Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
OK Conservative Buttholes -- Whaddya think of Kerry's speech?
- Thread starter majutsu
- Start date
coverguy
New member
bluepeter said:I'm closeminded? I love people who throw out Saddam's Hezbollah links. Hezbollah attacked the United States when? That's right, never. In fact, they have stated many times that they will not attack US interests.
In other words, you are trying to justify this invasion by saying that Saddam had links to Hezbollah, Hezbollah is attacking Israel, Israel are best buddies with the US so the US goes after Saddam.........lol
That's excellent justification for what will end up being 1000's of American deaths. Well, if you don't like that one, there's always the revenge for the bounty on Daddy's head
War on Terror! Known Terrorist organization! You don't see any connection? Tell me that not 1 American hasn't died from a Hezbollah attack. You can't! I specifically remember a pregnant NYC teacher being killed in a cafe bombing and that is one of many. Terrorism is terrorism whether it is directed at us or our allies. What about his link to suicide bombers throughout the world? There is no questioning the fact that he pays the families of suicide bombers not just in Israel but anywhere else that he deemed "for the cause."
One of the things that seperates the US from many other countries is that we do put our lives on the line for shit that we don't have to. Why? Sometimes it is in our own best interest, many times it is in others.
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/May2004/n05272004_200405275.html
Take a look at this article. Your boy Saddam, he's a really great guy. Sometimes you have to make a stand. If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything ... somebody said that once. Hopefully Canada, and you my friend, will be able to get back up someday.
bluepeter
New member
Coverguy said:
Saddam is not my boy. I'm totally in agreement with him being removed. It just shouldn't have been done for the bullshit reasons that were being spouted by dubya nor should it have happened now. You want to kill Americans to defend Israel who by definition are a terrorist state themselves? Have at it.
I dispute your iteration that Canada doesn't stand for something as well. Our government stood up in the face of much pressure and told George no. I think any dictionary definition would identify that as standing up for what you believe in. They didn't believe the bullshit that was being spouted by the US government justifying an invasion so they told them to shove it. Great stuff.
The fact that George then went into grade 3 mode and started ignoring our administration and decrying that only countries that helped his crusade in Iraq could bid on the lucrative contracts there speaks volumes.
coverguy
New member
bluepeter said:
You're right, in fact after we risked our lives over there we should turn around and give you whatever you want, because you helped so much and were such a good ally!
It is truly unfortunate that this conflict has arisen. If the UN would have done its job years ago we wouldn't be going through this mess. Unfortunately, it has happened and now action was needed. Saddam could not go unchecked anymore. Not just for the safety of America, but for the safety of his own damn people.
Its times like this when a country truly finds out who its allies are. As a member of the Armed Forces do you think I personally would ever want to fight to help troops from countries such as France, or even Canada? Why? When my ass was fighting for my life - in what ultimately is a just cause if you examine the history of Iraq and the atrocities commited by Hussein and the Bathe Party (note I said ultimately a just cause - not whether you believe in the reasons for going in now!) - they didn't back me up. Your country has benefited GREATLY in the past both economically and militarily from your alliance and proximity to the US. Its too bad that your country turned its back on us now ... Presidents will come and go and their foreign policies and views will shift, but a rift created with the individual people aren't so easily assuaged. Just look at the backlash towards the French over the last 18 months.
majutsu
Well-known member
Thanks for all the input. Good stuff, and I appreciate all these points of view. All in all, this has been very civil for a political thread, too.
As for myself, I mentioned that although a registered repub, I was impressed by Kerry, more so than I thought possible. Looking at the effect of his speech alone, independent of other concerns, he was very effective.
All the saluting and stories of vietnam combat are to clearly show that he is not militarily soft. I think that came across loud and clear. Bush may have trouble as he has come across as a privileged draft-dodger willing to send my friends and family to death without the seriousness and solemnity this deserves.
I thought the statements on health care, particularly prescription coverage in medicare, were very impressive. As a doctor, it is a fact that most of my patients on medicare simply cannot afford my prescriptions. I have seen deaths result from this. This is unconscionable. While I thought too it was short on substance, I hardly expect something more substantive on health care from Bush.
I thought the seizing of the flags/images of God, country and values from the republicans was quite a wise manipulation. I particularly like where Kerry says values must be accompanied by action to be true values. If you claim to value families and yet destroy them, you do not value families but are a liar. What Bush values is seen in his major domestic actions: gay bashing, religious intolerance, and nepotism. These are not values I share.
