Reptile & Amphibian Forums

In fact, the polls show he has a double digit lead! And, in a related story, ex-pres. Clinton has a heart attack!

Coincidence? I think not!--LOL

But seriously, I hope Clinton recovers quickly.

I predicted a couple of months ago that Bush would win by 5% in the popular vote and get 65% of the Electoral college. It looks like I will be wrong, I probably underestimated the percentages by quite a bit.

Rodney

Elections (like horse races) can be capricious....Dewey anyone?

Interesting event...As I was eating at a local Italian restaurant, a young testosterone toting (obvious Republican) over heard a waitress exptressing her concern for Clinton's health. He began to berate her in a very loud voice making it clear that Clinton deserved what he was getting for his record as president.

This is turning into the nastiest Presidential campaign season I have ever seen (and I go back to Eisenhower). Between obvious False attacks against Kerry's war record that even Bush had to stand up and say were wrong (in an interview on TV), to Democratic zealots attacking the Republican Convention....can't wait for it to be over.

Hey....better yet....elect me (I could use the money and I have no party affiliations LOL).

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Bush didn't say that the accusations were false, he said that it was wrong to make them, and to make the commercials,--Big Difference! Unfortunately, after Bush said time and time again how these groups should be shut down, the Kerry campaign clearly won't condemn them also. Probably because about 87% of them are Bush bashers while only 13% are Kerry bashers. To me, that shows integrity and fairness. Bush says "stop them all" and Kerry says "only stop the few that bash me"!

I am not so sure the accusations are false either. First we have a nonpartisan group of veterans that consists of democrats, independents, and republicans that all accuse Kerry. We have his commanding officer and doctors testifying about their refusing his requests for medals, and we have him going to someone else to get them (probably multiple refusals before he found someone that just didn't care). The dates of the certificates confirms this. We have his shipmates saying there was no enemy fire, and his diary also confirming this. Then there are the numbers, there is a huge percentage (90%plus) of those that served with him that contradict him. On the other hand, we have a very small percentage of partisans that support Kerry's account of what happened. We have Kerry's own diary and congressional record of his testimony to them, plus many of his stories that contradict one another. Do we discount the 90% plus of nonpartisan veterans that condemn him as liars, or is it the more likely that the very small percentage of partisans that support him are lying? We have found numerous contradictions by Kerry, couldn't this just be yet another one?

Bush has asked the swift boat captains to stop running the ads, but they have clearly stated that they would not, even if it hurts Bush. Does this sound partisan to you? That they don't care if it helps or hurts Bush? The swift boat vets. told Kerry if he apologized for testifying that the war crimes were done on a large scale, by everyone, they would stop the ads. To me, this sounds like deep emotional wounds he caused them while they were in prison camps, not politics. While he admits his language to congress was too strong and was done because of his youthful exuberance (politically correct for "false") he will not do this. He originally said he committed war crimes, now he has said he had "heard" about them. Which story is true? Is he a war criminal or a liar? Should we elect someone that is a self-admitted war criminal? Someone who would lie about such serious matters that would hurt the country in a time of war?

Let me ask you a question. If you came across an accident, would you believe the story that came from every one that was in one car, or would you believe the other story that came from the witnesses in the other car, on the sidewalk, in cars not involved in the accident, etc.? I'd tend to believe the much higher percentage that didn't really have anything to gain or loose by their account, over the minority that had a lot at stake.

I guess it depends on your opinion of vets. I tend to think that the majority are good decent people, and wouldn't lie about this. I have heard many vets. on the radio say that they never saw any war crimes in Vietnam, and I even heard a woman who said how nice the americans were, that they would help them fix their stalled cars, etc., and she also never saw them commit any war crimes. It is even an officer's duty to report any such crimes, let along commit them! If you think that the vast majority of vets. are liars and war criminals, maybe Kerry is telling the truth. But I doupt it, considering all the other contradicting stories we have heard from him.

Too bad Zel Miller is retiring, there's a dem. I'd be proud to vote for.

