http://cl.exct.net/?ffcd16-fe5b15747062027d7d12-fdf11571706307797214797c

Why hasn't G. W. Bush released his service records - Kerry wants to know - even though on Tim Russert's show, and Imus in the Morning show - he said he would release his immediately.(It's been 12 days since he said he'd do it.)

What is with this guy? :confused:

What is with this guy? :confused:
He is a politician :lmao:

He is a politician :lmao:
He's all that. Albeit a losing one! :lol:

I'm curious if either one of these news commentators(Russert/Imus) will follow up on Kerry regarding his promise to release his own records?

What is with this guy? :confused:

He's running to be the leader of his party. Howard Dean :boxing: is getting too much press so flip-flop :loser: has to keep his name in the news. Where is rraley when we need him? :peace:

He lost the election.
He lost the DNC chairmanship.
Geez, give up already.

he said he would release his immediately.(It's been 12 days since he said he'd do it.)

Remember that he hedged a bit near the end of the discussion on Meet The Press. Initally he said that he would release his records, but then he said he would release his records if the Swift Boats vets would release theirs. Now if Kerry was telling the truth, it shouldn't matter what the records of the Swift Boast vets show or don't show as his records should validate his claims.

http://cl.exct.net/?ffcd16-fe5b15747062027d7d12-fdf11571706307797214797c

Why hasn't G. W. Bush released his service records - Kerry wants to know - even though on Tim Russert's show, and Imus in the Morning show - he said he would release his immediately.(It's been 12 days since he said he'd do it.)

What is with this guy? :confused:


what is it with you???? Kerry:patriot: served did Bush????? nope stayed drunk and snortin coke

Kerry:patriot: served did Bush????? nope stayed drunk and snortin coke
:lmao: (http://democraticunderground.com) <---cleek me, sore loser!

what is it with you???? Kerry:patriot: served did Bush????? nope stayed drunk and snortin coke
Bushes records were revealed, ask Danny "I'm a disgrace" Rather!! I saw the Russert interview where Flipper agreed to release his records. Uhhhhh...where are they?? :confused:

Leave it to a loser liberal to make yet another false personal attack on the man who kicked their democratic azzes!! :yay:

There is no doubt J.F. Kerry served in Vietnam; I don't dispute that. Whether he did so as a result of his volunteering in the USNR, or otherwise.What I did find curious during the Tim Russert show, was that Mr. Kerry revealed he still had in his possession a hat, or cap given to him by a CIA operative, one early Christmas morning on the Cambodian border. He said he wished that CIA operative would come forward and confirm his account for that day.

He told Russert that he was up there running weapons/arms/guns to the Kymer Rouge faction in Cambodia, that day.

Hello!! The Kymer Rouge were the enemy at that time! You would think Mr. Kerry could come up with a better story than that one. :ohwell:

There is no doubt J.F. Kerry served in Vietnam; I don't dispute that. Whether he did so as a result of his volunteering in the USNR, or otherwise.What I did find curious during the Tim Russert show, was that Mr. Kerry revealed he still had in his possession a hat, or cap given to him by a CIA operative, one early Christmas morning on the Cambodian border. He said he wished that CIA operative would come forward and confirm his account for that day. He told Russert that he was up there running weapons/arms/guns to the Kymer Rouge faction in Cambodia, that day.
Hello!! The Kymer Rouge were the enemy at that time! You would think Mr. Kerry could come up with a better story than that one. :ohwell:
That's what happens when you flip/flop so often, you forget what you're talking about.... :lmao:

Bushes records were revealed, ask Danny "I'm a disgrace" Rather!! I saw the Russert interview where Flipper agreed to release his records. Uhhhhh...where are they?? :confused:

Leave it to a loser liberal to make yet another false personal attack on the man who kicked their democratic azzes!! :yay:

There were actually things in Bush's record that were not revealed, and calling Bush a drunk and a cokehead is not technically a false statement. I agree that if Kerry says he will release his record, then he should, but ignoring the past of Bush while at the same time blasting Kerry's past does not make sense to me. Anyway...say what you wish, Kerry is not perfect, but Bush is a distant second in my opinion.

ignoring the past of Bush while at the same time blasting Kerry's past does not make sense to me.
Kerry touted his OWN service record in order to convince the voting public that, as a big war hero, he was more qualified to lead us in the War on Tara than Bush. Bush didn't make a big deal out of his NatGuard service - he didn't have a distinguished military career and he knows it. Never tried to pretend otherwise and even went out of his way to praise Kerry's service.

