Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : John EDWARDS for President -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (1064)	3/1/2004 4:25:05 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1381

Didn't you read about the Halliburton testimonies before congress where the ex-employees admitted they were gouging, overchargging and wasting tax-payer money by the tens of millions as a matter of business as usual? You sure pick some stinkers to defend. I wouldn't if I were you.

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (1064)	3/1/2004 4:40:37 PM
From: PROLIFE	Respond to of 1381

Military Record Is Just One Part Of The Story By Steven Fantina In a recent column Thomas Sowell pointed out that Benedict Arnold had an exemplary military record. Timothy McVeigh earned several citations for his performance during the first Gulf War. Terry Nichols, his conspirator in blowing up Oklahoma City’s Alfred Murrah Building, also served in the American military during that conflict as did John Muhammad--now known as the Beltway Sniper. Former Filipino President Ferdinand Marcos who gained infamy for looting his own country was elected with a well-earned reputation as a war hero. All five of these ex-soldiers evaluated solely on their battlefield valor would deserve tremendous respect. Obviously, there is more to each man’s story. While their later actions did not undo their military service, the evil acts they perpetrated overrode previous positive contributions. It is important to remember these other examples in considering Senator John Kerry’s veteran image-laden presidential campaign. Before the conniptions commence, Massachusetts’s ultra-leftist senator is NOT comparable to the traitors and murderers previously cited. They were referenced only to show the complete bankruptcy of weighing anyone’s military experience--however heroic it was--devoid of every other facet of that person’s life. Senator Kerry is rightly proud (some question his sincerity) of his four months of active combat in Vietnam, and all decent Americans owe him a debt of gratitude for that chapter in his life story. Yet his efforts on behalf of the anti-war movement and his senatorial voting record do not escape scrutiny merely because of wartime bravery. Just as his baleful, antiwar activities do not eradicate his courageous service, his courageous service does not eradicate his baleful, anti-war activities. Perhaps he saw far more service than many of his contemporaries who served in the National Guard. He also saw considerably more action than former Vice-President Al Gore who went to Vietnam as a military journalist and had bodyguards protecting him. Still his battlefield experience does not allow Kerry to besmirch all those who serve in the National Guard or the military press corps. Not one American soldier in battle will look over at his comrades and stop to contemplate if he is a member of the regular army or the National Guard. He will be thankful that his brother soldier is there willing to die for his fellow freedom fighter. Additionally John Kerry’s doughty efforts on behalf of his country in Vietnam do not preclude valid alarm over his long senatorial record of voting to gut the military. Reasonable people can and should debate the effectiveness of various military systems, but Kerry has never met a weapon that he liked enough to fund, betraying a dovishness that is the opposite of what America needs as it fights the War on Terror. While John Kerry’s service in Vietnam deserves America‘s thanks, his post-Vietnam escapades warrant equal condemnation. American prisoners of war who heard gleeful reports of his anti-war rhetoric from their communist captors deserved far better. His false charges of rampant atrocities committed by American soldiers are doubly evil coming from one who was there and knows that if any violations occurred, they were anomalies and severe punishment awaited all perpetrators. The United States military and the citizenry it guards are worthy of more than a pacifist politician who will only support a war when overwhelming public opinion dictates such a move is expedient, but switches sides the second its poll numbers decline. As a decorated veteran John Kerry’s vote against funding the post-liberation effort in Iraq either demonstrates terrible judgment or political desperation. President George W. Bush’s National Guard service is admirable as is the part-time duty of millions of other Americans, but fate’s decision not to call him to war afforded him no opportunity to prove what kind of combat soldier he would be. Tragically, Islamic terrorists gave him ample opportunity to demonstrate what type of commander-in-chief he is. His overall record compared against John Kerry’s leaves no doubt which one America needs as president. Four heroic months three decades ago do not outweigh decades of slandering his fellow veterans or efforts to emasculate the military. George W. Bush’s National Guard service strengthened his appreciation for both the wrongly termed “weekend warriors” and regular enlistees and more importantly helped solidify the foundation that would guide him ably in waging the War on Terror. bushcountry.org