Rodney

Rodney did you see the Daily Show Episode when they made fun of him soooooo much. It was the funniest thing i have seen in my life.
-----
0.1 "Tremper" looking Albino Leopard gecko (Lex)
0.0.1 tiger crested gecko (peachs)
0.1 Red blood python (Rhianon)
0.0.1 ball pythons (FELIX!!!!!)
2.1 Feral cats that we adopted (Fuzzy, Bear, and Tony)

My image Gallery

OK lets say that Kerry did not earn one single purple heart. Why are so many Republicans so quick to condemn him for his service. I can understand they may feel slighted by his comments after he came home, but, have these people forgotten about Bush. Kerry actually went to Vietnam. Bush was missing for a year, and yet you dont hear a word about this from the Republicans. They would rather have someone who went on vacation instead. I dont understand this logic.
With regards to the convention, I think its terrible how they exploited 9/11. Sure, its relevent for them to talk about it in regards to their actions but to bring it up at every chance was overkill. They pass it off as if this naional tragedy would have been ignored by all democrats. This is ludicrous. But, I guess if you havent done anything else while in office you have to go with what youve got. I know the daily show is for laughs but there is a lot of truth in what they say. Bush spoke of we will do this and we will do that. Well, youve been in office for 4 years, why havent you been doing any of these things. Lastly, the whole flip flop thing is crazy too. Bush was a war president, then a peace president; he couldnt win the war on terror, then he could; he was against the 9/11 commission, then he was for it. Ill be happy when this is all over. If you havent looked at the link in my post below its pretty funny, it rags on both candidates equally. Happy voting

EP
-----
Occupants not paying rent:
16 eggs incubating
7 balls
2.2 corns(candy cane, creamsicle, ghost, normal)
1 pueblan milk
1 everglades rat
1 cal. king
1 gray band king
1 w. hognose
1 bearded dragon
2 fish
1 rat
1 mouse
5 cats

First, yes, I saw jibjab months ago and it is hilarious. The short clips of it on the news don't do the entire cartoon justice. Everyone should see it in it's entirety.

As for the purple heart thing, it's because Kerry used a regulation that is very rarely used in order to get out of Vietnam. People are not criticizing the fact that he was indeed there. If he fraudulently got his purple hearts in order to escape military duty, he shouldn't go around the country constantly claiming he is a war hero. And if he is lying about being a war hero, do we really want someone who is lying like this for political gain to be in the office? How can you claim you are a hero and then claim you are a war criminal? Wouldn't those be mutually exclusive? They are in my opinion.

Three months was not the normal tour for uninjured military personnel in Vietnam, and three purple hearts without bleeding (like Dole said) seems highly questionable, especially when his commanding officers said that they denied his requests for medals because his actions didn't qualify him for them.(because he wasn't injured during combat)

As Oliver North said in an interview, he has been wounded about a dozen times in combat. After his second purple heart, he has refused any other purple heart medals because he could be forced out of combat areas into a desk job. He wants to be in the field with his men. That's a war hero, not someone who runs from combat as quickly as possible, throws away the medals he is so proud of (later found to be false), testifies to congress that his fellow soldiers are all war criminals (later said to be exaggerations), etc.

(not that running from combat is necessarily a dumb thing to do, but a hero it is not!)

As for Bush being missing for a year, I don't know if that is true. I do know that the National Guard sometimes lets people space out their service, and I have heard that Bush did a lot of extra duty, then took time off for his personal life (business reasons) and then went back to Guard duty later. Again, I don't know if this is true or not, but I don't see 90%plus of the people he served with stating that he didn't do his duty like I see with Kerry.

And when you consider that the military is about 45% democrats and 55% republicans, I find the ratios that accuse/defend Kerry as very indicting. And the lack of such info on Bush very acquitting.--Though neither is absolute proof.

Rodney

To my knowledge there is not one person who can confirm that Bush served his time. And whats the deal with some of the swift boat guys who stood by Kerrys side several years ago praising him but seem to have retreived lost memories of what "really happened". The whole thing stinks.