Bush has no past that we're not aware of. We know he used to be a drunk - he said so himself. We know that he had a DWI back in the day - he admitted it. We know he was a stinker rapscallion ne'er-do-well until he got religion and got sober.

Kerry, on the other hand, is trying to polish a turd.

Kerry, on the other hand, is trying to polish a turd.

Poor Kerry... there are some things that all of the ketchup in the world won't wash away. :wink:

Speaking of ketchup... has any one else noted that we've lost Teresa Hienz-Kerry, and she's now Teresa Heinz again?

Poor Kerry... there are some things that all of the ketchup in the world won't wash away. :wink: Speaking of ketchup... has any one else noted that we've lost Teresa Hienz-Kerry, and she's now Teresa Heinz again?
If you were married to a loser, wouldn't you???? :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

Kerry touted his OWN service record in order to convince the voting public that, as a big war hero, he was more qualified to lead us in the War on Tara than Bush. Bush didn't make a big deal out of his NatGuard service - he didn't have a distinguished military career and he knows it. Never tried to pretend otherwise and even went out of his way to praise Kerry's service.

Bush has no past that we're not aware of. We know he used to be a drunk - he said so himself. We know that he had a DWI back in the day - he admitted it. We know he was a stinker rapscallion ne'er-do-well until he got religion and got sober.

Kerry, on the other hand, is trying to polish a turd.
This is totally correct. Let's examine our recollections for a moment:

J. F. Kerry is the one who came out on the Democratic National Convention podium and told us "Here I am America, reporting for duty", giving us a dumbassed (if-I-ever-saw-one) looking salute.
Right then and there, he made it a "who's qualified to be president more, him or me?" type issue.

The stories about the President's drinking habits in his youth were first raised in the 2000 elections - OLD NEWS!

Kerry's the one who had a dozen or so ex-Swift Boat (supposed comrades) travelling around with him.

Did GW play that game? Nope. Did he once boast about his tenure of service in the Guards? Nope. Nothing to boast about, except that he did qualify in the F-102 jet fighter, by all accounts. So he didn't go to war; I believe I read he wasn't chosen because of his youth, and inexperience, not qualified enough for combat operations. Again, nothing to brag about.

I believe I did see GW on national television, replying to the ads against Kerry about his Vietnam service, and GW giving praise to Kerry for his efforts.

I don't believe I saw Kerry returning the favor, huh?

Kerry, I think, is still in shock over losing the election, even though it happened 4 months ago, he's still not recovered from it.

I believe I did see GW on national television, replying to the ads against Kerry about his Vietnam service, and GW giving praise to Kerry for his efforts.
He praised Kerry during one of the debates - led off with it.

Kerry, I think, is still in shock over losing the election, even though it happened 4 months ago, he's still not recovered from it.
A lot of people spent a FORTUNE trying to get him elected and they're blaming him for running a pisspoor campaign. So Kerry's taking some heat for that - the music has stopped but he's still dancing.

It's a crapshoot donating a lot of money to a political candidate. If he loses, you might as well have flushed that money down the toilet. So Kerry has to do something to make good - he's going to have his hand out again at some point and he'll only collect if he's a good investment.

It's a crapshoot donating a lot of money to a political candidate. If he loses, you might as well have flushed that money down the toilet. So Kerry has to do something to make good - he's going to have his hand out again at some point and he'll only collect if he's a good investment.Didn't I read somewhere that George Soros had come out on the news saying that the reason J.F Kerry lost the election is because he belived him to be a flawed individual?

He added, I think, that in his view, Kerry never did/could present a viable alternative to Gw's vision of where and how to lead our nation.

