| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:36 pm CAN YOU NAME THIS COUNTRY? |
|
| Quote: | CAN YOU NAME THIS COUNTRY?
PLEASE copy this and send it to everybody in your mailbox, no matter where they stand politically, they need to read this and pray about their decision on November 2nd. please read this. thank you.
CAN YOU NAME THIS COUNTRY?
709,000 REGULAR (ACTIVE DUTY) PERSONNEL.
293,000 RESERVE TROOPS.
EIGHT STANDING ARMY DIVISIONS.
20 AIR FORCE AND NAVY AIR WINGS WITH 2,000 COMBAT AIRCRAFT
232 STRATEGIC BOMBERS.
19 STRATEGIC BALLISTIC MISSILE SUBMARINES WITH 3,! 114 NUCLEAR
WARHEADS ON 232 MISSILES.
FOUR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS AND 121 SURFACE COMBAT SHIPS AND SUBMARINES
PLUS ALL THE SUPPORT BASES, SHIPYARDS, AND LOGISTICAL ASSETS NEEDED TO
SUSTAIN SUCH A NAVAL FORCE.
IS THIS COUNTRY- RUSSIA? NO; CHINA? NO; GREAT BRITAIN? NO;
FRANCE? WRONG AGAIN (What a Laugh!!!!!)
MUST BE USA? STILL WRONG (SORT OF).......... GIVE UP?
THESE ARE THE AMERICAN MILITARY FORCES THAT WERE ELIMINATED DURING
THE ADMINISTRATION OF BILL CLINTON AND AL GORE.
AND [their elimination] was 100% SUPPORTED BY JOHN F. KERRY
(THESE HE DID VOTE ON)
SLEEP WELL!
This is not a new message, but a reminder of why we now have over-deployed our National Guard and Reserve Units.
HE SAID CHECK THE RECORD...!
Sen. John Kerry, Democrat from Massachusetts says he is the strongest Presidential Candidate on National Defense! He said Check the Record ... We Did!
Here is what we learned:
He voted to kill the Bradley Fighting Vehicle
He voted to kill the M-1 Abrams Tank
He voted to kill every Aircraft carrier laid down from 1988
He voted to kill the Aegis anti aircraft system
He voted to Kill the F-15 strike eagle
He voted to Kill the Block 60 F-16
He voted to Kill the P-3 Orion upgrade
He voted to Kill the B-1
He voted to Kill the B-2
He voted to Kill the Patriot anti Missile system
He voted to Kill the FA-18
He voted to Kill the F117
He voted to kill every military appropriation for the development and deployment of every weapons systems since 1988, including a bill for battle armor for our troops.
It is most likely, with Sen. John Kerry as President and Commander in Chief of our Armed Services, that they will cease to function making it impossible for our country to protect itself.
John Kerry voted to kill all antiterrorism activities of each and every agency of the U.S. Government.
He voted to cut the funding of the FBI by 60%.
He voted to cut the funding for the CIA by 80%. He voted to cut the funding for the NSA by 80%.
THEN, and this is abhorrent to almost every American Voter be you Democrat, Republican or Independent, he voted to increase OUR funding for U.N operations by 800%!!
Ask yourself . Is THIS the person you want as President of these United States providing for the Common Defense of the Nation and be the Leader of the Free World?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
His Voting history can be accessed through Senate voting records. please check it yourself if you think this Republican Party "B.S."
The above is an accurate summary. Check it out!
|
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:41 pm |
|
Whatever happened to secret ballot?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:44 pm |
|
Whoo! His record is EXACTLY what I've been saying, as displayed there, only with a few more thing! And this man claims to be strongest on defense! Baloney!
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:02 pm |
|
| Hitchhiker wrote: | | Whatever happened to secret ballot? |
It is secret ballot for common citizens. However this is a Senator and I am sure you can agree that the people of the US deserve to know what their elected official is voting for/against-which is why his voting record in the senate is no secret.
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:12 pm |
|
Isn't this record rather one-sided? It seems rather repetitive . . . surely he didn't vote against everything . . .
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:14 pm |
|
| Hitchhiker wrote: | | Isn't this record rather one-sided? It seems rather repetitive . . . surely he didn't vote against everything . . . |
No, he DID. Just do a search on his record.
