BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper

Subject: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 09:52 AM

a lot of you probably know this already, but The Texas Iconoclast, which endorsed Bush 4 years ago, "based on what he promised", now "wholeheartedly endorses John Kerry".

It is about as clear an exposition as I have seen of the problems with this administration. I realize that for those who wish to keep Republicans in power, no matter what, the arguments in the editorial will not faze them, but if Bush wins again, they will get the whole conservative package--not just the 'general' single issue pieces many of them are voting on.

I post this, hoping it will at least make a few have 2nd thoughts about the damage Bush is likely to do...and *I* am off to the Getaway for 3 days, where there may even be some nose-to-nose 'discussions'. *grin*

y'all play nice, now...hear?

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Peace
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 10:31 AM

They ought to know.

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Alba
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 10:38 AM

Well as one Bumper sticker said "Somewhere in Texas a Village is missing an Idiot"   looks like the Residents ain't to upset about that:>)
Just funnin.. Have a great time at the Getaway Bill D....
Blessings
Jude

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Kerry's Hometown Newspaper is pro Bush
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 10:39 AM

Endorsement: George W. Bush for president

http://www.lowellsun.com/Stories/0,1413,105~4756~2442946,00.html#

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 10:40 AM

Did you see Frontline last night? After months of smear-ads, what an amazing thing it is to see a documentary that aims to balance the representation of the candidates--and how poorly Bush comes out in the comparison. It's no surprise the paper is endorsing Kerry.

When examined based on all the facts, Kerry's voting record is enviable and echoes that of many Bush allies who are aghast at how the Bush administration has destroyed the American economy. Compared to Bush on economic issues, Kerry would be an arch-conservative, providing for Americans first. He has what it takes to right our wronged economy.

The re-election of George W. Bush would be a mandate to continue on our present course of chaos. We cannot afford to double the debt that we already have. We need to be moving in the opposite direction.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 10:43 AM

Oh and here's an excerpt from the Lowell papers incisive and keen-eyed analysis on which it bases its recommendation for W:

Islamic extremists, both here and abroad, have one purpose: To destroy America and halt the spread of democracy and religious tolerance around the globe.


They'd like to be plotting in our streets right now. They'd like to be sowing murder and mayhem with suicide bombers and hostage-takings, and spreading fear in the heartland and everywhere else. They'd like to be wearing us down and bringing our nation to its knees.



I dunno if any of you are familiar with the principle of unfounded generalizations being used to instil fear and compliance, but it looks one small-town paper is interested in trying the technique out. This sort of fear-mongering is immoral and capable of being used to support any viewpoint the fearmonger wants to slip over. And, in sum, it is horse-shit.

A

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 12:36 PM

Lowell is not Kerry's home town, its a town he carpet bagged into years ago.

Bush=lies
Bush=lies
Bush=lies

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 02:54 PM

The editor of the paper in Lowell has always been opposed to Kerry. He's a conservative good ol' boy.

I wouldn't call it "carpet bagging," but he did run in an area of Massachusetts that wasn't his home turf.

Anyone else watch Frontline last night?

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 04:48 PM

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Peace
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 04:53 PM

Old Guy,

That's the first smart thing you've said to date.

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 11:06 AM

Brucie:

When are you going to say something smart?

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 11:10 AM

the Lone Star Iconoclast paper that claims to be Bush's hometown paper is actually published in Clifton Texas.

"Most of the editorial board on the Iconoclast is liberal. Leon Smith started the paper after George Bush was elected in 2000. He also runs the Clifton paper, and started up a paper in Valley Mills, which quickly folded."

"After a while, though, it became apparent that something else was going on. Shortly after the Democrats began their drive to unseat George Bush, a group came to town and bought an old house. They called it the Crawford Peace House. The house serves as a meeting place for people who want to have demonstrations and parades against the President. None of the people associated with the Peace House are residents of Crawford, and all they really bring to the area are headaches. From my perspective, they're the same bunch of sixties radicals who now use bandanas to cover up bald spots and haven't done anything since 1967 except look for things to protest and a camera to photograph them doing it. The Iconoclast started giving gushing coverage to the Peace House. There were almost weekly stories. The founder was called "a visionary." Most people I talk to hate the Peace House. But to read the Iconoclast, you'd think the Peace House was the only going concern in town. Other events started to crowd the pages of the Iconoclast. When a group of Nader supporters came to town, the paper gave it more coverage than they had the previous year's football playoff games. One photo showed a man with long hair and a beard holding up a Viet Nam Veterans Against the War sign. Another showed a float of a grinning George Bush holding a missile."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1233860/posts

