I learned Kerry stands firmly for...

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Valence,

None of the rape alligations have been proven or even followed up in those articles you have posted.  

We'll here's another, more recent one for you then.

The Secret File of Abu Ghraib (July 28, 2004)

The new classified military documents offer a chilling picture of what happened at Abu Ghraib -- including detailed reports that U.S. troops and translators sodomized and raped Iraqi prisoners. The secret files -- 106 "annexes" that the Defense Department withheld from the Taguba report last spring -- include nearly 6,000 pages of internal Army memos and e-mails, reports on prison riots and escapes, and sworn statements by soldiers, officers, private contractors and detainees. The files depict a prison in complete chaos. Prisoners were fed bug-infested food and forced to live in squalid conditions; detainees and U.S. soldiers alike were killed and wounded in nightly mortar attacks; and loyalists of Saddam Hussein served as guards in the facility, apparently smuggling weapons to prisoners inside.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Sleep well Drew.

[Goz]

Even Gozur's post, while "expressive" to say the least, doesn't delve into any hateful actions he may want visited upon the "seditionists" he speaks of.

Your intellectually dishonesty is staggering. Why, exactly, do you think Gozur suggested dissenters be placed in Abu Ghraib? So they could trades notes? He dislikes what Carter, Moore, et al, have to say and he suggested they be put in a prison now infamous for the torture KNOWN to have taken place. Soliders have been indicted and CONVICTED of such. It just isn't funny and I can't stand it when people try to pawn off an inappropriate comment as a "joke". Ha ha, people were tortured and America lost uncalcuable amounts of respect in the world, let's send people I disagree with there, HA HA. And here you defend such a comment.

It was a joke (maybe a bad one), nothing more.... you are far too uptight.

perhaps you should talk to someone professionally about your issues or try adding extra fibre to your diet or maybe even a laxative.

Breath in...   Breath out.... find some mantra that helps you relax

Replying to this only drags it out..

Time to move on... to threads that relate to the hobby.

-Goz

[DarkKobold]

Sit on this one Drew!  

[mr.Curmudgeon]

LOL.


(See Gozur, I'm not that uptight)

[DrewKaree]

Well, how about responding to my post above directing you to possible answers to your disengenuine query (this topic) about Kerry's political stance? Read the PDF...or were you never really interested in Kerry's views to begin with?

You gave me a 251 page report on his "plans".  I do hope that you can find it in your heart to allow me to read it before posting on it.  Please forgive me for not posting quicker on the entire document.  I will get to it, but it may not be at your pace.  If you are so genuine in your concern to help me, I'm sure you'll find that to be reasonable.  It's kinda hard to not respond to the "compassionate and civil" postings you've made about myself and my character AND understand the otherworldy logic the candidate from MA is giving.  You'd agree that it is a bit "over my head" and I may have a tough time grasping all the good points the first time around, right?

...without being forthright and/or fair.

*ring....ring...ring*  Hello?
Mr Kettle, this is Mr Pot...I'm calling you black.
*click*

Again I call "shenanigans". You're publishing Republican talking points on an arcade website. If you really cared about this country you'll be voting for Kerry, end of story.

Said the man seething with hatred for Bush whose main point is that I'm a wingnut wackjob spouting my demagogic points to a rapt and willing audience and leading them in lockstep down a path of ruin to the foot of a cross of some carpenter who may or may not have done shoddy work.

Bush is a failure and to continue to support him (even indirectly) is tantamount to a character flaw at this point in the running. You know what's funny, maybe I missed it, but I haven't seen you outright express your support for Bush. Either you aren't brave enough to do so, or you really have nothing better to do than bag on the viable alternatives.

I support the need for continuing the fight we've started against countries willing to attack ours.  This means I support Bush's agenda for dealing with it.  I do not support his management of government programs regarding the creation of new entitilement programs without attempting to reform the wasteful, easy-to-abuse, misguided ones that we already have.  Viable alternative is your opinion, one which is in direct contradiction with your stance that it should not be posted to an arcade board.  I obviously disagree with your viable opinion statement. I agree in general with the libertarian cause.  I choose to support Bush this year because the (mis)information deluge he is having to battle is tremendous, and I believe it is vital to our country to have a leader with the convictions and purpose of ensuring our country is led, not managed, to defend ourselves.