Read my latest speech, revised from the original:
| Quote: | September 11th, 2001: The most devastating attack on American soil occurred. A plane struck each World Trade Center tower. A plane collided with the Pentagon. And another crashed in Pensylvania. We had a looming threat on our hands that lurked in the background of our country for decades, but until then was not truly realized: It was the threat of world-wide terrorism. In this time of desperate new need for protection of the United States, we are now faced with a choice--a choice of the President of the United States--deciding on our leader. Most of all, in this grave time, we are choosing our Commander-in-Chief--the man who will lead us in this War on Terror.
Since September 11th, President Bush has been a strong leader and Commander-in-Chief for our country and armed forces. And so, I see the choice is clear: looking at the record of this Senator from Massachusetts, John Kerry, the opponent, is the wrong choice for America. I�m not even going to bring up Kerry�s Vietnam Record, despite his making it the focal point of his campaign, as there�s 19 years in the Senate to be told that he would not want to be told.
It is necessary during such a time that we have a strong intelligence service and a strong military, and yet it seems as though Kerry is not too fond of United States Intelligence services and defense. On Defense and Intelligence: In 1991, Kerry voted to move over $3 billion dollars from defense to social programs, a vote that only 27 others joined him in casting. In 1992, Mr. Kerry voted to cut SIX billion dollars from defense and intelligence. Both sides countered Kerry�s vote.
In 1995, two years after the first World Trade Center bombing, Kerry voted to freeze defense and intelligence spending for the following seven years, which would have cut over $34 billion. Again, only 27 other senators joined in with him. In 1996, Kerry brought up a bill that would cut defense spending by $6.5 billion. His bill had �no co-sponsors and never came to a floor vote.� Ted Kennedy couldn't even join in with him. Come on? This man voted many more times than that--if he had his way, our defenses and intelligence would not be good. We would have trouble funding the weapons systems needed to fight wars, primarily the War on Terror and War in Iraq. If he had his way more than a few times when horrible intelligence bills were voted on by him and won, the CIA would be in even more trouble now. Who knows how many wars we would be fighting with faulty intelligence now?
Those are merely a few examples, however not only his he wrong there, but perhaps some of the most disturbing aspirations included the fact that he hoped to cancel defense to an extreme. On Weapons Systems: In the start of his 1984 campaign for Senate, Kerry stated his opposition to multiple weapons systems, including the B-1 bomber and Apache Helicopter, key systems used today.
And yet he actually voted for the cancellation of and against the following weapons currently used by the United States Military: the F-15, F-16, Persian II missile, the MX-Missile, the B-2 Stealth Bomber, the Apache Helicopter, the Aegis Defense Cruiser, Trident Summarine, Tomahawk Cruise Missile, and much more. These weapons were absolutely vital in Iraq. According to Brian C. Mooney of The Boston Globe, quote, �Kerry supported the cancellation of a host of weapons systems that have become the basis of the US military-the high-tech munitions and delivery systems on display to the world as they leveled the Iraq regime of Saddam Hussein in a matter of weeks.�
I don't think Mr. Kerry is a bad man--he just has horrible judgements. If he had his way, we would have no Apache Helicopter. We wouldn't have an MX-Missle and an F-15. We would not have leveled the Iraq Regime in a matter of weeks. And this man wants to lead our country and lead us through this war on terror? I think not--unless we want to count out all of our major weapons systems.
And so, how can we trust a man like this in office--a man who also voted against funding for missile defense at least 53 times between the years of 1985 and 2000! Some of that was during the Cold War, , a time where he pushed for a nuclear freeze when Reagan was winning it! . However, he then said on March 10th, 2004 on a political action site, that he supports missile defense. And then seven days later, Fox News� Major Garret reported that he said that he would defund missile defense! So is he for missile defense, or against it? Surely he is against it. However, a key thing to look at is if Mr. Kerry had his way, we would have lost the Cold War rather than won it, and lost the Iraq War rather than win major combat operations. It's very likely that we would be under Soviet control right now if he had his way with the nuclear freeze!
On Iraq: In 1990, the previous Bush Administration took us to war with Iraq in a US-lead defense of Kuwait. When that happened, an innocent country was being invaded. When that happened, we had a broad coalition. When that happened, the UN passed a resolution to go to war. And when it came to voting time on the floor of the US Senate, Mr. Kerry voted against it. Come on! We had all this, and yet he voted against it. If Mr. Kerry had his way, Kuwait would have been under Iraq control, and another free country gone.
October 11th, 2002: Senator John Kerry votes Yea on the resolution to go to war with Iraq. �George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.� That was Mr. Kerry on May 4th, 2003 during the first Democratic Candidates debate sponsored by ABC News.
