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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TideGlider who wrote (44924)	5/7/2005 2:59:09 PM
From: geode00	Respond to of 173976

12 retired generals, admirals back Kerry Former Joint Chiefs head Shalikashvili takes shots at Bush By ERIC ROSENBERG SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER WASHINGTON BUREAU BOSTON -- In an effort to strengthen John Kerry's national security and foreign policy credentials, Democratic officials rolled out the endorsement of 12 retired admirals and generals yesterday, including Army Gen. John Shalikashvili, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who jabbed the Bush administration for its Iraq policy. Shalikashvili, speaking in prime time to the Democratic National Convention, told delegates here that "no one will be more resolute in defending America or in pursuing terrorists than" Kerry. The nominee is "fully prepared to become the nation's commander in chief," Shalikashvili said, adding, in a reference to President Bush's invasion of Iraq, that Kerry "won't be distracted from the relentless pursuit of these terrorists." Citing Kerry's experience in Vietnam -- where he won three Purple Hearts, a Silver Star and a Bronze Star -- Shalikashvili, chairman of the Joint Chiefs from 1993-1997, said Kerry "would dispatch Americans to war only as a last resort." In another dig at the Bush administration's Iraq policy, the retired general added that the United States should "never go to war without a comprehensive plan for how to secure the peace once military victory has been won." Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told convention delegates that a Kerry administration would "fight the war on terror wherever it needs to be fought." The speeches and endorsements were part of a bid by campaign officials to cast Kerry as qualified to manage American foreign policy while addressing any concerns that dumping Bush during a time of war would leave the nation less safe. Polls show that voters prefer Kerry over Bush when asked about issues such as health care and the economy. On the other hand, the polls show voters prefer Bush on issues of national security and leadership. Although Democrats touted Kerry's experience in Vietnam and as a lawmaker on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Kerry supporters acknowledged that they have an uphill climb persuading voters to dump Bush while troops are battling in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander and presidential candidate, said that "we are going to have to persuade the American people ... to change horses in midstream." ============== See? Bush went to war for his PERSONAL POLITICAL PROFIT. That makes him a unfit to be human in the eyes of anyone with a moral bone in their body.

To: TideGlider who wrote (44924)	5/7/2005 3:00:02 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

The International Brotherhood Of Police backed Kerry and are a much more intelligent organization which cares about real cops needs. In 2000, they had backed Bush but didn't like what they saw and switched. Bush does nothing for cops. Bush is against unions and paying overtime. He mandates emergencies but won't fund them. He deliberately put into the Homeland Security bill that union rules no longer apply. He basically talks the talk, but isn't a real law and order president. This is a perfect example where conservative-leaning middleclass people vote against their own personal interests by going with the pro-corporate anti-worker and anti-union rightwinger.

To: TideGlider who wrote (44924)	5/7/2005 3:05:36 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

If the military supports Bush so strongly, why isn't the military able to get an overwhelming number of Republican recruits to fill its tired and diminished ranks of soldiers? Where are you muslim-hating, bible-thumping, beer-swilling, gun-toting Republicans when Bush needs you to go to Iraq for his oil profits? Where? Where? Where I'll ask again, the military is short 3 months running of its recruiting goal. Where are Republican kids (up to age 39 of course) signing up en masse? WHERE? Hypocrites and cowards all.