You all may want to read this. Just a thought.

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/

SOme many want to check this site out...

http://www.tnpsc.com/ssaver/patrioticgames.htm

actually another link prompted me to find this site again.
reminds me that no matter what choices we make in the election we are all americans.

the vets against Kerry is old news and no different than those making the claim that John MaCain messed with men when he was running against Bush.

http://www.veteransforamerica.com/

Veterans of America you are being shortchanged. What is the price of the sacrifices you have made for this the greatest nation on the face of this earth. President Bush believes that the price is nothing. As a matter of fact his 2005 proposed budget shortchanges our patriots in the most despicable manner possible. This administration is: Reducing the number of workers handling veterans claims by 829 employees Severely under funding health care Has increased the veteran, their families and spouses co-pay for prescriptions Wants to charge a $250.00 annual user fee for veterans who have a higher income Is shifting the burden of funding the veterans health care to our brave men and women who have sacrificed so much to serve our nation patriotically Increasing pharmacy co-pays from $7.00 to $15.00 Forcing veterans to wait longer for appointments some veterans will be denied care althogether Closing down seven veterans hospitals at a time when veterans desperately need these facilities Trying to pass a bill that would prohibit Veterans Preference for employment. Wants to reduce our fighting patriots combat pay ….that’s right this administration thinks our brothers and sisters should DIE FOR LESS. Is trying to pass a bill that reduces a disabled veterans compensable benefits by 10% This abhorrent, disdainful, disregard for our patriots must STOP! Funding for our veterans should not be “discretionary” it should be “mandatory” The fact is that this administration is shortchanging our veterans and not showing them the loyalty and fidelity that they deserve. The same loyalty and fidelity that our patriots showed our nation. This is disgraceful. You can stop this! Join our American veterans to elect Senator John Kerry to the Presidency of the United States. He is a true veteran who passionately loves this nation and honors our patriots.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/02/01/as_campaign_heats_up_veterans_taking_sides/

On Thursday, Terry L. Garlock, a decorated Cobra helicopter pilot in Vietnam, wrote in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that Kerry's antiwar protests were comparable to actress Jane Fonda's infamous visit to Hanoi in 1972, and warned readers about ``the dark side of Kerry's war record.'' ``Kerry's public actions encouraged our enemy at a time they were killing America's sons,'' Garlock wrote. ``Many Vietnam veterans have taken notice, and many of us will vigorously oppose Kerry's election to any office.'' Hurley said yesterday that most anti-Kerry veterans fall into two groups: Republicans who favor President Bush, and ``extremists'' who have dogged Kerry for years over his antiwar stand and his work with McCain to normalize US-Vietnam relations and account for POWs. The depth of animosity between Kerry's supporters and hard-line critics is nowhere clearer than on Sampley's website, which features a photo of Kerry testifying before the Senate in 1971 that has been manipulated to show a Viet Cong flag hanging in the background. Sampley called it a ``political cartoon,'' but Hurley said: ``While there are certainly vets who oppose John Kerry, a doctored photo reflects the tenor of these people.'' The role of veterans - and, indeed, the specter of Vietnam - has become enormously consequential in this race for Kerry, who, although he avoids discussing his memories of the war, has skillfully made his service there a central theme in his campaign. Veterans figured prominently in the two most important days of Kerry's winning Iowa campaign. Six days before the caucuses, Kerry attended a gathering of veterans alongside the four BolaÄnos brothers of El Paso, who all served at once in Vietnam they aired a documentary about Kerry's ties to his swift boat men - who are now campaigning for Kerry - and Rick BolaÄnos spoke of how their father taught them to respect the ``passionate patriotism'' of men like Kerry. Then, two days before Iowans voted, a former Green Beret named Jim Rassmann flew from Oregon to Iowa for his first reunion with Kerry in 34 years, sharing with the world the story of how an injured Kerry rescued him from the Bay Hap River while under fire, earning a Bronze Star.

Your corrct, he is not any type of Hero, and I bet if you asked him he would say he did it without thinking. He saved the guy because another perosn very well might have died and He did this while under fire.

He put his life on the line for others with only the thought of keeping that person alive, not about running for president, prostesting the War (which our country created, sound familiar?).

Oh wait, did a bunch of Cop's and Firemen do something like that on 9/11/2001? They ran into a building to help save others lives without putting them self first?



[Message Edited]

Right on IP
...All while Bush was on national guard duty, a cushy little postition his dad got him that he might not have even shown up for. I certainly don't think Bush has the right to send our sons and daughters into harms way after spending his life avoiding it.

He is a true veteran who passionately loves this nation and honors our patriots.

Secretary General Muoio of the Communist Party of Vietnam Honor Kerry

Vietnam Veteran's for Truth LLC Photograph of Sen. John F. Kerry with the Secretary General Muoio of the Communist Party of Vietnam and a delegation of North Vietnamese War veterans as they honor Kerry for his contributions to their victory over the United States and South Vietnam.