On September 2nd, 2003, he claimed that he voted only �to threaten� the use of force. What? And in an interview with Chris Mathews, host of MSNBC�s Hardball on January 6th, 2004, when asked if he was an anti-war candidate, Kerry replied, �I am [opposed to the war]--Yes, in the sense that I don�t believe the president took us to war as he should have, yes, absolutely.� He later said that he would have made the decision to go to Iraq knowing what we know now, then he wouldn't, then it "depends on the outcome." And yet in his speech to the Democratic National Convention, he said that he �won�t be a President who will mislead our country into war� and that he will be a President who will tell the truth. Essentially his statements were accusing Bush of misleading the public on the war and lying to us all. Well then, all I can say is this: Did you mislead our country? You had the EXACT same intelligence as Mr. Bush. Kerry served on the Intelligence Committee. He said in 1997 and 1998 that we had to go into Iraq! He said in the Congressional Record on November 9th, �97, that he believed that Iraq was such a, quote, �grave threat to the well-being of our nation that we must use force, unilaterally if necessary." Unilaterally!? That�s completely different from what he says now. That same day you said that we had an obligation to act on the threat! An obligation! And that was before the threat became absolutely imminent! And there were many other instances of him supporting the war, and until Howard Dean came along, he supported it. And yet he said on Monday, September 6th of this year that we were in the �wrong place at the wrong war at the wrong time.� Well, which is it, Mr. Kerry? Make up your mind. Are you for or against the Iraq War? You say that you've been consistent--well, that's just not true. You've been inconsistent. Stop taking a dozen positions on the war--choose one and stick with it! I don't think Mr. Kerry can, though.
On Funding our Troops: �I actually did vote for the $87 Billion, before I voted against it.� Those are Mr. Kerry�s exact words on March 17 2004, after he had voted against the $86.5 Billion resolution to fund our troops. When on NBC�s �Meet the Press,� he told Tim Russert, �No, I think we should increase it,� it being funding for the war. He continued to say, �By whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win.� And yet Kerry voted against the 87 Billion. That must have been when he voted for it. He had also stated that it would be irresponsible for a Senator to vote against the bill to fund our troops, and yet he voted against it! He's complained about little body armor and little equipment for the military--well, this bill gave them what our troops needed! This is dispicable. He's come up with many excuses for it, but they just...don't...work! You either support our troops or you don't.
Kerry keeps flip-flopping and being on the wrong side of every military and defense issue of our day and yesterday. His record clearly shows that although he's not a bad person, he has made horrible judgements in his 19 years in the Senate that would have brought the US into trouble. Hence, there is no way that he can be the next President--the next Commander-in-Chief--of the United States, especially at this paramount point in time.
|
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:31 pm |
|
And this is some literature that I'm preparing for a Youth for Bush rally that I'm hosting Wednesday w/ the Republican Party:
| Quote: | Kerry Chronicles: Kerry on the Record: Defense
The following chronicles Senator John Kerry�s record on Defense and Intelligence in his 19 years in the Senate:
On Weapons Systems Kerry voted against and for the cancellation of:
� F-15, F-16
� Persian II Missile, Patriot Missile, Tomahawk Cruise Missile, MX-Missile
� B-1 Bomber, B-2 Stealth Bomber
� Apache Helicopter
� Aegis Defense Cruiser
� Trident Submarine
� Bradley Fighting Vehicle
� M-1 Abrams Tank
� P-3 Orion Upgrade
� FA-18
� F117
� Brian C. Mooney of The Boston Globe: �Kerry supported the cancellation of a host of weapons systems that have become the basis of the US military-the high-tech munitions and delivery systems on display to the world as they leveled the Iraq regime of Saddam Hussein in a matter of weeks.�
� Voted at least 53 times between 1985 & 2000 against funding for ballistic missile defense.
� March 10th on a Political Action site said that he supported missile defense
� March 17th: Fox News� Major Garret reports that he wanted defund missile defense
� Pushed for a Nuclear Freeze during the Cold War when President Reagan was winning it.
Summary: He voted against all of these systems, and more. How can he be trusted to run our country during a time of war and terrorism? We would have lost the Cold War and not won the First Gulf War and major combat operations in Iraq this time around!
On Intelligence & Defense:
� 1991: Kerry voted to move over $3 billion dollars from defense to social programs, a vote that only 27 others joined him in casting.
� 1992: Mr. Kerry voted to cut SIX billion dollars from defense and intelligence. Both sides countered Kerry�s vote.