"Bush's Hometown Spurns Editorial
October 04, 2004
By Richard Williamson

DALLAS About a dozen advertisers in President Bush's hometown of Crawford, Texas, have cancelled ads in The Lone Star Iconoclast after the tiny local newspaper endorsed Sen. John Kerry, according to its publisher."
http://199.249.170.191/aw/regional/southwest/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000652908

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Amos
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 05:34 PM

Elsewhere in the abyss of ignoral and disrespect where the dreaded Goppers multiply like black leeches:


Sinclair's disgrace
The right-wing network's decision to force its affiliates to air
anti-Kerry propaganda is one of the lowest moments in the history of
television news, says the former head of the FCC. And it may unleash
a backlash.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Eric Boehlert

Oct. 14, 2004 | "We do not believe political statements should be
disguised as news content."

Policy statement, Sinclair Broadcasting, April 2004.

Kerry campaign officials aren't the only ones outraged over Sinclair
Broadcasting's order to its 62 television stations nationwide to
preempt regular programming days before votes are cast Nov. 2 to air
"Stolen Honor," a highly charged documentary critical of Sen. John
Kerry. The move breaks with a long-standing tradition among
broadcasters of covering presidential campaigns as part of their
obligation to serve the public interest, and to do so with at least a
patina of honesty.

Sinclair's unprecedented move once again raises questions about the
effects of rampant media consolidation, the deregulation that allows
a small number of large conglomerates to own so many outlets, let
alone use them to advance an obvious political agenda. The
controversy over "Stolen Honor" has also thrust little-known Sinclair
before the klieg lights, drawing attention to its news department,
whose public spokesman has no experience whatsoever in journalism.
And it reveals a publicly held corporation, operating on the public
airwaves, run by a hypocritical chief executive, preaching
conservatives values by which he himself has been unable to live.

...

http://salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/14/sinclair/

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Peace
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 09:04 PM

Yes, Amos.

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 12:56 AM

Hey Amos: I want to see it. I want to see Going Upriver, Farenhype 9/11 and Farenheit 9/11 but I won't put a cent into Mike Moore's pocket by going to his movie. I want to see Saddam's Final Solution that I saw on PBS in 2002 again.

Why aren't all of these movies on CBS, ABC and NBC? Are they left wing organizations.

I want to see everything concerning this election and I will digest the information and decide who I am going to vote for.

As Kerry said: "Bring It On"

I do not think Kerry spokesman Chad Clanton Clanton should threaten Sinclair Broadcastingby saying: "I think they are going to regret doing this, and they had better hope we don't win"

In 1988, Jane Fonda said: "I would like to say something ... to men who were in Vietnam, who I hurt, or whose pain I caused to deepen because of things that I said or did. I was trying to help end the killing and the war, but there were times when I was thoughtless and careless about it and I'm ... very sorry that I hurt them. And I want to apologize to them and their families."

Is Kerry ever going to apologize?

Your turn Amos

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 01:15 AM

Apologize for trying to shame Nixon into ending that useless war?

You should be thanking him.

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 01:28 AM

Kerry stood up to the powers in play at the time and put his courage and repute on the line and called a shitty game shitty.

I wish we all that kind of guts.

What we get instead are endless convolutions and rationalizations and data-parsing and yammering.

The war in Iraq is a shitty game.

A

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 02:09 AM

Jack:

Johnson started that war and Nixon ended it. So why is Nixon to blame?

I never liked Nixon myself but I can't blame Vietnam on him.

Amos:

What did Kerry do to his fellow soldiers while he was courageously standing up? Why do 2/3rds of the military favor Bush over Kerry?

I am constantly seeking new information.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 01:12 PM

I'm not blaming Nixon for Vietnam, But when Kerry was protesting, things were going bad, atrocities were being committed and Nixon was showing no desire to end the war. He spent more effort fighting the protests then he did trying to end the war. Nixon campaigned for President saying that he had a plan to end the war. If he did have such a plan, like Bush's so called plan, it was patently not working.

Because it was Nixon's decision whether to stop it or not Old Guy. Nixon let an additional 20,000 people die because, in his words, "I'm not going to go down in history as the first President to lose a war." Are you so partisan that you are blind to that?

