"Fletis Humplebacker" ! wrote in message ...
"Nate Perkins"

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...ng_flip_flops/

It's all in the advertising you believe.

I realize this appeals to your mindset but none of the quotes are sourced so
we can't read the comments in context, or if they are even accurate. I wonder
what the author was hiding.

Hmm, Fletis ... Which part can't you find a cit for? The President's
speeches on Sept 13, 16, 2001? The quotes from Face the Nation or
Meet the Press on March 16, 2003? The White House press briefing on
Oct 24, 2001? You do know that most of the President's speeches are
actually on the White House web site?

I admire your determination that quotations be placed in context.
Wouldn't it be nice if the Bushies did that? So how about this one:

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=209

On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 22:41:45 -0500, Todd Fatheree wrote:

Forget Kerry flip-flopping in the same speech...try
the same sentence. "I actually voted for the 87 billion before I voted
against it." Hard to get around that one.

Folks who enjoy that quote have apparently not realized that these were
two very different bills. Here's an analogy: Say you offer
me an 8" jointer at $500 and I agree to your price. You tell me, "It's a
deal." Then the next day I come to pick it up, I say, "I'll pay you next
month." If you cancel the deal, are you a flipflopper? After all, first
you agreed to the sale and then you disagreed with it. No, you're not a
flipflopper. You're just showing common sense in the face of my attempt to
change the rules, which is exactly what Kerry did. Really. Look at the
facts; it's all public record stuff.

One of the several reasons I'm voting for a Democrat presidential
candidate for the first time in my life is the meaningless drivel that the
Republicans are substituting for a realistic discussion of issues. The
silliness about the 87 billion is a perfect example of campaign-by-slogan,
and I expect better from my leaders.

Mark & Juanita wrote:
: On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:00:21 -0500, WD wrote:

:On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 17:52:05 GMT, "Mike Hide" wrote:
:
:Of course it's ok if your daddy is President getting your son a cozy Stateside
:job. Wouldn't you do it for your own son?

: I think you have a slight problem with history there.

As do you:

Bush was president
: about 16 YEARS after the Vietnam war had ended.


Yes.

However, the senior Bush
: was CIA director under Nixon.


He was a member of Congress when his son avoided serving in Vietnam by
getting a domenstic post to the TX national Guard, part of which he
apparently served.

This is an interesting report:


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...son/index.html


-- Andy Barss

"ray" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 22:41:45 -0500, Todd Fatheree wrote:

Forget Kerry flip-flopping in the same speech...try
the same sentence. "I actually voted for the 87 billion before I voted
against it." Hard to get around that one.

Folks who enjoy that quote have apparently not realized that these were
two very different bills. Here's an analogy: Say you offer
me an 8" jointer at $500 and I agree to your price. You tell me, "It's a
deal." Then the next day I come to pick it up, I say, "I'll pay you next
month." If you cancel the deal, are you a flipflopper? After all, first
you agreed to the sale and then you disagreed with it. No, you're not a
flipflopper. You're just showing common sense in the face of my attempt to
change the rules, which is exactly what Kerry did. Really. Look at the
facts; it's all public record stuff.

One of the several reasons I'm voting for a Democrat presidential
candidate for the first time in my life is the meaningless drivel that the
Republicans are substituting for a realistic discussion of issues. The
silliness about the 87 billion is a perfect example of campaign-by-slogan,
and I expect better from my leaders.

First off, I don't believe you've never voted for a Democrat before, unless
you've never voted before at all. I can't prove it, but it's just a gut
feeling. You want to say I don't know, fine. I'm just not buying it.
Second, Kerry is the same guy who can't decide whether or not he owns an
SUV. When he's talking to union auto workers, he's a proud owner. When
environmentalists might be listening, suddenly the only vehicles in the
fleet are Honda Insights. On the Senate vote in question, it was passed
87-12. That's quite a minority for Kerry to be with. It didn't have
anything to do with the rules being changed, but he and Edwards had to show
the Deaniacs that he was also a big anti-war guy just like Howard.

todd

Mark & Juanita wrote in message . ..
On 24 Aug 2004 18:14:40 -0700, (Fred the Red Shirt)
wrote:


Accusations of lying aside, don't you think that they might be just a
little bit miffed with a person who served with them for less than 4
months, then returned to the states and accused them of committing war
atrocities, then 35 years later attempting to run on his war record as a
war hero and involving them by using pictures of them in those ads?

As I said above, I think that is their point of view. I don't know
how many would or have gone as far as lying though.

Again, the accusation that all of those men are lying.

Again, I do not understand that last remark, but:

Here are some statements attributed to 18 putative Swift Boat vets:

http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/index...SwiftVetQuotes

These men clearly state that their criticism of Kerry is based on
his antiwar activities and make no claim (on that page) to have
even seen Kerry in person in Vietnam or elsewhere. O'Neill at least
has seen him stateside.

James Steffes
Robert Brant
Richard O'Mara
William Shumadine
Captain George Elliott, USN (retired)
David Wallace
Bernard Wolff
Lt. Col. James Zumwalt, USMC (retired)
Joseph Ponder
Robert Elder
Jeffrey Wainscott
Andrew Horne
John O'Neill


This man criticizes Kerry's performance in Vietnam, without actually
coming out and saying that he ever saw Kerry, and criticizes
his anti war activity.

Rear Admiral Roy Hoffmann, USN (retired), chairman, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth


This man says that Kerry was under his command in Vietnam. He does not
criticize Kerry's perfomance in Vietnam, but does criticize his anti-
war activity.

Captain Charles Plumly, USN (retired)


This man disagrees with Kerry in regards to the success, or lack thereof
of a specific campaign, and does not remember meeting with Kerry, though
Kerry claims he did.

Captain Adrian Lonsdale, USCG (retired)


This man served with Kerry on a Swift boat. He is the only man to have served
with Kerry on a Swift boat who is critical of Kerry.

Steven Gardner


This man says he knew Kerry in Vietnam and crtiticizes his antiwar activity,
not his performance in Vietnam, but does criticize his first PH.

Commander Grant Hibbard, USN (retired)


Fifteen of the Eighteen criticize him soley based on his antiwar
activity with no comment on his performance in Vietnam. Some such
as Steffes, lie about Kerry's statements.

That also leaves 232 putative Swift boat verterans against John Kerry
unaccounted for, other than by signature he

http://www.swiftvets.com/article.php...40629220813790

And that letter is clearly critical of his antiwar activity, without
substantive commment on his service in Vietnam.


--

FF