� 1993: Kerry presented a plan to Congress to cut the number of Navy submarines and their crews, to decrease tactical fighter wings in the Air Force, and dispose of the Navy�s coastal mine-hunting ship program, which would have forced 60,000 members of the armed forces to retire.
� 1995: Two years after the first World Trade Center bombing, Kerry voted to freeze defense and intelligence spending for the following seven years, which would have cut over $34 billion. Only 27 other senators joined in with him.
� 1996: Kerry brought up a bill that would cut defense spending by $6.5 billion. His bill had �no co-sponsors and never came to a floor vote.� Ted Kennedy couldn't even join in with him.
� Voted even more times to gut intelligence and defense
Summary: If he had his way, our defenses and intelligence would not be good. We would have trouble funding the weapons systems needed to fight wars, primarily the War on Terror and War in Iraq. If he had his way more than a few times when horrible intelligence bills were voted on by him and won, the CIA would be in even more trouble now. Who knows how many wars we would be fighting with intelligence that turned out to be false now?
Kerry Chronicles: Kerry on the Record: Iraq
The following chronicles Senator John Kerry�s record on Iraq from the First Gulf War to the Second Gulf War:
1991: Senator John Kerry votes Nay on the Resolution to go to war with Iraq
� Fact: The Sovereign Nation of Kuwait was invaded, its people tortured
� Fact: The UN approved actions of War with Iraq
� Fact: The Coalition was larger than the coalition now
� With all this, Kerry still voted Nay on the resolution
Summary: If Kerry had his way, a free nation would have been gone, its people tortured, and Iraq larger.
October 11th, 2002: Senator John Kerry votes Yea on the resolution to go to war with Iraq.
� Congressional Record, Nov. �97 Quote: �[Iraq is such a] grave threat to the well-being of our nation that we must use force, unilaterally if necessary."
� May 4th, 2003 Quote: �George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.�
� Sept. 2nd, 2003 Kerry said that he voted only to �threaten� the use of force.
� Jan. 6th, 2004 Quote: �I am [opposed to the war]--Yes, in the sense that I don�t believe the president took us to war as he should have, yes, absolutely.�
� Kerry later said that he would have made the decision to go to Iraq knowing what we know now, then he wouldn't, then it "depends on the outcome."
� Dem. Convention Speech Quote: �I won�t be a President who will mislead our country into war.�
� September 6th, 2004 Quote: �[Iraq is the] wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time.�
� Fact: It has been US policy since the Clinton Administration to attack Iraq and press them to dispose of their WMD programs.
Summary: Kerry was for the Iraq, then against it, and for it, and against it off and on, and he has never explained his position. He can�t choose one position on Iraq. How can a man who changes his view because of Howard Dean and the polls be President?
2003: Kerry votes Nay on the $86.5 Billion resolution to fund our troops
� Meet the Press Quote: �No, I think we should [funding for our troops] by whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win.�
� Fact: Passage of the bill that would appropriate $86.5 billion in fiscal 2004 supplemental spending for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill would provide $10.3 billion as a grant to rebuild Iraq, including $5.1 billion for security and $5.2 billion for reconstruction costs. It also would provide $10 billion as a loan that would be converted to a grant if 90 percent of all bilateral debt incurred by the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein has been forgiven by other countries. Separate provisions limit reconstruction aid to $18.4 billion. It also would provide approximately $65.6 billion for military operations and maintenance and $1.3 billion for veterans medical care.
� Quote March 17th, 2004: �I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it.�
� First Presidential Debate Quote: �I made a mistake in talking about the war. The President made the mistake in taking us to war.�
Summary: You either support the troops, or you don�t. Kerry chose not to. He didn�t just make a mistake in talking about the war. He voted against supplies for our troops!
|
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Mon Oct 25, 2004 10:18 pm |
|
Im scared for America if Kerry wins.
|
|
|
Dirt
Exercise Boy
Joined: 19 May 2003
Posts: 2086
Location: a tree
|
| Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:26 pm |
|
You should all just move to France, 
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:28 pm |
|
| Dirt wrote: | | You should all just move to France, |
Yeah, like that would happen.
No, really, Kerry should. Defiant should. Moore should. All you Liberal Bush-haters should.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Dirt
Exercise Boy
Joined: 19 May 2003
Posts: 2086
Location: a tree
|
| Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:31 pm |
|
Major compagnies should, oh wait, they already are moving away... 
|
|
|
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 4:09 am |
|
What the hell is america going too do without F-15's and F-16's?
|
|
|
Birdy
Socialist
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 4:49 am |
|
My god. Why don't we all put Kerry in a bad light?!