I'm guessing you've bought Bush's whole "compassionate conservatism" spiel, since he's been "born again" -- Personally I feel being born again is for the week-kneed who refuse to grow up -- and you're just one more doey-eyed foot soldier marching lock-step with the Bushinistas in the culture war. You have a blatantly obvious agenda and you're being completely dishonest about your "open-mindedness".

I'll be sure to pass this along to each of my Democratic friends when I go to church this Sunday.

Get off the cross, someone else needs the wood.

I'd hate to give up my "spot" in case another would take my place and lead all the "week-kneed who refuse to grow up" to an "enlightened" place of peace and happiness.

Your wanton wingnut topics will continue to piss me off, but I promise to hold off as much as possible. However, sometimes a troll needs to be labelled a troll.

does this mean we part vastly differing in opinion, but civil to one another in areas outside of politcal debate?  (I think we could be civil to one another in politcal debate as well, but you're showing that it's really not possible.

Yeah, that giant conservative banner on each of your posts certainly feigns relevancy on retro gaming threads.

would you like my signature to be made smaller, or just censor remove it altogether?  Let me know...your "middle of the road" viewpoint has me confused.  

I get it.  You want to create the very "flame war" you state existed in this thread before you joined the conversation.  I don't believe you read over all of them, or, having done that, you're unfamiliar with "disingenous" and how it relates to your comments and your attempts to foment said "flame war".  I'm guessing you majored in intellectual dishonesty yourself, since you're unwilling to address the fact that this HAS been civil discourse.  If you look at the Google ads, I've even made your opinion the topic in targeted marketing!

I find it ironic that you believe in a candidate who espouses a non-divisive campaign, yet can't seem to control your own divisive comments.  Hypocrite, heal thyself.

Cheers
DK

[DrewKaree]

Sit on this one Drew!  

Ferrets are so cool, Budweiser put 'em in a commercial with the hippest parties!  All they've done with bunnies is make jokes about 'em in cartoons!  Beer commercials are the be all and end all.  If I just drink the right stuff, I can get the fastest car, hottest girl, you name it!  It may look horrible in the morning, but...

Ferrets in '08!

[DrewKaree]

and lastly:

for MrC, Bush's plan from 2000.  I'll have to wait to see his plan.  I haven't looked for it, as I'm voting for him for reasons stated two posts up.  If he takes our education, social security, and health care down the avenue of creating larger government programs, then I think he should be tarred and feathered, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt


The Secret File of Abu Ghraib

The foot-dragging is astonishing, given that Congress has access to classified documents detailing the abuses outlined by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba in his report on Abu Ghraib. Rolling Stone obtained those files in June and offers this report on their contents.

You'd think some outraged Congressman would take a stand and do something.  Thank goodness Rolling Stone was able to get their hands on these classified military documents and is willing to take the bull by the horns.  If the story is proven to be true, mountains should be moved to punish the guilty parties involved, but to state these allegations as fact paints a picture of  ALL of Congress as willing accomplices in keeping this under wraps, "given that Congress has access to classified documents detailing the abuses outlined by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba in his report on Abu Ghraib".  It's reporting like this that causes war supporters to call into question "the press" and their motives.  At least the Guardian is a little more even-handed in how they wrote their story about this.

re:  Washington Post If the allegations are proven to be true, the responsible parties should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of whatever law you choose.

re:  New York Times (in case anyone wants to dismiss this because it comes from peaceredding.org, the NY Times would require you to register/subscribe in order to read their stories.  It's easier to show a repost from somewhere else)  It appears this is the same case being reported on as above.  Regardless, in all of these cases the punishment should be just as severe as what was doled out.

re:  CBS News - again, seems to be the same cases, they add a few of the other cases stated to also be in question.

re:  Telegraph - a different case alleging rape of a female prisoner that is/will be under investigation now.  If proven to be true, again, I'm all for punishment to whatever extent you wish to be meted out.

re:  The Guardian - a case alleging sodomy.  Unsure as to the outcome of the allegations, but I am willing to wait to hear the outcome and, if proven to be true, would expect that punishment for the actions HAS to be given.