I really don't believe that the 40,000 men and women of the National Guard over in Iraq or the families of the 81 Guardsmen that have died over there think they have a cushy job.

If your looking for a president that "avoided military service", Bill Clinton fit that role perfectly.

That's not what I meant at all. BUSH had a pretty cushy military job for the time, there were also a couple hundred people who applied for the position he got that were better qualified, and he might not have even showed up for it. Bush didn't have to dodge the draft.

I guess you did not read what was posted above...

The depth of animosity between Kerry's supporters and hard-line critics is nowhere clearer than on Sampley's website, which features a photo of Kerry testifying before the Senate in 1971 that has been manipulated to show a Viet Cong flag hanging in the background. Sampley called it a ``political cartoon,'' but Hurley said: ``While there are certainly vets who oppose John Kerry, a doctored photo reflects the tenor of these people.''

Oh hell here we go again.. But but Clinton, when does Gore come out?




Seriously though... I do not care if Bush blew off going to Vietnam in the least. It was his choice and he made it. But what gets me is all the speaches he has made in the past and present where he states we must stand behind our troops. ( I will refrain from making the obvious wise crack )

Then he guts the VA, supports cuts on pay and other benifits.


anyway...

Funding for Veterans up 27%, But Democrats Call It A Cut Money for Veterans goes up faster under Bush than under Clinton, yet Kerry accuses Bush of an unpatriotic breach of faith. In the Feb. 15 Democratic debate, Kerry suggested that Bush was being unpatriotic: “He’s cut the VA (Veterans Administration) budget and not kept faith with veterans across this country. And one of the first definitions of patriotism is keeping faith with those who wore the uniform of our country.” It is true that Bush is not seeking as big an increase for next year as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs wanted. It is also true that the administration has tried to slow the growth of spending for veterans by not giving new benefits to some middle-income vets. Yet even so, funding for veterans is going up twice as fast under Bush as it did under Clinton. And the number of veterans getting health benefits is going up 25% under Bush's budgets. That's hardly a cut.

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=144

Sorry knatzz, I misread what you meant and understand now you were just refering to Bush

guess you did not read what was posted above...

Yes I did... this is not a photoshop image, if you want to call or write the capt. that posted it, you can find his information at the bottom of this page.

http://www.therant.us/vvt_kerry_photo.htm

No Problem Essencay I can see how you might have read it that way. I could have made my post more clear. I don't have a problem with Bush's service, really. But for someone who had a position like Bush did to question the actions of someone who actually saw combat I think is ridiculous.

http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-doc.cfm?doc_name=sr-108-2-70

If anyone is interested in the indepth information on the 2004 budget I can post the links to the Congressional Libraries PDF documents which are verbatum of what takes place on the floor.

Interesting that the patriotism of those who actually were there and got shot at in VN is questioned over those who actually managed not to serve in VN. Given the previous attacks on McCain
when he ran for president, it appears that even being a Republican and a former POW doesn't exempt anyone from being smeared when it suits a political goal to discredit the opposition.

I'm still somewhat amazed that while we're all for making sure folks thousands of miles away have freedom of speech and the right to dissent against their government's policies, US citizens exercising those same rights risk being labeled traitors, collaborators, fellow travelers, etc.

About the vets for truth folks http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Swift_Boat_Veterans_for_Truth

I don't much care for Kerry, frankly, but I do care that apparently for some people the right to dissent is worth fighting and dying for in other countries but it's not something also to be honored here as well.

I bet that the second part of the commisions task will not be presented to the American Voter before Election time.

I would think that *everyone* no matter what they call themselves (independant, republican or democrat) would not only want but demand to have this information released before electing anyone.

It is not a question of politics, but of turh and honesty. Of knowing for exactly what took place for a fact, not based in he said she said, but in the actual actions taken without anyone coloring it for political bent.

Interesting link...thanks IP

Kerry mob jeers injured vet babykiller etc

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/181422_robert09.html

I thought you had risen above such colorful claims...

That was not a Kerry Mob, it was a bunch of Lilly white, yellow striped cowards who should have been taught better or at least known better...

All you have done is not only buy into but pick up their sick and twisted perception that the young mans service was in fact a political statement...

Those people are no better than those who sat at home, playing at free love, doing drugs and spitting on Vietnam Vets. All of which is criminal and so is what they did to him in my opinion. But people back then allowed such actions to take political guise which is where it all went wrong to begin with.

You shouldn't follow suit, you should keep it personal. An attack on a young man who has fought for his country being verbally attacked by others with questionable cause. They attempted to use him as a political pawn, your posting it in such a manner gives them the power to do so...

just my opinion, but... if you validate their actions in such a manner it lends credence to their cause, if you keep it as it should be, as a personal attack against a young man who did his duty for his country then they can not hid behind smoke and mirrors, they have to face the truth of their actions which removes all credence and leaves nothing more for them than to admit being morally corrupt and to in fact not be as thoughtful and caring as they present themselves to be.

