Proof that John Kerry is Unfit for Command Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Proof that John Kerry is Unfit for Command

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Archie Meeties who wrote (16276)	10/6/2004 11:06:57 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) of 27181

I judge commitment not by a number, but by the outcome. My father has often said "argue your limitations and they are yours." People who know what they want go after it with all of their heart. Look at the Clintons, they are committed. Hillary told someone when they were in college that some day Bill would be President. She despises him, yet she sacrificed her ethics to get the power she yearned for. Look at John Kerry. He is committed; he has yearned for the White House since he was a young man. He wanted to live so badly that he found a loophole and invented / earned the Purple hearts which were his ticket out of the deadly jungles. Kerry then sold out his fellow servicemen to further his political aspirations. He has been wherever on the political map he felt he could draw the strongest support. He married for money twice, the second time to a woman familiar with politics and the money to buy a lottery ticket with the White House as its prize. Look at FDR. He knew that the Nazis were evil. It took him years to bend public opinion to support war. Some claim he knew about Pearl Harbor, and let it happen to shock the populous into support. If that is true, what commitment! Let us examine President Bush. Some agree with him, some disagree. He saw with moral clarity that Osama Bin Laden was evil after being shocked on 9/11. He pursued a policy designed to eliminate him, and minimize the threat posed by Al Qaeda. He further saw a threat from three additional countries who he believed where most advanced in their nuclear weapon programs and other WMD programs. He made a compromise and went after what was politically achievable instead of the worst offender. The governments surrounding Iran will soon be democracies. Are you familiar with those who complain of a porous border along the Rio Grande? Do you think that Iran might experience the same kind of talent drain with two free Muslin neighbors? China has its own reasons to keep North Korea in play. DO you think Libya would have caved with a President in office whose favorite use for the military was to distract the press from his dalliances? George W. Bush has commitment. Partisans say that North Korea and Iran became nuclear on Bush 43's watch. Clinton signed the agreed framework that gave NK the isotopes. Kerry voted for it. Ambassador Albright admitted that she was "fooled" by their promises. It takes time to develop a nuclear bomb. The process should have been addressed way prior to 2000. I think Bush 43 shares blame. I think Clinton is culpable. I apologize for the long post.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next