While it troubles me to see continued allegations such as these come out, I am also not willing to pack it all in and ship out.  I am all for giving out whatever punishment dissenters of this war want to give to these people who have committed these acts.  We have a responsibility to treat prisoners of war as we would want our own prisoners to be treated, and if prisoner treatment falls outside the guidelines laid out in the Geneva Convention we are quick to invoke, punishment should be swift and severe.

These things have been done in the name of giving military intelligence control over almost every aspect of prison conditions at Abu Ghraib with the explicit aim of manipulating the detainees' "emotions and weaknesses".  It is in THIS area that I am willing to have U.N. assistance present to ensure our compliance with the Geneva Convention.  

At some point, the actions of those we fight against must be looked at by those willing to pack up and ship out as tactics as horrific as those we've perpetrated.  We are at war, and unfortunately, bad things happen during wartime.  

To bring this back to the topic of the thread, something I've learned about Kerry is that I am being asked to believe that the man who is saying he will lead the country better than it is currently being run has also admitted to committing similar acts he decries now.  I see many things that point to his politicizing what happened in the Vietnam war for the benefit of his public persona, but I guess it's just my tainted opinion that sees his re-enactments of "my heroic actions" as the narcissistic actions of a blowhard.  What I don't see is a reason to believe that the man who didn't possess the intestinal fortitude to not commit these actions then, somehow has developed it since.  If it is so horrible for our current administration to "allow this to happen" (Kerry's words) then he should show this "newfound" intestinal fortitude and remove himself from this race for not only allowing it to happen, but to DO the very things he finds so vile now.

[rchadd]

drew, i wonder why you are really posting this stuff?

getting worried?

[APFelon]

[

Hope these are not the 'wacky conspiracy' websites you are talking about

No need to be sarcasticly rude, pal. I was requesting information, not threatening to shoot your hampster with a howitzer.

APf

[danny_galaga]

I prefer concave buttons to convex buttons--call me crazy but old school is the way to go.

you and i both. and gozur wears his preference proudly.

CONCAVE BUTTONS FOR PRESIDENT!

[fredster]

mr.Curmudgeon,

On that article you posted to support your point,  Do people actually read rolling stone and believe it's indepth reporting on poltical subjects??!?

Come on.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

mr.Curmudgeon,

On that article you posted to support your point,  Do people actually read rolling stone and believe it's indepth reporting on poltical subjects??!?

Come on.

So are you saying the whole article is a lie? Do you have proof to the contrary?

I agree that it's sad that something like this is relegated to the pages of Rolling Stone (although I don't believe that makes it inherently false) and I have to wonder exactly why our Congress isn't doing more?  

[mr.Curmudgeon]

I support the need for continuing the fight we've started against countries willing to attack ours.

Good for you, tough-guy. When are you going to sign up for duty?

I choose to support Bush this year because the (mis)information deluge he is having to battle is tremendous, and I believe it is vital to our country to have a leader with the convictions and purpose of ensuring our country is led, not managed, to defend ourselves.

This is wrong-headed on so many levels I wouldn't even know where to begin. So basically you're supporting Bush because you feel "sorry" for him? Great.

does this mean we part vastly differing in opinion, but civil to one another in areas outside of politcal debate?  (I think we could be civil to one another in politcal debate as well, but you're showing that it's really not possible.

It's possible and we could be. However, you have misrepresented your intentions in the past and the more you allow your real agenda to take center stage, leveling the playing field, the more apt I will be to temper my frustration.

would you like my signature to be made smaller, or just censor remove it altogether?  Let me know...your "middle of the road" viewpoint has me confused.  

You play the victim really well. *golf-clap*

I find it ironic that you believe in a candidate who espouses a non-divisive campaign, yet can't seem to control your own divisive comments.  Hypocrite, heal thyself.

If forcing you to lay all your cards on the table is hypocritical, then so be it. I find it ironic that you support a candidate that espouses a strong sense of moral fortitude and leadership and can't run on the record he's built before nor during his presidency.

"Mr. Bush's advisers plan to cap the month at the Republican convention in New York, which they said would feature Mr. Kerry as an object of humor and calculated derision."  - A true uniter!

[shmokes]

Drew, Kerry said this:


"There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed, in that I took part in shootings in free-fire zones, I conducted harassment and interdiction fire, I used .50-caliber machine guns which were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search-and-destroy missions, in the burning of villages," Kerry said in 1971.