Why does 2/3rds of the Military say that the planning of the war was bad? Its hardly black and white but in 1971, Kerry was fighting for the lives of his fellow soldiers.

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 02:02 PM

Clifton, Texas, is my hometown. According to reports I receive from friends still living there, Mr. Smith is in deep do-do. "The Clifton Record" is a well respected Texas weekly newspaper. I hope that it survives the publisher's recent editorial in the Crawford newspaper and his notoriaty in the national press. I haven't read the Clifton Record online for this week, but it will be interesting to see if Mr. Smith repeats the editorial in that newspaper.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 02:13 PM

Kerry did not do anything to his fellow soldiers. The mythology that his stance somehow inspired the VDC to torture prisoners is unfounded, as far as I have seen. It is a hot wind of propoganda. He may have upset them, but in my opinion upsetting those invested in violence by declaring it immoral is well worth it. They (whoever they are that whine about it still) should get over it and seek to acquire the same kind of guts as Kerry showed, both in battle and out of it. Instead, they are demonstrating the same kind of slippery self-interest that characterizes Mister Bush's mismanaged administration.

A

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: DougR
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 02:40 PM

My comments: see the thread on Kerry's "hometown" newspaper.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 18 Oct 04 - 02:54 AM

Jack:

Before you conclude that no harm was done to the POW's ask one.

Nixon had a plan to end the war before he took office according to Kissinger so blame all of the deaths on Nixon and don't mention the deaths on Johnson's watch

Also 19% of the military are Democrats. NY Democrat Chuck Wrangel says there is an imbalance of people in the Military. I agree we shoud force more Democrats to serve seeing as they think they are in the majority.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Oct 04 - 03:04 AM

What percent of the 19% are 'Grunts' ?????

d

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Oct 04 - 03:10 AM

Jack the Sailor - Kerry was fighting for the lives of his fellow soldiers.

I wholeheartidly agree.

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Oct 04 - 03:17 AM

Amos - Kerry did not do anything to his fellow soldiers.

Yes he did, he helped set many of them free. The same way I freed my brother. I marched and I raised my voice in protest.

I didn't have any medals to throw to the crowd but if I had been given the same opportunity, I certainly would have done the same.

d

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Amos
Date: 18 Oct 04 - 01:12 PM

There are poeple--and I think Bush is among them--who actually believe int heir hearts that the state of war is a good thing, that it somehow uplifts and purifies those who participate in it. All you have to do is get over the hard part -- facing the gore and injustice and violence -- and you will be raised up by your war-purified soul.

This is complete, anti-social inhumane melodrama and acting out.

But some folks never outgrow it.

Maybe it is the adrenaline, or the out-of-body experiences, or the restimulkation of past deaths or maybe it is th eclarity that life-and-death combat brings to your point of view. But whatever the reason, some folks think there's nothing quite like it and have an almost religous fervor toward those who direct, participate, and prosecute war.

But warmongers should never be the leaders of our society. It is not what the United States is about, or was made to be, or should be about.

Rather, it is a catastrophic misassessment of right action, and even when it is justified, it rides on the back of catastrophic errors in judgement.

The present war is hung between the generalized visionary hopes of the Bush administration and the hamstrung people of Iraq who cannot move toward democracy as loing as the terrorist tactics of the insyurgents make them fear for their lives if they vote, or participate in reconstruction. Until the environment is safer than it is now, the Iraqi nation will not have a chance to become democratic. But until they generate widespread demand for that safety, and for that right at self-governance, they will continue to tolerate the operations of terroristas among them, stalemating the entire economy of the nation.

All of these factors were predictable and should have been planned for. The current situation, then, is the result of massive failures of imagination and failure to predict, which in turn stem from massive failures to take responsibility for the actions one contemplates taking. George's father predicted this morass, and it is why he did not extend his war beyond the liberation of Kuwait. I never thought I would see the day when I would say that Bush I was a better President than someone.

A



A

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 18 Oct 04 - 11:39 PM

Amos:

Can you cite us some history to support your theory that war is never necessary?

Or if you think that war is necessary sometimes, under what circumstances?


Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 01:45 AM

Old Guy - Can you please at least try to answer my question regarding your statistics? What percent of the 19% are 'Grunts' ?????

d

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 02:06 AM

D:

I did not see any Grunt classification.