I'm not saying it isn't true, but come on, like Bush didn't do anything wrong. I think the media in the US are way too hard on Kerry. They spread too much rumours, and did they do the same with Bush? No!
|
|
|
Kyre
Commodore
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Posts: 1263
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 9:22 am |
|
| lionhead wrote: | | What the hell is america going too do without F-15's and F-16's? |
I dunno, maybe use all those F-22 Raptors they built to replace them?
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:24 am |
|
| Belanna1985 wrote: | My god. Why don't we all put Kerry in a bad light?!
I'm not saying it isn't true, but come on, like Bush didn't do anything wrong. I think the media in the US are way too hard on Kerry. They spread too much rumours, and did they do the same with Bush? No! |
 You must be KIDDING! Have you checked out CNN or the other major channels? (I'm guessing not since you don't live here) Bush gets plenty of bad wrap. Farenheit DID come from the U.S. And these aren't rumors. Check out www.senate.gov, and find Kerry's record. It's aaaaaaall there.
|
|
|
Jadzia Lenara Dax
Garbage Queen
Joined: 17 Oct 2001
Posts: 5761
Location: Sunnydale, California
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:28 am |
|
Have you viewed any other sites besides senate.gov? It's never a good idea to get all your facts from one source.
-------signature-------
"I can't stand someone who can outdepress me." -Shirley Manson, Garbage
|
|
|
Birdy
Socialist
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 10:42 am |
|
| Exalya wrote: | | Belanna1985 wrote: | My god. Why don't we all put Kerry in a bad light?!
I'm not saying it isn't true, but come on, like Bush didn't do anything wrong. I think the media in the US are way too hard on Kerry. They spread too much rumours, and did they do the same with Bush? No! |
You must be KIDDING! Have you checked out CNN or the other major channels? (I'm guessing not since you don't live here) Bush gets plenty of bad wrap. Farenheit DID come from the U.S. And these aren't rumors. Check out www.senate.gov, and find Kerry's record. It's aaaaaaall there. |
All right, all right.. sorry  No I don't watch CNN too much.. geesh..
|
|
|
Jeremy
J's Guy
Joined: 03 Oct 2002
Posts: 7823
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 11:55 am |
|
| Belanna1985 wrote: | My god. Why don't we all put Kerry in a bad light?!
I'm not saying it isn't true, but come on, like Bush didn't do anything wrong. I think the media in the US are way too hard on Kerry. They spread too much rumours, and did they do the same with Bush? No! |
Em, yes they do. Basically if you stand for president then you're going to be torn apart by the media. It happens everywhere.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 11:58 am |
|
| Belanna1985 wrote: | My god. Why don't we all put Kerry in a bad light?!
I'm not saying it isn't true, but come on, like Bush didn't do anything wrong. I think the media in the US are way too hard on Kerry. They spread too much rumours, and did they do the same with Bush? No! |
1. We are NOT putting Kerry "in a bad light." So releasing his record is putting him "in a bad light?" I think NOT.
2. WHAT! The media is way too hard on Kerry! Forgive me, but are you deaf or blind or something? If they are hard on anyone, it is BUSH. The media WANTS Kerry to win, no buts about it!
| Exalya wrote: | | Belanna1985 wrote: | My god. Why don't we all put Kerry in a bad light?!
I'm not saying it isn't true, but come on, like Bush didn't do anything wrong. I think the media in the US are way too hard on Kerry. They spread too much rumours, and did they do the same with Bush? No! |
You must be KIDDING! Have you checked out CNN or the other major channels? (I'm guessing not since you don't live here) Bush gets plenty of bad wrap. Farenheit DID come from the U.S. And these aren't rumors. Check out www.senate.gov, and find Kerry's record. It's aaaaaaall there. |
EXACTLY. I was watching CNN this morning, and in a report about Bush's speech this morning, the anchor said that he spoke primarily about the economy, but the "discussions in the halls are about those explosives that have disappeared in Iraq." I mean come on! That is NOT what was being said in the halls! It was a sleazy attack!
| Jadzia Lenara Dax wrote: | | Have you viewed any other sites besides senate.gov? It's never a good idea to get all your facts from one source. |
Yes, and I've got mine from multiple sources.
But that is the SENATE OFFICIAL WEBSITE! It has EVERYTHING there, for cripse's sake! You don't need to go anywhere else if it's THAT!