In 1971, Kerry also testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and recited a litany of atrocities and war crimes he said had been reported to him by other soldiers.

He said those included rapes, mutilations, torture and random shootings of civilians. He did not claim to have personally witnessed or been involved in such acts.

That's from this CNN article

I don't buy all this stuff about Kerry being a waffler.

First, even if he did support the war and then change his mind, that might have had something to do with the fact that the Bush administration deliberately mislead everyone into believing that Iraq posted a serious threat, and that they were in league with Al Qaeda.  I think it would be morally reprehinsible for someone to stubbornly support something simply because they originally supported it, even after they have come to believe that the original support was a mistake.

Second, your claim is just Michael Moore-style misdirection.  Kerry did not "support the war and then not support the war."  He voted against the $87 Billion dollars, because the plan basically pretended that money simply has to be printed.  It wasn't, "We'll pull $87 billion from this program and that program and send it to Iraq," or, "We'll raise the $87 billion with this tax or that tax."   It was simply,  "We're going to spend an extra $87 billion dollars and figure it out later."  I thought you'all were supposed to be the fiscally responsible party.  It's funny how whenever you're in power you just pull out the credit cards and go on a big spending spree.

Third, if you want to see waffling why don't you ask mister Bush why we're at war with Iraq.  Do you think he'll tell you that it's because Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction?  Perhaps he'll tell you that the U.S. went into Iraq (at the disapproval of the U.N.) because Iraq wouldn't do what the U.N. told them to do.  Or maybe he'll tell you that it's because Saddam wanted weapons of Mass Destruction.  No???  Well, maybe you caught him on the day that we were going into Iraq because they were in league with Al Qaeda.  What??? You mean to say that Bin Laden considered Saddam Husseign an evil socialist who needed to be overthrown?  Well, maybe Bush will tell you that it was a humanitarian mission because of all the atrocities Saddam has committed against his own people.  Or maybe he'll tell you that it's because Saddam was a declared enemy of the United States who, while he did not have any WMDs, had the capability of producing WMDs.  Of course, maybe he should lock me up too, since, afterall I have expressed a desire to have lots of money and I do, afterall, have the capability of robbing a bank.  

He's a facist waffler

[fredster]

mr.Curmudgeon

I can't believe anybody would take that seriously. If it were true, there would be news media all over it, it would be a very very BIG story.

That's the proof I am looking for, more than one source.

Believing something like that is like believing Clem and Elmo were abducted by aliens in a story in the Enquirer.  With no backup evidence from another source, don't you think that it puts the story in question?

The opposite was true the other day on the drudgereport. There was a story proclaiming that the Iraqi government found a neuclear missle buried deep in concrete.  It even went so far as to describe the type of warheads on it.  If it were true, the media would be all over it.

Weren't they all over the original Story?  Think about it.  The Rolling Stone has been anti-Bush and Anti-Republican for like, ever man.  

[mr.Curmudgeon]

for MrC, Bush's plan from 2000.  I'll have to wait to see his plan.

In a thread where you criticise Kerry for not establishing a coherent platform, you'd admit to not knowing the current platform of a man who has been president for the last 3 1/2 years? After the largest terrorist attack on American soil, the largest debt our country has ever faced and two wars, you're voting for platform established in 2000? While you're at it, why not vote for Reagan, I hear he had some great ideas on how to win the Cold War. Damn, Russkies.

I haven't looked for it, as I'm voting for him for reasons stated two posts up.  If he takes our education, social security, and health care down the avenue of creating larger government programs, then I think he should be tarred and feathered, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Oops.

Republicans Become the Party of Big Government
"Politically, it must be frustrating for the Republicans who have worked hard in the past to cut government to see today's Republican president become one of the biggest spenders in decades. "

You'd think some outraged Congressman would take a stand and do something.  Thank goodness Rolling Stone was able to get their hands on these classified military documents and is willing to take the bull by the horns.

I agree with yo on this. See my post above.

If the story is proven to be true, mountains should be moved to punish the guilty parties involved, but to state these allegations as fact paints a picture of  ALL of Congress as willing accomplices in keeping this under wraps, "given that Congress has access to classified documents detailing the abuses outlined by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba in his report on Abu Ghraib".