EP
-----
Occupants not paying rent:
16 eggs incubating
7 balls
2.2 corns(candy cane, creamsicle, ghost, normal)
1 pueblan milk
1 everglades rat
1 cal. king
1 gray band king
1 w. hognose
1 bearded dragon
2 fish
1 rat
1 mouse
5 cats

I agree it stinks. But a lot less than the Michael Moore movie! Did you see all the senators that were fuming when his movie was released. He asked them questions, and then edited out their answers (to make it look like they didn't have an answer) because he didn't like their answers, giving the viewer a totally wrong idea of reality. And some people have the audacity to call this type of move, with lots of "false" editing, a documentary?

But I also find it hard to believe that Bush could fly fighter jets if he wasn't trained to do so, and I have never heard anything to the contrary (as far as his pilot status is concerned). He's pretty smart if he could fake being able to fly fighter jets, without any National Guard training. I just wish he was a better public speaker.

Rodney

I saw somewhere that he did learn to fly but on jets that were being phased out. It wouldnt take forever to learn how to fly. It just concerns me that he is missing a year. I know he took some breaks to go and work on campaigns but who knows the whole story.
I did see Moores film and thought it was quite funny, more for entertainment, but it did have some interesting points. My opinion of Bush was already formed long before it was released. I just dont trust him, and I dont agree with a lot of his policies. Id like to see some lively debates between the 2 but I dont see that happening. They will probably be too formatted which is basically Bush reciting someone elses words. Again, Bush hasnt really accomplished much in office and is exploiting 9/11 for personal gain. Just sad. Heres to 2008.

EP
-----
Occupants not paying rent:
16 eggs incubating
7 balls
2.2 corns(candy cane, creamsicle, ghost, normal)
1 pueblan milk
1 everglades rat
1 cal. king
1 gray band king
1 w. hognose
1 bearded dragon
2 fish
1 rat
1 mouse
5 cats

It wouldnt take forever to learn how to fly

No, it wouldn't. But if he was AWOL for a year, like some charge, do you really think he would have become a pilot?(or would he have been kicked out/dropped out) Been honorably discharged? Lost records seems a lot more likely to me.

I just dont trust him, and I dont agree with a lot of his policies. Id like to see some lively debates between the 2 but I dont see that happening.

Considering all the contradictions Kerry has made about his record, and all his flip-flops, I trust him a whole lot less! Bush has done what he said he would do. As for not agreeing with his policies, that is fair. And I'd like to see some debates too. I think Bush would kill Kerry in a debate on the issues, like he did with Gore. Kerry would have a terrible time defending all his flip-flops.

Bush hasnt really accomplished much in office and is exploiting 9/11 for personal gain.

First, what personal gain? He made a very dangerous political decision to defend the country, and that was a huge risk to his political future. I don't see any gain in that. And Bush sure turned around the economy! The stock market leveled off, after falling drastically for nine months before he took office. Unemployment is now way way down. And considering he stimulated the economy with the tax cuts, I can't help but wonder what would have happened if Kerry was in office at the time. Raise taxes and put the final nail in our economic coffin? Has government ever directly created a job (other than a govt. job)? Nope. Has easing government regulations and taxes ever crated a job?--Yep, it does so every time. He got congress to give him power to declair war, he got the UN to unanimously sign 1441 (even though they wouldn't enforce it). He got a large coalition of countries to support the war after the UN backed down. Then add all this to the war on terror (Afghanistan and Iraq), and he has accomplished an enormous amount in 4 short years--even if you don't like what he did.

And if you don't think Bush has accomplished much in 4 years, then don't you have to ask yourself "What has Kerry accomplished as a Senator in 30 years? Anything?"

(I always find it amazing when people criticize any president, and won't apply the same scrutiny/test to the person/party they support. Very strange)

Some say they hate Bush and support Kerry because of the war, but they both have taken the same position--they support it. In fact, Kerry said he supported it even without WMDs being taken into consideration, which is far more radical than Bush's position. So, if you are honest, and if you are against the war in Iraq, you should be more for Bush than Kerry.

