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: American Spirit who wrote (21820)	10/24/2004 7:49:29 PM
From: redfish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

Kerry is going to have a 3/2 political commercials advantage over Bush in the last week in both Florida and Ohio. Last time around Gore had to drop out of Ohio entirely to push Florida ...

To: American Spirit who wrote (21820)	10/24/2004 8:03:09 PM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

John Kerry's Life Of Wasted Opportunities! Unlike the average American, John Forbes Kerry was born into a family of wealth and privilege. His mother Rosemary Forbes, was a French national, and heiress to the Forbes family fortune. Her father James Grant Forbes was born in Shanghai, China. Family members, including her father were leading opium dealers in China during the Opium War accumulating a considerable fortune. With support of the Forbes wealth John Kerry had the opportunity of the finest education being trained at boarding schools in Switzerland and Massachusetts, including the prestigious St. Paul school in New Hampshire. He relished the advantages of wealth spending his summers in Europe, especially the posh Forbes estate in France. After preparatory school the Forbes wealth enabled John Kerry to attend Yale University. Then John Kerry went to Vietnam to, in his words, serve his country, though only after being turned down for a requested deferment. He had the opportunity to become a respected leader and though he gained recognition with heroic decorations he was the only Swift sailor ever to leave Vietnam without completing the standard one-year tour of duty, other than those who were seriously wounded or killed. His departure was described as reassignment following the receipt of three (questionable) Purple Hearts under Naval regulations. However the Officer- in –Charge Thomas Wright states that he requested Kerry be removed from his boat group because he had trouble getting Kerry to follow orders. Thousands of true Vietnam heroes not only fulfilled their year assignments, but also signed up two or more tours. On return from Vietnam Kerry had the opportunity to use his hero status to foster an end to the war, but he chose to denigrate his fellow soldiers with false claims probably extending the war with additional deaths and continued persecution of POW’s. Married in 1970, John Kerry and his wife Julia had two daughters. He had the opportunity to be a devoted husband and father. However, when Julia was suffering from severe depression and suicidal John decided that she stood in the way of his political ambitions and he moved out. Then when he married Theresa he petitioned the church to have his 18-year marriage annulled as if it never existed and the children illegitimate. Elected to the Senate in 1984 John Kerry had the opportunity to introduce and fight for legislation to benefit the people of Massachusetts and the nation. Yet after 20 years he can only point to 11 bills that became law and carry his name. How significant was this legislative effort. He can only claim action on bills to: Grant a visa and admission to Kil Joon Yu Callahan. (1987) To make the week of Oct. 22 – Oct. 28, 1989 “World Population Awareness Week.” (1989) Fund the National Sea Grant College Program, (1991) To renew “World Population Awareness Week” for 1991, (1991) To make Nov. 13, 1992 “Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day.” (1992) To make Sept. 18, 1992 “National POW/MIA Recognition Day." (1992) Name a federal building in Waltham, Massachusetts (1994) A save-the-dolphins measure (1994) Provide grants to woman-owned small businesses (1999) Award a congressional gold medal to Jackie Robinson (2003) Increase the maximum research grants for small businesses (2001) In 1991 John Kerry, a decorated veteran, had the opportunity to resolve the fate of POW’s and Mia’s in Vietnam as Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on P.O.W./ M.I.A. Affair’s. Yet reports are that he carried out a subterfuge shredding documents, suppressing testimony, and sanitizing the committee's final report in an effort to normalize relations with Vietnam. And, finally as a dedicated man of the Middle Class, John Kerry had the opportunity to improve their lives over the past 20 years. Yet he voted a total of 22 times not to reduce the marriage penalty. He voted 18 times against expanding the child tax credit, and a total of 350 times he voted to increase the taxes or to keep taxes from being reduced on the Middle Class. Given a life of privilege John Kerry could have used this opportunity to improve the lives of those less fortunate in this country and around the world. However, driven more by ego than personal sacrifice John Kerry has wasted this life of opportunity. Michael Ashbury Michael Ashbury, a noted researcher and author, is the author of ''Who is the REAL John Kerry?'' (Booksurge.com 2004). His website is at www.whoistherealjohnkerry.com.