I actually think there is more to it than that. I am, myself, conflicted about whether or not it's in our country's best interest to release all the details. For if what is floating around now as rumor ends up being true, Bush's War in Iraq will have cost our country it's very soul and the War On Terror will end up being futile. Maybe Congress really does know the truth and collectively think it's unwise to publish the torrid details. Remember the pale and drawn faces of all the congresspeople after Rummy showed them all the "photos and videos". Most of that stuff has never been seen by the public, so it's not a stretch to say that Congress knows more than what they are telling us. Sounds like tin-foil hat stuff, but I imagine they may think it best to quietly prosecute offenders and not politicize it at all, since it hurts our country more than it hurts Bush/Kerry etc. The screams of abused children would have a tendency to do that, you know. This stuff is so horrid, there really isn't a way for our news outlets to discuss this sort of thing and they may know that. Can you picture Judy Woodruff candidly talking about children being anally raped?

While it troubles me to see continued allegations such as these come out, I am also not willing to pack it all in and ship out.

Nor am I, but I do believe Bush and his inept administration have created the circumstances for allowing something like this to happen (ie: Illegitmate war, private contractors, Rumsfailed allowing torture) and I believe every single American with a conscience should hold them accountable in November, no matter what your political affiliation may be. Not only for these horrible acts (should they be proven to be systemic), but for record deficits, record job loss, two failed war/reconstructions and misappropriation of resources better suited for the "real" War On Terror. I don't see why the President should be allowed any less accountability than I am at my job, I mean, if I or my staff screw up....I'm fired. Shouldn't he be held more to account?

I am all for giving out whatever punishment dissenters of this war want to give to these people who have committed these acts.  We have a responsibility to treat prisoners of war as we would want our own prisoners to be treated, and if prisoner treatment falls outside the guidelines laid out in the Geneva Convention we are quick to invoke, punishment should be swift and severe.

I imagine you believe the "few bad apples" story. I believe it's systemic, thus the administration is at fault. More stories are coming out of Gitmo that point in this direction.

At some point, the actions of those we fight against must be looked at by those willing to pack up and ship out as tactics as horrific as those we've perpetrated.  We are at war, and unfortunately, bad things happen during wartime.  

A little too apologist for my tastes with the "unfortunately, bad things happen during wartime". Kerry, as with most Democrats (and probably independents such as myself) have never advocated leaving Iraq. So don't confuse the issues at hand.

Afghanistan is a mess:
"The most likely future for Afghanistan is chronic instability that Western powers, expending limited resources, will attempt to contain, but will not be able to resolve." (PINR Report)

To bring this back to the topic of the thread, something I've learned about Kerry is that I am being asked to believe that the man who is saying he will lead the country better than it is currently being run has also admitted to committing similar acts he decries now.

Didn't you just state earlier, "unfortunately, bad things happen during wartime"? Better a man who seeks contrition than a man who can't remember ever making any mistakes. WWJVF? (Who would Jesus Vote For?)

I see many things that point to his politicizing what happened in the Vietnam war for the benefit of his public persona

As opposed to an AWOL'er landing on air-craft carrier to declare "Mission Accomplished" when it's not, using our troops as propoganda, and posing with fake thanksgiving day Turkeys for photo-ops in the guise of "boosting troop morale"? (You do realise that only troops that supported Bush were allowed in the tent, much like attendees to Bush/Cheney rallies are now required to sign a "pledge of allegance" to his campaign in order to attend)

What I don't see is a reason to believe that the man who didn't possess the intestinal fortitude to not commit these actions then, somehow has developed it since.  If it is so horrible for our current administration to "allow this to happen" (Kerry's words) then he should show this "newfound" intestinal fortitude and remove himself from this race for not only allowing it to happen, but to DO the very things he finds so vile now.

Or maybe he should continue to run for President in order to make it right.

Peace and love,
mrC

[mr.Curmudgeon]

I can't believe anybody would take that seriously. If it were true, there would be news media all over it, it would be a very very BIG story.

You'd think. See my post above for potential reasons why we're not seeing this all over.

That's the proof I am looking for, more than one source.

I don't believe this over yet. Not by a long shot. So we'll see.

mrC

[GGKoul]

Before I post this, I just want too say that I am a Canadian and I have not seen F9/11.