So, if a guy with his kind of reputation(Soros) shelled out that much serious money in Kerry's behalf - and slams him like that, I would have to offer up that he does not consider Monsieur Kerry a good investment at this point.

And then there's Kerry, like some poor Boston Bull terrier, refusing to let this die, still craving the limelight, making erroneous statements to the public.

Liberals, makes you scratch your head.

...first off, he came pretty close. He got the second most votes for President. Ever.

Second, this, the Presidency, is apparently his life's ambition.

Third, he's a Senator, what else is he gonna do? There's only one job higher.

Gore's father wanted him to be President. If he actually did want it himself, he would have gone on national TV election night, conceded like a leader, with regret but deep hopes for the future, congratulated W and set about winning '04.

Instead, he grew a beard, put on 50 pounds and started the Wierd AlGore routine. He was done.

If Clinton had lost in 1992, he'd have been back in 1996.

Does anyone expect a man like Kerry, in Kerry's position, to stand up and say "I'm not the man for the job"?

Until someone else stands up and starts taking the wind out of his sails, he is the presumptive Dem nominee. I'd be surprised if he is not around come Iowa and New Hampshire.

...first off, he came pretty close. He got the second most votes for President. Ever.

Is that really a cause for celebrity? Each year the number of registered voters goes up, so each election it can be expected that every candidate will see their numbers go up. What would Kerry's vote total be if it were corrected for political inflation? :lmao:

What I like is that now that Howard Dean is the HMFIC of the Democrats, what's the first thing he's doing? Hitting the "campaign" trail on a cross country tour to show the flag for Democrats. Did Dean ever officially drop out of the race? I remember him going on hiatus. Maybe that nutty little mind of his thinks it's still summer of 2004. What better time to further drain the lowered coffers of the party than tp spend a few hundred thousand on self promotion.

Kerry touted his OWN service record in order to convince the voting public that, as a big war hero, he was more qualified to lead us in the War on Tara than Bush. Bush didn't make a big deal out of his NatGuard service - he didn't have a distinguished military career and he knows it. Never tried to pretend otherwise and even went out of his way to praise Kerry's service.

Bush has no past that we're not aware of. We know he used to be a drunk - he said so himself. We know that he had a DWI back in the day - he admitted it. We know he was a stinker rapscallion ne'er-do-well until he got religion and got sober.

Kerry, on the other hand, is trying to polish a turd.

If someone is bashing your record, you would most likely stand up for yourself right...??? I just have a problem with being second rate and proud of it... Kerry was and is not the end all to America's problems, just not sure how people can think that Bush is the best thing there is just because he is Republican...

Is that really a cause for celebrity?

...it's not, but it is, I'm pretty sure, part of the thought process...if you are in JFK's shoes.

Dean ain't done. Does it say somewhere that he CAN'T be the nominee while running the DNC?

"Today, I'd like to thank myself for all the hard work I did for the nominee...me."



Val,

Bush is decidely NOT the best thing there is simply because he is a Republican, but the choice was Kerry or Bush. I, saddly and simply, was not on the ballot. Bush, however, has turned out a damn sight better than I thought he'd be back in 2000.

Why hasn't G. W. Bush released his service records - Kerry wants to know -

I am not sure where I picked this up, but if you non-believers out there don't believe it, I'll find where I got it.

What do you really know about George W. Bush’s time in the Air National Guard?

That he didn’t show up for duty in Alabama? That he missed a physical? That his daddy got him in?

News coverage of the president’s years in the Guard has tended to focus on one brief portion of that time — to the exclusion of virtually everything else. So just for the record, here, in full, is what Bush did:

The future president joined the Guard in May 1968. Almost immediately, he began an extended period of training. Six weeks of basic training. Fifty-three weeks of flight training. Twenty-one weeks of fighter-interceptor training.

That was 80 weeks to begin with, and there were other training periods thrown in as well. It was full-time work. By the time it was over, Bush had served nearly two years.

Not two years of weekends. Two years.