Some say Bush hasn't accomplished much in 4 years, but then they ignore that Kerry has done far less in 30 years, and hasn't said anything about any accomplishments during his political career.

After watching a lot of debates/conventions/rigth wing radio/left wing radio,etc. I still don't have any idea what Kerry is for exactly. Except for raising taxes, which any economist will tell you, will badly hurt the economy and jobs. Does wallstreet want Kerry for pres.? Nope. Why not? He's bad for the economy!

So how do you support someone that is even "more" for the Iraq war than Bush, less trustworthy, and worse for the economy? Easy, you let your feelings rule over your conscious thought.

Rodney

Reguarding more or less...Teddy Roosevelt was that dumb cowboy war hero that was put in to the VP slot as a boost for Mckinley. He did little if anything for this country (as to legislation) before he became Pres (by means of assassination). When in office he became one of our best presidents.

Grant (who saved the union as a general)...became one of our worst.

Bush has four years worth of record(as pres). I vote against him because of that. Kerry's record on a swift boat is not why I am voting for him. Bush made that decision for me years ago.

frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Wait a minute......Rodney...Your taking Oli North at his word. Now there is a whole load of credibility lost........

(lol)

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Wait a minute Frank......Your taking Kerry at his word over hundreds of vets and every one of his commanding officers?-LOL

Yes, I am taking Olie at his word. Not because he said it, but because I have heard the exact same thing said by many vets. in interviews, and because Olie is still serving, and not trying to get out of the service as quickly as possible, so his story makes sense. Olie clearly could have gotten out of the military if he wanted to, so why would he lie about this?

I tend to believe people when I see nothing to be gained by their statements, and I tend to disbelieve people when they have a lot at stake.

Rodney

Excuse me? Does the Highest ranking officer in the US Navy count? Admiral Elmo Zumwalt defended Kerry's record till the day he died. Even McCain said that Zumalt had said it to him.

How does that constitute everybody?

Seems to me that the people who were actually there on the boat with him would be more reliable witnesses than a bunch of johny come afters....

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Interesting, while I was not aware of commanding officer Admiral Elmo Zumwalt ......

First you say that the top commanding officer Admiral Elmo Zumwalt defended Kerry's record till the day he died

then you say Seems to me that the people who were actually there on the boat with him would be more reliable witnesses than a bunch of johny come afters....

So you think a top commanding officer defending Kerry is important, but in your second statement you say he is not a reliable witness since he wasn't there? So why quote his support of Kerry when he wasn't there?

You also say that McCain said that Zumalt had said it to him. (which is pure hearsay), but you ignore all the sworn affidavits (direct evidence) by the swift boat veterans that actually were there and witnessed Kerry's actions?

Eighteen Navy combat veterans and commanders went on the record opposing John Kerry's bid for the Presidency, including the entire chain of command above Lt. Kerry in Vietnam, and men who had fought at his side.

Since I was unaware of Admiral Elmo Zumwalt supporting Kerry, I did a quick internet search and this is the first thing that came up, hardly flattering.

“[T]he fabled and distinguished chief of naval operations,Admiral Elmo Zumwalt,told me — 30 years ago when he was still CNO —that during his own command of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam,just prior to his anointment as CNO, young Kerry had created great problems for him and the other top brass,by killing so many non-combatant civilians and going after other non-military targets.‘We had virtually to straitjacket him to keep him under control,’ the admiral said. ‘Bud’ Zumwalt got it right when he assessed Kerry as having large ambitions — but promised that his career in Vietnam would haunt him if he were ever on the national stage.” And this statement was made despite the fact Zumwalt had personally pinned a Silver Star on Mr. Kerry.