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:07 pm |
|
I think this is funny. We were at a time of peace during the Clinton admisnistration, we had no need for millions of active military. We thought that most hostilities had ceased.
Also, we have no need for the 232 SLBM's considering we still have hundreds of thousands of Nuclear warheads stored away.
What about all the Economic gains that was brought during the Clinton administration? The reduction in unemployment and poverty,
Everybody says that voting for kerry is bad because of his record. He voted down most of those things during a time of peace.
Basically what you're saying is that War is good. And that The US should have more weapons then it needs even during times of peace.
This is the reason I'm voting for Kerry.
As is written all over my college campus: Don't mistake blatent stupidity for being patriotic" and "Dont mistake nationalism for patriotism...." There is a continuation of that quote adding in an unspeakable person.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:31 pm |
|
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | I think this is funny. We were at a time of peace during the Clinton admisnistration, we had no need for millions of active military. We thought that most hostilities had ceased.
Also, we have no need for the 232 SLBM's considering we still have hundreds of thousands of Nuclear warheads stored away.
What about all the Economic gains that was brought during the Clinton administration? The reduction in unemployment and poverty,
Everybody says that voting for kerry is bad because of his record. He voted down most of those things during a time of peace.
Basically what you're saying is that War is good. And that The US should have more weapons then it needs even during times of peace.
This is the reason I'm voting for Kerry.
As is written all over my college campus: Don't mistake blatent stupidity for being patriotic" and "Dont mistake nationalism for patriotism...." There is a continuation of that quote adding in an unspeakable person. |
Bah humbug! Kerry has a bad record on defense, and if he had his way then we would be in big trouble. THAT'S why the systems that he voted against had to be voted on, and he chose not to.
Also, are you forgetting 9/11 AGAIN? Yes, Clinton had peace because he did nothing to combat terrorism and those that would attack us. 9/11 taught us that we had to act on threats before they fully materialize. Bush did that. And 9/11 greatly hurt our economy, and Bush has done well in bringing it back (lower unemployment rate than when Clinton ran for reelection) as much as we have been brought back. You forget 9/11, and that is where your arguement is flawed.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 2:21 pm |
|
I did not forget about 9/11. and the fact that you bring that up shows that you are blinded. The US was content, we didn't think that we would ever be attacked so we cut down military.
Most of those defense cuts happened WAY BEFORE 9/11. What you are doing is taking the past, a time of peace where no one thought we would ever be attacked, and comparing it to now, a time of war. That where your arguments are flawed.
Again, you are blinded by useless things. Even you Beloveded FOXNews has said that the reason unemployment is so low is that people have stopped looking for jobs. Or the unemployment rate would be tripled.
|
|
|
Jeremy
J's Guy
Joined: 03 Oct 2002
Posts: 7823
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 3:13 pm |
|
I think the point that RM is making is that because America cut back on their defences, that was why you were attacked.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Oct 26, 2004 3:51 pm |
|
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | I did not forget about 9/11. and the fact that you bring that up shows that you are blinded. The US was content, we didn't think that we would ever be attacked so we cut down military.
Most of those defense cuts happened WAY BEFORE 9/11. What you are doing is taking the past, a time of peace where no one thought we would ever be attacked, and comparing it to now, a time of war. That where your arguments are flawed.
Again, you are blinded by useless things. Even you Beloveded FOXNews has said that the reason unemployment is so low is that people have stopped looking for jobs. Or the unemployment rate would be tripled. |
You are right on many cuts being before 9/11, but as Jeremy said, that lead to 9/11. However, just because we were in a time of relative peace doesn't mean that his record on defense doesn't matter. Plus, he was on the wrong side of issues to do with defense from 1984 through the end of the Cold War and beyond--when there was fear of all-out war. Plus, we WERE attacked. After the 1st World Trade Center bombing, Kerry pushed for cuts in intelligence and defense, and that was WRONG. Same after the Kenya bombings and during Bosnia and Kosovo (you know, the place that Clinton took us to with little reason and no UN approval) and yet he STILL pushed for cuts.
And in some cases the giving up on jobs puts forth a lower unemployment rate, but I have NOT heard them say that that is "the reason" for that. It is not, except in some cases.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:56 pm |
|
i am afull democrat on their policies and beliefs, but this takes the cake. i will now vote Bush. Not because i agree with him on policies, but because i dont the military reduced to the size of my towns police force
-------signature-------
At Least In Vietnam, Bush Had An Exit Strategy
It was Bush, not Clinton, who ignored the warning signs for 9/11.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