But if you don't believe Bush & the Saudi's royal family are "close" friend.  You may want to see this

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0804041gifts1.html

-GGKoul

[DrewKaree]

Good for you, tough-guy. When are you going to sign up for duty?

I tried years ago.  I'm medically unfit for duty.  If I could have, I wouldn't need to sign up for duty now, as I'd have already volunteered.  Me, a "tough-guy"?  Are you just trying to flatter me to get on my good side?  It's working   I'm starting to love you...maybe it's just my religious fanaticism working to let me see the good in you  

[mr.Curmudgeon]

...without being forthright and/or fair.

*ring....ring...ring*  Hello?
Mr Kettle, this is Mr Pot...I'm calling you black.
*click*

You know, I'm not the one posting partisan flamebait "topics" on a hobby board dedicated to arcade machines.

Here's why I think it's wrong:

1) It's easy. No thought required, just an agenda.
2) It's divisive. At this point in a heated election year, our country is split right down the middle. The independents are a smaller group than they have ever been. You are *not* going to win any converts. Even Bush has given up on the idea. (ie: requiring the signing ofwavers to get into see Bush/Cheney speeches. How can undecideds get in?)
3) Opinions are like bungholes...everybody has got one.
4) It's anathema to the nature of this site. It will only encourage more extremely opinionated topics, pushes this community further apart. Should I start posting my views on abortion? gay rights? minorities? Religion? Creationism vs. Evolution. Come on...you see where this is going.
5) It's the advertising of ideals that have NOTHING to do with the hobby, which is never very constructive...you know what they say about arguing on the internet....

Just so you understand my criticism, I've searched the BYOAC archives and visually scanned thread topics over the last several years, and granted I may have missed some, your recent postings are by FAR the most overtly political. In the past 3 years (excluding your recent posts), there have been two anti-bush topics (2004), one topic about F9/11 (asking people about their opinions, not cramming partisan rhetoric down people's throats, ie: "Farenheit/Michael Moore links/Lies") and one pro-Kerry topic. If you expect me to accept that your posts fit in with the general atmosphere of this board and the specific leanings of topics in "Everything Else", than that's a really crappy ratio. 4 topics out of thousands.

You joined here in Feb 2004, I've been a member here (lurking/reading/researching mostly, as you'll see by my post count) since 2002. You're posts *do not*, IMHO, fit in with the vast majority of "Everything Else" that has been posted here since the boards inception. You are deliberately titling your threads in provocative manner to increase viewership in advance of your political views/motives. I consider that spamming/advertisement. It's not political discourse since you have no intent of changing your views.

Now, am I being hypocritical by posting in the current threads? Probably. However, you won't see me EVER start one of these sorts of topics. In addition, I'm trying to wind down my posts on these threads since my points have been made. So, at least there I'm being consistent and honest. No kettle, no pot.

Finally, I'm asking you, begging you, chill out on the political threads and take it somewhere else. You are entitled to your opinion, and I'd love to debate you...just not here. Hell, if you lived by me I'd take you out for a beer (or something) and we could knock heads. I just don't think the BYOAC is the place to try further your agenda. It's pointless and it's giving birth to more of this sort of thing. Watch and see.


(really very)
Sincerely,
mrC

[fredster]

MrC,

In defense of Drew, This is as very good a topic on this board for "everything else"

If you don't like the topic, then you don't have to open the thread.  We are not compelled to open every thread every day on every side.  

After all, It's not political discourse since you have no intent of changing your views.

I think it comes down to two camps -
Those that trust the President
Those that don't trust the President.

We can argue and compare our facts. We can make points.  We may never agree.

But one thing is clear, when one side starts calling names and getting personal, then that side has lost the argument. Period.

As a rebutal to the Rolling Stone thing (again) - Here's one about Kerry, and there are as many on him as with Bush - http://humaneventsonline.com.edgesuite.net/unfit_video_wmv.html  after all - can we say the whole article is a lie? Do you have proof to the contrary?

There are always two sides. We should all try and see the other side.  It's fun and interesting to see where we stand.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

UPDATE: (Friday, Aug. 6th)
Swift Boat Veterans have been sunk! Their story didn't even last a day.
"The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" have been found to include a man who changed his story right after Kerry entered the race and another who flat-out retracts his accusations.  Meanwhile, another SBVfT member has accused Kerry of not really deserving his Bronze Star because the events leading to it never occured... even though the Veteran recieved a Bronze Star for the same day's events</a> he claims now never happened.