That or they have to swallow even deeper and admit they hold other peoples lives above his, which is just as bad if not worse...



another words, in posting like this you do nothing to change the status quoe, but in fact perpetuate it, who knows maybe that is the goal?

anyway....

Well there are idiots all over, regardless of party, race, creed, place of national origin, etc. Trying to characterize a large group of people (whether Kerry supporters or vets or whatever target group here) based on the apparent or reported actions of a few is an old propaganda technique. But apparently still effective with some people.

As for the mob calling the vet names at that event, was it a mob or only two people? I guess it depends which report one reads and what one prefers to believe or which version serves one's political purpose. Another report here: http://www.thesunlink.com/redesign/2004-07-10/local/200407103427.shtml
[Message Edited]

There has always been those few who has chosen to defend and secure the freedoms and liberties that the majority so selfishly benefit from.

I support or guys and gals!! CONGRAT: .....I just don't like politicians >

I'm tired of listening to speeches

*our

HAHAHAHAHAHA

a Thriving T-Shirt company is now selling “’Go f… yourself’ - Vice President, Dick Cheney.” shirtsgaining huge profits


I ordered three!

and one for Boomer too

kinda nice that Cheney found his voice to speak how he truly feels.

Boy I hate polls, not the polls themselves, but what the media does with the numbers to create validity for a story. The Washington Post has had an ongoing poll asking a number of questions. The most important factor in the poll is trends, which way is American opinion heading on certain questions. If you read this story http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/07/13/MNG2B7KGK41.DTL and never saw the rest of the poll, you would think, Oooo much badness for Bush. The only polling number the story tells of is:

*A new Washington Post poll found that 45 percent of the public believes the war was worth fighting, compared with 49 percent in May and 57 percent a year ago

Using the very same poll you could have just as easily spun a story about the numbers concerning who America would vote for....while Kerry's approval rating as the choice for the president peaked in June during the release of Michael Moore's movie Farenheit 9/11 at 48% compared to Bush's 44%, Kerry has since lost ground with American voters and continues to slide in the polls. The latest Washington Post poll shows that only 46% of registered voters would now vote for Kerry compared to 48% last March. Bush however continues to remain the strong choice in the eyes of the American voters and his campaign is gaining momentum, 46% of the voters would choose Bush if the election were held today, compared to only 42% back in March. This strength in Bush's numbers comes, after Moore's movie, after Edwards was ed as Kerry's running mate and after the release of findings by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

On the war on terror, when Americans were asked who they would trust to do a better job, 51% said Bush compared to 42% that said Kerry. Terrorism and the war in Iraq continue to be the most important issue for Americans, combined, 38% of Americans feel that it's the most important issue in their vote for a president, compared to 29% that feel the economy and jobs are the number one issue, which 78% of those Americans polled felt that their financial situation was about the same or better off than a year ago. The reason for Bush's strength in his numbers is that 59% of Americans feel Bush is a strong leader and 57% feel he can be trusted and 53% feel that the war with Iraq has contributed to the long-term security of the US.

Spin it baby...spin it

Unlike the real article, here's the poll http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/trend_071204.html so that you can come to your own conclusions

I think it's too early to get excited about any polls, to be honest. Of course that doesn't stop me from reading them and speculating. But the point is that there are at least half a dozen major polls being updated practically on a daily basis, and I have yet to see any real sign of either candidate having an edge to this point in terms of a real national trend.

What I do see, however, is some very interesting state polls that may well have people biting their nails when electoral votes begin to be counted. Florida (27), Illinois (21), Pennsylvania (21), Ohio (20), New Jersey (15), N. Carolina (15), Indiana (11), and Missouri (11) are all really tight races at the moment. Even Texas (34) is still in play, although I think Bush will carry it in the end.

I think Edwards being added to the ballot legitimately puts North and South Carolina in play, whereas two weeks ago I would have put them down as a lock for Bush. I also think it strengthens the Kerry hold on Florida. But a couple of other recent trends look good for Bush. The fight over Gay Marriage initiatives are beginning to really heat up in several states, and I honestly think that can only be good for Bush as it will bring out more conservatives to support the bans than it will bring out liberals to defeat them. Ohio, Michigan, and Oregon are now in play, in my opinion, where I would have otherwise tagged them for Kerry. Maybe the strangest event going on right now is the possibility of Mike Ditka running on the Republican ticket for the Senate in Illinois. If he decides to run and his nomination is confirmed, I can honestly see him helping Bush to take Illinois.

All in all, I still see this race as too close to call with this much time remaining. Too many things can happen between now and November. If I was making a (very small) bet right now though, I'd bet on Kerry winning the electoral college with a near tie in the popular vote.

There's my 2 cents



[Message Edited]