To: American Spirit who wrote (21820)	10/24/2004 8:32:08 PM
From: Brasco One	Respond to of 27181

<important>make sure everyone votes this november 2nd...also vote BUSH </important> TIA

To: American Spirit who wrote (21820)	10/24/2004 10:44:35 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

Kerry's false plan for peace Charles Krauthammer October 22, 2004 townhall.com WASHINGTON -- The centerpiece of John Kerry's foreign policy is to rebuild our alliances so the world will come to our help, especially in Iraq. He repeats this endlessly because it is the only foreign policy idea he has to offer. The problem for Kerry is that he cannot explain just how he proposes to do this. The mere appearance of a Europhilic fresh face is unlikely to so thrill the allies that French troops will start marching down the streets of Baghdad. Therefore, you can believe that Kerry is just being cynical in pledging to bring in the allies, knowing that he has no way of doing it. Or you can believe, as I do, that he means it. He really does want to end America's isolation. And he has an idea how to do it. For understandable reasons, however, he will not explain how on the eve of an election. Think about it: What do the Europeans and the Arab states endlessly rail about in the Middle East? What (outside Iraq) is the area of most friction with U.S. policy? What single issue most isolates America from the overwhelming majority of countries at the United Nations? The answer is obvious: Israel. In what currency, therefore, would we pay the rest of the world in exchange for their support in places like Iraq? The answer is obvious: giving in to them on Israel. No Democrat will say that openly. But anyone familiar with the code words of Middle East diplomacy can read between the lines. Read what former Clinton national security adviser Sandy Berger said in ``Foreign Policy for a Democratic President,'' a manifesto written while he was a senior foreign policy adviser to Kerry. ``As part of a new bargain with our allies, the United States must re-engage in ... ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. ... As we re-engage in the peace process and rebuild frayed ties with our allies, what should a Democratic president ask of our allies in return? First and foremost, we should ask for a real commitment of troops and money to Afghanistan and Iraq.'' So in a ``new bargain with our allies'' America ``re-engages'' in the ``peace process'' in return for troops and money in Afghanistan and Iraq. Do not be fooled by the euphemism ``peace process.'' We know what ``peace process" meant during the eight years Berger served in the Clinton White House -- a White House to which Yasser Arafat was invited more often than any leader on the planet. It meant believing Arafat's deceptions about peace while letting him get away with the most virulent incitement to and unrelenting support of terrorism. It meant constant pressure on Israel to make one territorial concession after another -- in return for nothing. Worse than nothing: Arafat ultimately launched a vicious terror war that killed a thousand Israeli innocents. ``Re-engage in the peace process'' is precisely what the Europeans, the Russians and the United Nations have been pressuring the United States to do for years. Do you believe any of them have Israel's safety at heart? They would sell out Israel in an instant, and they are pressuring America to do precisely that. Why are they so upset with Bush's Israeli policy? After all, isn't Bush the first president ever to commit the United States to an independent Palestinian state? Bush's sin is that he also insists the Palestinians genuinely accept Israel and replace the corrupt, dictatorial terrorist leadership of Yasser Arafat. To re-engage in a ``peace process'' while the violence continues and while Arafat is in charge is to undo the Bush Middle East policy. That policy -- isolating Arafat, supporting Israel's right to defend itself both by attacking the terror infrastructure and by building a defensive fence -- has succeeded in defeating the intifada and producing an astonishing 84 percent reduction in innocent Israeli casualties. John Kerry says he wants to ``rejoin the community of nations.'' There is no issue on which the United States more fails the global test of international consensus than Israel. Last July, the General Assembly declared Israel's defensive fence illegal by a vote of 150-6. In defending Israel, America stood almost alone. You want to appease the ``international community''? Sacrifice Israel. Gradually, of course, and always under the guise of ``peace." Apply relentless pressure on Israel to make concessions to a Palestinian leadership that has proved (at Camp David 2000) it will never make peace. BTW - You are disusting when you call a journalist Nazi because you disagree with them. Did you call Dan Rather a Nazi for publishing forged documents containing lies? The ones who are intollerant are those who call others namme like LIAR and Nazi, etc. because they cannot deal with the truth. When you lose, the American People win. Vote Bush / Cheney in 2004.