MrC,

There are always two sides. We should all try and see the other side.  It's fun and interesting to see where we stand.

Ok. Hope you enjoy the fact that the author of the book you linked to, John O'Neill, has been linked to the GOP establishment since the 70's and didn't serve in Vietnam until three months after Kerry left and none of the men in the group Swiftboat Veterans for Truth actually served on Kerry's swiftboats. They are also linked to the GOP and have received at least $100,000 in support from Bob J. Perry, a big Texas Republican donor.

While the veterans attacking Kerry in the ad are veterans of the Vietnam War and may have served at the same time as Kerry, as The New York Times reported on August 5, the Kerry campaign noted that "none of the men had actually served on the Swift boats that Mr. Kerry commanded." Adm. Roy F. Hoffman, one of the veterans in the ad, has even "acknowledged he had no first-hand knowledge to discredit Kerry's claims to valor," the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported on May 7, "and said that although Kerry was under his command, he really didn't know Kerry much personally."

In contrast, many of the veterans who have appeared on the campaign trail with Kerry did serve alongside him. The Wall Street Journal's Albert R. Hunt noted in his August 5 "Campaign Journal" column, titled "Sham Charges Against a War Hero", "Indeed, 10 of the 11 men who served on his two swift boats all have sworn by John Kerry; nine living members were in Boston [for the Democratic National Convention]." (Read More Truth)

Plus Snopes debunked these fools a long time ago,

"How well all of these men knew John Kerry is questionable, and discrepancies between how some of them described Kerry thirty-five years ago and how they describe him today suggest that their opinions are largely based upon political differences rather than objective assessments of Kerry's military record. For example, Rear Admiral Roy Hoffman is quoted above, yet the Los Angeles Times reported:

. . . Hoffman and Kerry had few direct dealings in Vietnam. A Los Angeles Times examination of Navy archives found that Hoffman praised Kerry's performance in cabled messages after several river skirmishes.1
"

Two sides, indeed. Even John McCain call these latest criticisms of Kerry's service "dishonest and dishonorable". Scott McClellan, White House spokesman has the White House backing down, you really still think there is truth in this?

P.S. Don't worry about whether or not I open any more threads, I've made my feelings on them clear and I'll leave it at that. I understand that they will probably continue. However, you won't see me start any, but I may continue to try to end them by refuting the "facts" therein.

[shmokes]

err....seriously.  It's just weird to talk about the fact that a thread shouldn't exist and how retarded it is, and then post to it.

I kind of like Drews threads.  I think he's got loose screws rolling around in his head, and I think his party is full of god-fearing racists and elitists, but mostly people who delusionally believe that one day they too will be admited into the club and can be rich and powerful.  It's an impressive scam.  But, well, it's America damn-it.  When you tell someone they shouldn't say inflamatory things it starts sounding like the retarded claims from the Bush administration about people being unpatriotic.  

Anyway...if you're going to do a boycot, do it right.  Otherwise, join the fray -- you make good arguments.  But you can't boycot a thread and post to it at the same time.  Something about cake.  And it's the everything else forum, which in a way...means....welll......everything else.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

err....seriously.  It's just weird to talk about the fact that a thread shouldn't exist and how retarded it is, and then post to it.

Agreed. One problem...

Anyway...if you're going to do a boycot, do it right.  Otherwise, join the fray -- you make good arguments.  But you can't boycot a thread and post to it at the same time.  Something about cake.  And it's the everything else forum, which in a way...means....welll......everything else.

...how do you boycott something in the digital realm?  You can't exactly stand in front of it with a sign and picket. I've made peace w/ the fact that he'll probably post more topics like:

"John Kerry Eats Babies Raw --- See Inside For More"
"Liberal Elite Media Puts Hex On My Family -- Latte Streams From All Our Faucets"
"Bush Walks On Water, Heals the Blind, Still Can't Distinguish Between Iraq and Iran"

and I'm done bitching about it. I'll either work to debunk or ignore them all together, just like everyone else. Promise.

mrC
 

[DrewKaree]

I've made peace w/ the fact that he'll probably post more topics like:

"John Kerry Eats Babies Raw --- See Inside For More"
"Liberal Elite Media Puts Hex On My Family -- Latte Streams From All Our Faucets"
"Bush Walks On Water, Heals the Blind, Still Can't Distinguish Between Iraq and Iran"

Are you sure you aren't Rush Limbaugh in disguise?  I hadn't thought of those, but now that you mention it...