After training, Bush kept flying, racking up hundreds of hours in F-102 jets. As he did, he accumulated points toward his National Guard service requirements. At the time, guardsmen were required to accumulate a minimum of 50 points to meet their yearly obligation.

According to records released earlier this year, Bush earned 253 points in his first year, May 1968 to May 1969 (since he joined in May 1968, his service thereafter was measured on a May-to-May basis).

Bush earned 340 points in 1969-1970. He earned 137 points in 1970-1971. And he earned 112 points in 1971-1972. The numbers indicate that in his first four years, Bush not only showed up, he showed up a lot. Did you know that?

That brings the story to May 1972 — the time that has been the focus of so many news reports — when Bush “deserted” (according to anti-Bush filmmaker Michael Moore) or went “AWOL” (according to Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the Democratic National Committee).

Bush asked for permission to go to Alabama to work on a Senate campaign. His superior officers said OK. Requests like that weren’t unusual, says retired Col. William Campenni, who flew with Bush in 1970 and 1971.

“In 1972, there was an enormous glut of pilots,” Campenni says. “The Vietnam War was winding down, and the Air Force was putting pilots in desk jobs. In ’72 or ’73, if you were a pilot, active or Guard, and you had an obligation and wanted to get out, no problem. In fact, you were helping them solve their problem.”

So Bush stopped flying. From May 1972 to May 1973, he earned just 56 points — not much, but enough to meet his requirement.

Then, in 1973, as Bush made plans to leave the Guard and go to Harvard Business School, he again started showing up frequently.

In June and July of 1973, he accumulated 56 points, enough to meet the minimum requirement for the 1973-1974 year.

Then, at his request, he was given permission to go. Bush received an honorable discharge after serving five years, four months and five days of his original six-year commitment. By that time, however, he had accumulated enough points in each year to cover six years of service.

During his service, Bush received high marks as a pilot.

A 1970 evaluation said Bush “clearly stands out as a top notch fighter interceptor pilot” and was “a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership.”

A 1971 evaluation called Bush “an exceptionally fine young officer and pilot” who “continually flies intercept missions with the unit to increase his proficiency even further.” And a 1972 evaluation called Bush “an exceptional fighter interceptor pilot and officer.”

Now, it is only natural that news reports questioning Bush’s service — in The Boston Globe and The New York Times, on CBS and in other outlets — would come out now. Democrats are spitting mad over attacks on John Kerry’s record by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

And, as it is with Kerry, it’s reasonable to look at a candidate’s entire record, including his military service — or lack of it. Voters are perfectly able to decide whether it’s important or not in November.

The Kerry camp blames Bush for the Swift boat veterans’ attack, but anyone who has spent much time talking to the Swifties gets the sense that they are doing it entirely for their own reasons.

And it should be noted in passing that Kerry has personally questioned Bush’s service, while Bush has not personally questioned Kerry’s.

Bravo Otter~!! :clap:

Bravo Otter~!! :clap:
:yeahthat:

But when most democrats read Otter's post, they'll see :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah:

democrats read
:killingme Good one!

http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.phtml?title=Swift_Boat_Veterans_for_Truth

It seems like I recall Swift Boat veteran John E. O'Neill being interviewed on MSNBC one night. The interviewer asked him what the Swift Boat Vets would do if the President asked them to stop televising their ads. He said he'd refuse to do that.
Well, what if some of the information being unearthed might harm GW's campaign?

O'Neill said something to the effect, that "we're not working for the president, and it's our feeling that - well, let the chips fall where they may".

_________________________________________________________________
The Kerry camp blames Bush for the Swift boat veterans’ attack, but anyone who has spent much time talking to the Swifties gets the sense that they are doing it entirely for their own reasons.
_________________________________________________________________

I didn't talk to any of them, but I did listen to them; and their efforts were their own initative I believe, not from the GOP, as the liberals wanted us to accept.

and their efforts were their own initative I believe, not from the GOP, as the liberals wanted us to accept.

...if the effort was ordered and directed by Richard Nixons Watergate Ghost; the questions about Kerry, his Purple hearts, his combat V's, his accounts of what happened and, most of all, the doubts a whole bunch of MEN WHO SERVED WITH him have about his character still stand on their own merits.