Annenberg Public Policy Center 1
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
DATE: October 15, 2004
CONTACT: Adam Clymer at 202-879-6757 or 202 549-7161 (cell)
VISIT: www.naes04.org
Service Men and Women Upbeat on Bush, War In Iraq,
Economy and Intend To Vote, Annenberg Data Show
America's military service men and women and their families are convinced that the country is going in the right direction, like George W. Bush much more than the civilian population does,
support the war in Iraq more strongly and are more positive about the economy, the University of Pennsylvania's National Annenberg Election Survey shows.
From September 22 through October 5, Annenberg polled 655 adults who have either served on active duty between February and October or who were family members of those who served but were not available to be interviewed. Their answers were compared to the responses of 2,436
adults polled nationally from September 27 through October 3.
The survey did not ask the voting preference of the respondents because a 1948 statute prohibits polling members of the armed services about whom they intend to vote for.
The Pentagon is making intense efforts to get troops on active duty to vote this year, and 94 percent of the military sample said they intended to vote in the presidential election, compared to
85 percent of the civilian population. Eighty-nine percent of the military sample said they were registered, compared to 82 percent of the general population. Most of the polling was conducted
before registration deadlines had passed, Seventy-seven percent of the military sample said they had learned enough about the candidates and the issues to cast an informed vote, compared to 65
percent of the general population.
But at the same time, reflecting the non-political tradition of the American military, 55 percent said it would be inappropriate to ask someone of equal rank to vote for a Presidential candidate.
Junior enlisted personnel disagreed; 52 percent said it would be appropriate.
Whether they urge anyone to vote for him or not, a variety of measures showed that they preferred Bush to John Kerry. Sixty-nine percent had a favorable opinion of Bush and 23 percent
an unfavorable opinion. But only 29 percent had a favorable opinion of Kerry, while 54 percent
were unfavorable. (Bush and Kerry both had small favorable balances in the general population.)
Annenberg Public Policy Center 2
On particular traits, the military sample gave Bush an advantage on caring, leadership, sharing
their values, knowledge, consistency and optimism. They did consider Bush more stubborn.
When asked whom they would trust more to handle the responsibility of commander-in-chief, 69
percent of the military sample preferred Bush to 24 percent for Kerry. The civilian group also
preferred Bush, but by only a 50 to 41 percent majority.
When asked if the country was "going in the right direction" or was "seriously off on the wrong
track," 64 percent of the military sample said "right track" and 31 percent said "wrong direction."
In the general population a majority said "wrong track"; 55 percent took that view compared to
37 percent who said "right direction."
On all four of these measures, there were almost no differences between regular military
respondents and those who served in the guard and reserves. Family members were less
supportive of Bush than their active duty relatives. Families of guard and reserve members were
the least supportive, but even in that last group narrow majorities took his side. There was little
difference based on the rank of service members, although commissioned officers and NCOs and
their families were slightly more supportive than junior enlisted members and their families.
When it came to the war in Iraq, 64 percent of the military sample said the situation had been
worth going to war over, while 32 percent said it had not. Of those who served in Iraq,
Afghanistan or nearby, a smaller share, only 55 percent, said the war had been worth it; 40
percent said it had not. In the general population, 45 percent said the war had been worth it and
51 percent said it had not.
The military sample was also asked what was the most important reason why the United States
had gone to war in Iraq. They were offered six choices, and 29 percent said the most important
reason was "removing Saddam Hussein from power." Twenty-three percent said "because Iraq
was helping terrorists." Fifteen percent said because "Iraq had weapons of mass destruction."
Thirteen percent said "to bring stability to the Middle East." Eleven percent said "to gain control
of Iraqi oil." Six percent said "to bring democracy to Iraq."
The military sample also felt, narrowly, that the war in Iraq had reduced the risk of terrorist
attacks in the United States; 47 percent said that while 42 percent said the war had raised the risk
of terrorism. While service members themselves were nine percentage points more likely to think
the risk had been reduced than increased, their family members were evenly divided. But in the
general population, 53 percent said the war had raised the risk of terrorism here, while 34 percent
said the risk had been reduced.