Hell, if you lived by me I'd take you out for a beer (or something) and we could knock heads.

I'm headed for Lowell if we can come up with some more of those snappy thread titles  

Check your IM's

[fredster]

...how do you boycott something in the digital realm?

Interesting question, easy answer.  Same way you do with anything else, you don't buy into it.  You don't post, you ignore it altogether.

MrC can't let it go.  He has to put in the two cents like the rest of us.

[DarkKobold]

Ok, this thread is waaaay to long, and most people talk for like, 1/2 a page.  Is drew voting for Kerry yet?













Or at least bunnies?

[danny_galaga]

Darkkobold, soon the elections will be over (in the US and Australia) and we can all forget about the fact that all politicians that are successful are the same!! business as usual whoever wins and these threads will sink from view. i dont know if you ever saw it in the US, but the uk tv series 'yes minister' and 'yes, prime minister' is a brilliant portrayal of how bureaucracy (damn thats a hard word to spell) remains unchanged whichever government is in power...

[Santoro]

What I want to know is where these guys find the time to research and write these loooong posts!

[mr.Curmudgeon]

  Work has been slow lately.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

MrC can't let it go.  He has to put in the two cents like the rest of us.

Hehe...If you only knew how many times I sat down and got back up from my computer , gritting my teeth before making each post...

[Harry Potter]

Drew, never met you, never will, but please listen. Walk to the arcade machine, plug it in, play it and stop posting this crap.

Getting very boring.

[DrewKaree]

Ok, this thread is waaaay to long, and most people talk for like, 1/2 a page.  Is drew voting for Kerry yet?  Or at least bunnies?

Up with Kerry, down with bunnies...wait...YOU TRICKED ME!  STOP PLAYING THAT FRIGGEN PEARL JAM CD!

[DrewKaree]

Drew, never met you, never will, but please listen. Walk to the arcade machine, plug it in, play it and stop posting this crap.  Getting very boring.

or, better yet, while browsing...keep chantingn over and over.....must...not....open....thread....must....not....read...thread

BTW, which was the boring part, the 70+ posts you read, or the part where you were forced to post your own reply?    

I'm working on not continuing this purposefully, but when you say something like that, it's kinda hard not to respond.  I've got a few specific things I need to respond to, until that point, you've only served to bring this thread back to the top and publicize it yourself.  Maybe I've also lucked out, and you subscribed to this thread  

MrC, he's teasing me!  

[Edgedamage]

Leafswitch joysticks ROCK!

[danny_galaga]

further to my statement about major parties being much of a muchness, a friend forwarded this to me today:

http://antiwar.com/orig/pilger.php?articleid=2089


ages ago, drewkaree said 'vote for none of the above'. i think he was right. and if enough people actually voted and wrote 'none of the above' then politicians would take notice...

[Harry Potter]

Drew, never met you, never will, but please listen. Walk to the arcade machine, plug it in, play it and stop posting this crap.  Getting very boring.

or, better yet, while browsing...keep chantingn over and over.....must...not....open....thread....must....not....read...thread

BTW, which was the boring part, the 70+ posts you read, or the part where you were forced to post your own reply?    

I'm working on not continuing this purposefully, but when you say something like that, it's kinda hard not to respond.  I've got a few specific things I need to respond to, until that point, you've only served to bring this thread back to the top and publicize it yourself.  Maybe I've also lucked out, and you subscribed to this thread  

MrC, he's teasing me!  

AAARGH! The agony! Something I've so long tried to stop has now been brought back. BY ME! Oh the irony, the irony.  

Purpose is out to lunch from this topic by the way. But by all means don't let me stop you. Good luck.

And I never was good at chanting, or knowing to to stop typing.

[shmokes]

I thought it was Peale that kept posting "Vote none of the above".

[danny_galaga]

I thought it was Peale that kept posting "Vote none of the above".

peale, drew. you guys all look alike to me...