Kerry: Country would be ‘far better off’ under him
Former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, who lost decisively to President Bush in an election focused on national security, said Tuesday the country would be “far better off” with his proposals for Iraq and the military.
“I think my security proposals for the country were smack on, dead on,” Kerry said. “I think that had they started to do the things I proposed on Iraq when I proposed them, we would be far better off today. And they are in fact now trying to do some of the things that I proposed. </B>(More) (http://www.airforcetimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-660997.php)

http://www.airforcetimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-660997.php

The last line is a joke, as usual...............:duh:

The only reason Kerry is still at it is because the media knows it will draw viewers. If we just ignore him hopefully he will go away.

Great post Otter. The Democrats have been leveraging the public's ignorance of how the Guard and reserves operate for too long.

As for Kerry's “I think my security proposals for the country were smack on, dead on...” statement, I think you need look no further than his Meet The Press interview when he cited specific dates and locations for his smack on/dean on comments, instead of saying "as I said repeatedly during the campaign..." He knows he took every side of the issues, and he can't cite specific times that he said something to meet virtually any situation. What a putz.

I didn't thoroughly read all of the posts in this thread, but I have some comments about John Kerry (someone remarked, "where is rraley?").

I did not support John Kerry in the primaries. The arguments that I made against him during the primary debate was that he would too easily be labeled as a "Massachusetts liberal" and I argued that he could not connect to people. These two things, combined with the label of flip-flopper, were in many regards why John Kerry lost the general election.

Now I was disheartened when Kerry won the primaries, but I was certain that almost any Democrat (save Kucinich, Dean, and Sharpton) would do better than President Bush. I believed that lost jobs, higher deficits, a misguided Iraqi policy, and economic policies favoring the wealthy meant that this nation needed new leadership. Kerry fit that mold in some respects, so I was forced into defending his ridiculous statements during the hyper-partisan environment of American presidential elections.

So, in summary, John Kerry was not my favorite and I only defended him because he was the candidate of my party and because he represented at least a partial improvement from President Bush (especially on the economy). Now that the election is over and Kerry's terrible campaign is finally done with, I have withdrawn my name from his email list because he will not receive my support again and I am now free to tell that man from Massachusetts to sit down, shut up, and stay there.

I remember one of our Lib friends talking about going to a Kerry speech and being so enthralled. Wasn't that you rr, or am I thinking of someone else?

I remember one of our Lib friends talking about going to a Kerry speech and being so enthralled. Wasn't that you rr, or am I thinking of someone else?

I think that you are thinking of someone else...I may have said nice things about Kerry's acceptance speech but I do not recall being "enthralled" by any of his speeches...if I said that I was, I'm gonna blame it on temporary insanity.

I know that not everyone is going to agree with me here, especially I suppose if you were(or are) a Liberal, a lefty, an Independent, even a Bush-hater. But I have to tell ya - I sat through many of John Kerry's speeches: the Democratic Primaries, the Presidential Debates, Kerry's acknowledgement in Boston -conceding the election to President Bush, and other television spots. Unless you're a dyed-in-the-wool supporter of him, John Kerry is one BORING individual to have to sit and listen and figure out what he's trying to say!

He literally made my eyes and ears fatigued, droning on and on and on. Not really saying anything, just words about "my plan". Then the flip-flops didn't help either. :ohwell:

I think that you are thinking of someone else...I may have said nice things about Kerry's acceptance speech but I do not recall being "enthralled" by any of his speeches...if I said that I was, I'm gonna blame it on temporary insanity.

No, it wasn't the acceptance speech. This was before he was the nominee. I think he came to Leonardtown and gave a speech, or went to a Maryland college.

RRaley, when you talk like that, it's hard for me to remember that you're a high school kid.

Did I mention that I have three daughters? :biggrin:

RRaley, when you talk like that, it's hard for me to remember that you're a high school kid.

Did I mention that I have three daughters? :biggrin:

Haha...well I'm single.