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 : Proof that John Kerry is Unfit for Command -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richnorth who wrote (17150)	10/9/2004 8:17:17 AM
From: Bearcatbob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

"John Kerry offered real solutions to real problems. He told America the truth, and offered a plan for a fresh start on the economy, Iraq, and the war on terror. Simply put, he was presidential. Ironically, the president was not. " John Kerry tonight told the biggest lie of the campaign - no new taxes. To say he told the truth is desparate spin. Last night the game changed!

To: Richnorth who wrote (17150)	10/9/2004 8:40:28 AM
From: Andrew N. Cothran	Respond to of 27181

Yea, Richnorth: And you were the first one on this thread to tout the expected win of Latham vs. Howard, and for many of the same reasons that you now tout Kerry. You were so convinced that Howard would be booted by the Aussies just as Spain booted its PM because of Iraq. But the Aussies are smarter than the Spanish liberals. And Howard is in for another four years, despite your best efforts to have him defeated. And the Australian victory of Howard, rather awesome given the campaign, is but a foreteller of what will happen in the Misguided States of America. So take these facts to the pub and have another beer even if you are a tetoaller. When will you learn? You are not the smart strategist that you presume to be. Nor or you very good at predicting the outcome of looming events. Bush took Kerry to the cleaners in the second debate. It will take a few days for the RAD/LIB/DEMS to admit it. It will take Kerry even longer. He thinks he is so Goddam Great and his only greatness is the length of his ego.

To: Richnorth who wrote (17150)	10/9/2004 9:31:03 AM
From: Andrew N. Cothran	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

Remember this on November 3rd, Richnorth. Bush will excel Howard's Australian victory in these Misguided States of America Here's why, in case your biased brain can decipher it! The really horrifying thing about Howard's victory for Labor is that it proves that packaging and spin are ultimately dead ends. It is a cul-de-sac lined with klieg lights and celebrity occasions, but there is no exit all the same because it is the platform of the Labor party that is rotten. The hodge-podge of wacky environmentalists, professional victims, special sexual pleaders etc. have laid a dead hand on attempts to regard any issue, like the War on Terror, with anything approaching common sense. How else to explain why Labor should offer a country of 20 million people, living in close proximity to Indonesia, the chance to downgrade their alliance with the United States. If the Left were thinking clearly, it would realize that the single most striking aspect of George W. Bush is how ordinary he is. There is nothing in his strategy to combat terrorism beyond a refined common sense. He represents a threat to Liberalism for precisely the reason that an everyman reacting to an extraordinary historical challenge imperils kings and hereditary elites: the prospect he may discover by success in action that royalty with its cant and obscurantism is no better than he. Let's welcome back on to the world stage the man deemed intellectually inferior to all his Labor opponents; a person said to be singularly lacking in refinement and bereft of nuance. The man who for nearly ten years beat them all and has won another term. Australian Prime Minister John Howard.

To: Richnorth who wrote (17150)	10/9/2004 9:39:03 AM
From: Andrew N. Cothran	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

Never Have the American people elected as president a candidate with a record on national security issues resembling that of John "Dead Man Walking" Kerry. From the October 18, 2004 issue: Never have the American people elected as president a candidate with a record on national security issues resembling that of John Kerry. by William Kristol The American Spectator10/18/2004, Volume 010, Issue 06 Give it up Richnorth. Your surrender at all costs mentality went out with Nevil Chamberlain NEVER HAVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE elected as president a candidate with a record on national security issues resembling that of John Kerry. Consider some of the distinctive national security choices Kerry has made over the years. * April 22, 1971: The American people have never elected president someone who, while serving in the military, chose to testify (in uniform) against a war his country was then waging. Lt. Kerry asserted before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that his country and his fellow service members were guilty in Vietnam of "crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command." Indeed, Kerry asserted that the American military was "more guilty than any other body of violations of [the] Geneva Conventions." Kerry forthrightly rejected the bipartisan doctrine that had guided American foreign policy for a generation, deriding "the mystical war against communism." Kerry today remains proud of his testimony. Fall 1984: The American people have never elected president someone who, in his first successful bid for federal office, chose to make support for a unilateral nuclear freeze and for major cutbacks in America's defense programs the centerpiece of his campaign. The freeze and the cutbacks would have weakened U.S.-European ties, emboldened the Soviet Union, and strengthened the hand of hardliners in the Kremlin. Kerry has never said that the position he took at this turning point in the Cold War was mistaken. January 12, 1991: The American people have never elected president a senator who voted against an authorization for the use of military force, in this case in pursuance of a United Nations-approved policy to eject Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. Senator Kerry complained in 1991 that we were engaged in "a rush to war." It turned out that Saddam had been only months away from acquiring nuclear capability. Kerry now cites the first Gulf War as a success for the purpose of contrasting it with the recent one--but he has never acknowledged that his judgment in opposing that war might have been in error. October 17, 2003: The American people have never elected president someone who voted against an appropriation to support troops fighting in a war he had approved. Contrary to misleading press accounts, such as this one from the October 8 USA Today, this was not a "typical Senate situation in which party members vote yes on their own version of a bill and then vote no on the other party's version." Fellow Democrat Joe Biden had cosponsored with Kerry an alternative supplemental appropriation that would have paid for the war by repealing part of the Bush tax cut. But when the alternative was defeated, Biden and 38 other Democratic senators, unlike Kerry, voted for the final bill. Indeed, Biden made the case for the president's proposal on the Senate floor. In fact, in the vote on final passage of the $87 billion, Kerry was joined by only 11 other senators, less than a quarter of his fellow Democrats. And of the 77 senators who had voted to authorize the war, only four--Kerry, John Edwards, Tom Harkin, and Ernest Hollings--now voted to deny the troops the support they needed. Kerry had himself said just a month before, "I don't think any United States senator is going to abandon our troops and recklessly leave Iraq to whatever follows as a result of cutting and running. That's irresponsible." His vote against the $87 billion was irresponsible. Today he says he is proud of that vote. September 23, 2004: The American people have never elected president someone who gratuitously attacked a visiting leader, in this case Iraqi prime minister Ayad Allawi, after a speech to a joint session of Congress, when that leader's government was fighting terrorists on a day-to-day basis alongside American troops. * Will the American people choose as president someone with John Kerry's national security record? They never have before. --William Kristol