tours. By the way, Clinton, who I am pretty sure you would consider a good president, had his own service issues if I recall (where was he exactly?).
It truly is amazing how similar circumstances seem to yield one response when the circumstances conflict with your beliefs and an entirely different one when they support your position. First Amendment rights are all important, except when the christian right tries to exercise theirs. Those that question Kerry's service are liars, while those that question Bush's are digging for the truth. The electoral college should be abandoned for the popular vote... at least until Kerry wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote, at which time you will all extol the virtues of the electoral college. These threads (almost all of which were started as Bush Bashing threads) are quite tiresome because all I have seen is name-calling, innuendo and speculation. Very little of substance has been discussed, and it seems that the posters here have no intention of discussing the issues or the respective strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. If you really wanted someone to see eye to eye with you, try making some intelligent arguments which are applied equally and fairly to all candidates.
|
|
|
|
08/29/2004 11:09:32 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by SoCal69:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
President Bush joins the National Guard and gets training to become a pilot. I assume that's a big commitment of money and time by the military to train him. A war is going on. Where was our fearless leader when he was needed in Viet Nam? Business school ? |
Get over it Olyuzi... everyone serves in their own way and as they see fit... some not at all. Is this the one most significant criteria you use in considering a candidate for office? Even Kerry only served a mere four months, compared to the majority of citizens who served, including many who served several tours. By the way, Clinton, who I am pretty sure you would consider a good president, had his own service issues if I recall (where was he exactly?).
It truly is amazing how similar circumstances seem to yield one response when the circumstances conflict with your beliefs and an entirely different one when they support your position. First Amendment rights are all important, except when the christian right tries to exercise theirs. Those that question Kerry's service are liars, while those that question Bush's are digging for the truth. The electoral college should be abandoned for the popular vote... at least until Kerry wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote, at which time you will all extol the virtues of the electoral college. These threads (almost all of which were started as Bush Bashing threads) are quite tiresome because all I have seen is name-calling, innuendo and speculation. Very little of substance has been discussed, and it seems that the posters here have no intention of discussing the issues or the respective strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. If you really wanted someone to see eye to eye with you, try making some intelligent arguments which are applied equally and fairly to all candidates. |
***I'm so surprised by your response, SoCal. I mean, weren't you the one who was berating Mr. Hinzman in another thread because he didn't fullfill all of his duty, despite already having served in Afghanistan?
He too was serving in his own way, but now, you seem to have a double standard by saying it's alright that Bush reneged on his duties even though the military made a financial and time committment to him in training him to be a pilot. Curious... |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 11:12:24 PM · #122 |
Just SOME of the 2,000 bodies of Iraqi civilians recovered from a mass grave near Musayib, Iraq, about 75 KM south of Baghdad. They were murdered following an uprising against Sadaam Hussein in 1991.
No one protested.
Not in the streets of Baghdad; and not in New York City. |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 11:17:00 PM · #123 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Originally posted by SoCal69:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
President Bush joins the National Guard and gets training to become a pilot. I assume that's a big commitment of money and time by the military to train him. A war is going on. Where was our fearless leader when he was needed in Viet Nam? Business school ? |
Get over it Olyuzi... everyone serves in their own way and as they see fit... some not at all. Is this the one most significant criteria you use in considering a candidate for office? Even Kerry only served a mere four months, compared to the majority of citizens who served, including many who served several tours. By the way, Clinton, who I am pretty sure you would consider a good president, had his own service issues if I recall (where was he exactly?).
It truly is amazing how similar circumstances seem to yield one response when the circumstances conflict with your beliefs and an entirely different one when they support your position. First Amendment rights are all important, except when the christian right tries to exercise theirs. Those that question Kerry's service are liars, while those that question Bush's are digging for the truth. The electoral college should be abandoned for the popular vote... at least until Kerry wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote, at which time you will all extol the virtues of the electoral college. These threads (almost all of which were started as Bush Bashing threads) are quite tiresome because all I have seen is name-calling, innuendo and speculation. Very little of substance has been discussed, and it seems that the posters here have no intention of discussing the issues or the respective strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. If you really wanted someone to see eye to eye with you, try making some intelligent arguments which are applied equally and fairly to all candidates. |
***I'm so surprised by your response, SoCal. I mean, weren't you the one who was berating Mr. Hinzman in another thread because he didn't fullfill all of his duty, despite already having served in Afghanistan?