On the economy, 45 percent of the military sample called the national economy excellent or
good, while 55 percent said it was fair or poor. In the general population only 25 percent said
excellent or good and 74 percent said fair or poor. The military sample was also more likely than
the general population to rate their own economic circumstances excellent or good. And sixty
percent of them said they approved of how Bush was handling the economy, compared to 42
percent of the general population.
Annenberg Public Policy Center 3
A partial explanation for the pro-Bush tilt of the military sample was that they were considerably
more Republican than the general population. Forty-three percent called themselves Republican,
19 percent called themselves Democrats and 28 percent said they were independents.
While the
party identification of respondents in national polls moves around a bit from week to week, this was strikingly more Republican than the general population in the September 27-October 3
sample. There, 28 percent called themselves Republican, 34 percent Democratic and 27 percent independent.
But this Republican partisanship explained only some but not all of the differences, because on many questions the Republican service members were more pro-Bush than their civilian fellow
partisans. Independents in the military sample, when compared to civilians, were also more pro-Bush.
For example, 94 percent of Republicans in the military sample approved of Bush's handling of his job as president, compared to 88 percent of civilian Republicans. Among Democrats, 23 percent of those in the military sample approved, while 20 percent in the general population did.
Among independents, 59 percent of those in the military sample approved while just 48 percent of those in the general population did.
The military sample was split on whether Bush had a clear plan for a solution in Iraq, with 47 percent saying he had a plan and 48 percent saying he lacked a plan. But he rated better with them
than with the general population, where 38 percent said he had a plan and 56 percent said he did not.
While the military sample was more likely than the general public to credit Bush with having an Iraq plan, it was less likely than the public to believe Kerry had one. Eighteen percent of the
military sample said Kerry had a clear Iraq plan, while 72 percent said he did not have one. In the general public, 34 percent said Kerry had a plan and 54 percent said he did not.
The military sample also felt that being a veteran mattered as a qualification for the presidency.
Forty percent said it mattered "a great deal," and most of them also said having been in combat was an added advantage.
The military sample also generally agreed with the general population that the United States had become more unpopular in the world since Bush took office. Forty-two percent of the military
sample said the United States was regarded worse now, while 19 percent said it was now better regarded. In the general population, 52 percent said "worse" and 16 percent said "better."
On personal traits, the military sample gave Bush the advantage on several points where the general public sees Kerry better. Fifty-nine percent of the military respondents said the term
"cares about people like me" fit Bush better, while 30 percent said Kerry. In the general public, 46 percent preferred Kerry and 39 percent Bush.
Another consistent Kerry advantage in the general public, being considered "knowledgeable," also went to Bush among the military. Fifty percent said the term fit Bush better, while 33 percent
said Kerry. In the general public, 45 percent preferred Kerry while 38 percent chose Bush.
Annenberg Public Policy Center 4 One consistent Bush disadvantage with the general public, being considered "reckless," turned against Kerry in the military. Forty-seven percent of the military sample said the term fit Kerry better, while 37 percent chose Bush. In the general public, 46 percent said the term fit Bush better, while 30 percent chose Kerry.
The military sample also held Kerry's anti-Vietnam war activities against him more deeply than did the general public. Seventy-six percent of the military sample said they had seen, heard or
read about those statements and half of that group said they strongly disapproved. In the general public, 52 percent said they know of those statements, and a third of them strongly disapproved.
The military also gave a positive balance of opinion to Vice President Dick Cheney while the general public was negative. Fifty-four percent of the military sample had a favorable opinion of Cheney, while 28 percent had an unfavorable view. In the general public, 34 percent were favorable and 41 percent unfavorable.
Two members of Bush's cabinet also drew positive balances from the military sample. (The general population was not asked about them.) Fifty-three percent said they had a favorable opinion of Donald H. Rumsfeld, secretary of defense, while 24 percent said they had an
unfavorable view.
But the strongest rating of all went to Colin Powell, secretary of state. Eighty percent of the military sample had a favorable opinion of him. Only 7 percent had an unfavorable view.


Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Amos
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 09:02 AM

OG:

I have never said war is never unnecessary, so please don't put words into my mouth.

But in truth, it is only necessary in the presence of insanity. Our own or another's, or a collision of the two. Despite the fact that we have elevated it to such an art since the days of Lao Tzu, it is a dramatization of psychosis in the final analysis.

As to whether the war in Iraq was necessary, it was not only a wrong war, but it subtracted assets from the more relevant, but equally wasteful, war against those who perpetrated the 9-11 attack. I never have been able to figure out why our war efforts were turned away from that issue. Seems nuts to me.
A

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Wolfgang
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 12:17 PM

I have never said war is never unnecessary, so please don't put words into my mouth. (Amos)

Ah, the revenge of the triple negative. (Thou shalt never use a triple negative and rarely a double)

Old Guy too has never said that you have said that a war is never unnecessary. One should try to avoid the error one is complaining about at least in that very post.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 12:39 PM

I will not take a position on who you or anyone else should vote for since I am an active military member. It is against the rules of the uniform code of military justice for those of us (still in uniform) to campaign for anyone regardless of party.

It was something of a shock to me to here retired generals and admirals supporting Presidet Bush as a candidate in 1999-2000. It is even more shocking to me now that several of them have stated that they made a mistake and are now supporting Kerry.

The thing about an all volunteer force is that you are going to get the people who want to volunteer (or are forced to volunteer - jail or the military) or who volunteer because they can't find a job elsewhere. Forcing someone to serve because of their political beliefs is as wrong as requiring only males to register for selective service.

I will say that for the first time in my career there is far more conversation about this election than there has ever been before with more people in the military polarized to either side when before you could pretty much count on a solid Republican vote. What does that say?

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 12:46 PM

"Jack:

Before you conclude that no harm was done to the POW's ask one."

Old Guy,

How dare you? Have you no shame at all?

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Amos
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 01:37 PM

Sorry -- please subtract one negative (choose wisely) from my previous post.

A

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Wolfgang
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 01:56 PM

But choosing unwisely is more fun!

Wolfgang (grin)

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: DougR
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 03:02 PM

Amos: what leads you to believe that the war against terror and the search for Bin Laden ceased as a result of the war in Iraq? I certainly have not heard or read any such thing. A link to your information on the subject would be useful. I'm not referring, of course, to Senator Kerry's opinion or any other person's opinion, of course, I'd like to know the facts. And by the way, Sgt. Tilman's family would be interested to know, I'm sure, that their son, really was not killed while searching for Bin Laden, but was killed instead while doing something else.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Amos
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 03:32 PM

DougR:

I am tempted to accuse you loudly of twisting and altering my point, but it is possible I didn't make it clearly.

I know people have died pursuing Bin Laden. SIx billion dollars has been spent, and a thousand or more Americans and countless other men women and children have had their lives shredded in prosecuting the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent occupation thereof. A small fraction of those resources was spent on seriously tracking down who ourt enemies actually were, and a LOT of it has gone into the generation of enmity where there was none. We've spent a lot to make new enemies. Now, we have a whole insurgent war on our hands.

Only the most specious and gullible Fox-addict could accept the notion that it was necessary to invade Iraq. There are two reasons why this was a shitty strategy. One is that we had more important battles to prosecute entailed by 9-11, with which Iraq had nothing to do. The second is that there were plenty of less expensive, less destructive ways to bring about the cvhange of regime that Bush chose as his substitute goal. Mister Bush chose a bad goal, a wrong target, and chose the worst possible means of accomplishing it. He used the most exemplary and idealistic language to justify his choice, but it wasn't part of the ground truth. It was just semantic fairy-dust and glitter. What he was really doing was sowing destruction and violence, for reasons he has never yet owned up to.

I am open to correction, of course! :)

A

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Terry Allan Hall
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 04:06 PM

Bu$h's hometown is in Conneticut, not Texas...

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 04:15 PM

Alice Cooper said it best.   Anytime who would vote for a candidate based on the endorsement of a rock star is a bigger moron than they are.   The same is true for a newspaper endorsement.   especially two local yokel newspapers.

As far as Fox goes- did you see the research after the second debate.   all the polls and newscasters rated it a draw.   Some independant research think tank evaluated the talking head analysis of the debate.   Here were the results.

CBS, ABC, CNN, CNBC   all had pro kerry comments 20%-30% over Bush
NBC was 60% pro Kerry comments over Bush
FOX NEWS- had 48% pro Kerry   46% pro Bush

FOX NEWS WAS THE ONLY ACCURATE REPORTER.    FAIR AND BALANCED.

I am sorry to give statititcal proof against your nonsensical ramblings about fox news.    I am also sorry that it beats all the other cable stations in viewers combined.   I am also sorry that CBS and the NY Times have been a collossol embarrassment.    I am not sorry that George Bush will be the next president.

Subject: RE: BS: G.W. Bush's hometown newspaper
From: Amos
Date: 19 Oct 04 - 04:45 PM

Gee, Larry, nice to see your right-wing ass around. It's been a while.

But I pray you are wrong about who'll be driving in 2005. If Bush wins it will be hard on the nation.


A