I thought the statements on Bush's well-known destruction of science research, particularly at NIH being my concern, were excellent. Bipartisan science committees have lambasted the governments destruction of scientific research for political, economic and religious motivations. This is pathetic and a very destructive path, which undermines the technological might and power that make America great. Henry Waxman CA, McCain, and every republicans Russell Train and William Ruckelshaus are involved in lambasting Bush perversion of science. When NIH officials pulled grants for 150 programs all together on a "hit-list" published by the religious organization Traditional Values Coalition at the urging of the Bush administration is when this effort became bi-partisan.
I also felt that investing money in head-start, etc is wise. As Kerry pointed out, a small amount of money in early education and youth programs in inner cities makes economic sense, so as to prevent much larger expenses of violent crime and incarceration later.
Lastly, the economy is poor. Unemployment is high. New businesses have fallen off.
In short, Kerry effective made himself seem militarily strong and principled (two common republican salvos), while emphasizing several domestic flaws in the Bush administration. Politically, it was a strong and effective speech. I am curious how Bush will respond in kind. I don't believe talking about Iraq and not addressing domestic policy is likely to be effective. Furthermore, talking about abortion and punishing gays is unlikely to win any votes except with the conservative christian caucus (votes bush already has, but fail to help him pull ahead). Bush will need to win over moderate america somehow. I can't see how he can do this without alienating his extremist base.
As for myself, I mentioned that although a registered repub, I was impressed by Kerry, more so than I thought possible. Looking at the effect of his speech alone, independent of other concerns, he was very effective.
All the saluting and stories of vietnam combat are to clearly show that he is not militarily soft. I think that came across loud and clear. Bush may have trouble as he has come across as a privileged draft-dodger willing to send my friends and family to death without the seriousness and solemnity this deserves.
I thought the statements on health care, particularly prescription coverage in medicare, were very impressive. As a doctor, it is a fact that most of my patients on medicare simply cannot afford my prescriptions. I have seen deaths result from this. This is unconscionable. While I thought too it was short on substance, I hardly expect something more substantive on health care from Bush.
I thought the seizing of the flags/images of God, country and values from the republicans was quite a wise manipulation. I particularly like where Kerry says values must be accompanied by action to be true values. If you claim to value families and yet destroy them, you do not value families but are a liar. What Bush values is seen in his major domestic actions: gay bashing, religious intolerance, and nepotism. These are not values I share.
I thought the statements on Bush's well-known destruction of science research, particularly at NIH being my concern, were excellent. Bipartisan science committees have lambasted the governments destruction of scientific research for political, economic and religious motivations. This is pathetic and a very destructive path, which undermines the technological might and power that make America great. Henry Waxman CA, McCain, and every republicans Russell Train and William Ruckelshaus are involved in lambasting Bush perversion of science. When NIH officials pulled grants for 150 programs all together on a "hit-list" published by the religious organization Traditional Values Coalition at the urging of the Bush administration is when this effort became bi-partisan.
I also felt that investing money in head-start, etc is wise. As Kerry pointed out, a small amount of money in early education and youth programs in inner cities makes economic sense, so as to prevent much larger expenses of violent crime and incarceration later.
Lastly, the economy is poor. Unemployment is high. New businesses have fallen off.
In short, Kerry effective made himself seem militarily strong and principled (two common republican salvos), while emphasizing several domestic flaws in the Bush administration. Politically, it was a strong and effective speech. I am curious how Bush will respond in kind. I don't believe talking about Iraq and not addressing domestic policy is likely to be effective. Furthermore, talking about abortion and punishing gays is unlikely to win any votes except with the conservative christian caucus (votes bush already has, but fail to help him pull ahead). Bush will need to win over moderate america somehow. I can't see how he can do this without alienating his extremist base.
C
Code
Guest
I laughed when he said "reporting for duty", I thought that was a nice little joke.
America still doesn't know what his platform is.
Unless he's thinking the Purple Hearts are gonna be his only platform.
America still doesn't know what his platform is.
Unless he's thinking the Purple Hearts are gonna be his only platform.
C
Code
Guest
Kerry's claiming family values was nice to see.
I've never understood why the dems have never backed the concept.
I mean Tipper Gore invented the V-Chip afterall.
I've never understood why the dems have never backed the concept.
I mean Tipper Gore invented the V-Chip afterall.
Similar threads