He too was serving in his own way, but now, you seem to have a double standard by saying it's alright that Bush reneged on his duties even though the military made a financial and time committment to him in training him to be a pilot. Curious... |
I don't understand why you are surprised. It is one thing to choose to serve or not to serve before committing yourself to the military. Both Bush and Kerry elected to serve, and I, for one, believe that both most likely served honorably, although in different ways. I have seen no hard and irrefutable evidence that either Kerry or Bush did anything improper with regard to their service. However, Hinzman chose to serve (which in and of itself is admirable), and then, when he didn't like what he had committed himself to, fled his post, contrary to the rules, without authorization and in a manner which could easily have endangered those who were serving with him and who had placed their trust in him. There is no double standard here.
Edit: By the way, if it turns out that either Bush or Kerry did anything improper with respect to their service, I will be the first person to voice my disdain for it. However, the second issue becomes: Is this truly the one significant fact that tells you about how a candidate will lead, especially 35 years after the fact? Did Bill Clinton's conduct with respect to military service really provide any significant indication of his abilities? Really, lets stop the bashing and talk about the current issues, strengths and weaknesses of the candidates.
Message edited by author 2004-08-29 23:24:12.
|
|
|
|
08/29/2004 11:24:52 PM · #124 |
Originally posted by SoCal69:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Originally posted by SoCal69:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
President Bush joins the National Guard and gets training to become a pilot. I assume that's a big commitment of money and time by the military to train him. A war is going on. Where was our fearless leader when he was needed in Viet Nam? Business school ? |
Get over it Olyuzi... everyone serves in their own way and as they see fit... some not at all. Is this the one most significant criteria you use in considering a candidate for office? Even Kerry only served a mere four months, compared to the majority of citizens who served, including many who served several tours. By the way, Clinton, who I am pretty sure you would consider a good president, had his own service issues if I recall (where was he exactly?).
It truly is amazing how similar circumstances seem to yield one response when the circumstances conflict with your beliefs and an entirely different one when they support your position. First Amendment rights are all important, except when the christian right tries to exercise theirs. Those that question Kerry's service are liars, while those that question Bush's are digging for the truth. The electoral college should be abandoned for the popular vote... at least until Kerry wins the electoral vote but loses the popular vote, at which time you will all extol the virtues of the electoral college. These threads (almost all of which were started as Bush Bashing threads) are quite tiresome because all I have seen is name-calling, innuendo and speculation. Very little of substance has been discussed, and it seems that the posters here have no intention of discussing the issues or the respective strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. If you really wanted someone to see eye to eye with you, try making some intelligent arguments which are applied equally and fairly to all candidates. |
***I'm so surprised by your response, SoCal. I mean, weren't you the one who was berating Mr. Hinzman in another thread because he didn't fullfill all of his duty, despite already having served in Afghanistan?
He too was serving in his own way, but now, you seem to have a double standard by saying it's alright that Bush reneged on his duties even though the military made a financial and time committment to him in training him to be a pilot. Curious... |
I don't understand why you are surprised. It is one thing to choose to serve or not to serve before committing yourself to the military. Both Bush and Kerry elected to serve, and I, for one, believe that both most likely served honorably, although in different ways. I have seen no hard and irrefutable evidence that either Kerry or Bush did anything improper with regard to their service. However, Hinzman chose to serve (which in and of itself is admirable), and then, when he didn't like what he had committed himself to, fled his post, contrary to the rules, without authorization and in a manner which could easily have endangered those who were serving with him and who had placed their trust in him. There is no double standard here. |
***So then the military trained Bush to be a pilot for what? To leave service during a time of war? I think not. How did he serve? Just by being trained, taking pay and then leaving when his country needed him the most? Sounds to me like Bush went AWOL, but he didn't have to leave the country like Mr. Hinzman because he came from a very well connected and wealthy family. And that is a double standard on your part, from what I can tell. |
|
|
|
08/29/2004 11:39:31 PM · #125 |
Originally posted by SoCal69:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
President Bush joins the National Guard and gets training to become a pilot. I assume that's a big commitment of money and time by the military to train him. A war is going on. Where was our fearless leader when he was needed in Viet Nam? Business school ? |
Get over it Olyuzi... everyone serves in their own way and as they see fit... some not at all. Is this the one most significant criteria you use in considering a candidate for office? Even Kerry only served a mere four months, compared to the majority of citizens who served, including many who served several tours. By the way, Clinton, who I am pretty sure you would consider a good president, had his own service issues if I recall (where was he exactly?).
|
Mr. Hinzman served 7 months over in Afghanistan, if my memory serves me correctly. I don't know what he did there, but for sure, he did more than Bush ever did in the military to help his country. Bush has NO BALLS and wants others to fight his war. There is a term for that...see the picture of the tee-shirt I posted above...it's very appropo of Bush. |
|