Mr. Kerry was assigned to Swiftboat 44 on December 1, 1968. Within 24 hours, he had his first Purple Heart. Mr. Kerry accumulated three Purple Hearts in four months with not even a day of duty lost from wounds, according to his training officer. It’s a pity one cannot read his Purple Heart medical treatment reports which have been withheld from the public. The only person preventing their release is Mr. Kerry

the whole article. http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2004/02/27&ID=Ar00800

Rodney

Rodney....Your statement was "ALL his comanding officers".

As to the rest....Does this mean McKain lied when he defended Kerry and quoted Zumwalt?

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

As to the rest....Does this mean McKain lied when he defended Kerry and quoted Zumwalt

No, but it does mean that Zumwalt waffles just as much as Kerry!

Zumwalt writes in a book (years ago) how Kerry was a real pain in the but to the brass because he was always shooting civilians, etc. and now he is defending his record because Kerry is running for pres.? Again, I tend to believe his earlier writings when there wasn't this political overtone to his opinion.

How can you defend someones record today, when earlier you stated that they were a pain because of all the things they did wrong (war crimes)?

Rodney

I think that one is a matter of perception. You can also say that maybe Zumwalt did not like such a "High Profile" officer and expressed his additude in the reports (unfortunately a common practice as I saw when I was in. Logs ( as the Navy calls Records) were very much a part of my duty Then later, he mellowed on the subject.

Too much room for interpretation to be taken one way or the other. I'm inclined to agree with what Zumwalt wrote later on since he died before this campaign and so would not have been influenced by that.
Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Bush actually said Kerry had served "Honorably" and that he was considering charges agains the 527(?) groups. This I heard (from Bush himself)in an interview with Dan Rather.

Veterans are human like everyone else Rodney. No special state of grace (just a more informed perspective in some cases). I had an interesting talk with a friend back from Afghanistan. At least things make more sense there...but then I did feel that war was justified.

John McCain (sorry if I misspell the name) said it best, when he said that to go after every candidates service records was disgusting.

What Kerry did after his service is (I agree with McCain) fair game. Kerry did make a mistake making his medals an issue.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Bush actually said Kerry had served "Honorably" and that he was considering charges agains the 527(?) groups.

Charges? What charges? It's legal. How could you bring charges? Bush has said he wants the law changed to prevent all 527s, and asked Kerry to join him in this effort. The Kerry campaign has not responded, and it is believed that they don't want all 527s done away, with since 87% of them are liberal and only 13% conservative.

Veterans are human like everyone else Rodney. No special state of grace (just a more informed perspective in some cases).

I agree completely. That's why I believe a group of hundreds of nonpartisan vets that served with Kerry, over a few partisan ones he was able to dig up. Why believe a few biased/partisan individuals over more than 10 times as many individuals that aren't affiliated with only one party? Think about it. Are the swift boat vets. endorsing Bush? Nope. Have they been asked if they would pull their ads. if the ads. hurt Bush? Yes, they were asked, and they said they would refuse because this is about the truth and not about re-electing Bush.

What Kerry did after his service is (I agree with McCain) fair game. Kerry did make a mistake making his medals an issue.

I don't think anyone cares about his medals. It's his testimony to congress about war crimes, that was used by the Vietnamese against POW servicemen, and his illegitimate use of purple hearts to exit Vietnam post haste, that has veterans angry. (Especially when he now says his testimony about war crimes was greatly exaggerated, but he won't apologize to the servicemen he characterized as "all being war criminals".)

Picture in Ho Chi Minh City of Kerry meeting with the Vietnamese and getting honored as a Vietnamese war hero! Guess he was a war hero after all, but for the wrong side! Doesn't look like presidental material to me!

Rodney

Nice photo...I don't beleave it was docktored (even though he is strangely spotlighted) but I really have to question the explanation of why he was there. I suspect that he might have had other reasons for being there (official business) that were left out of the caption. As to honoring him? Sounds like right wing crap based on N. Vietnamese propoganda.

I'm sure we can find legitimate photos of other politicians posing with our enemies. It's very easy to smear some one with a photo and a "interpreted" caption....isn't it?

Not that we haven't seen altered photos emenate from the right wing before in this election.

As to the statement from Bush...He said quote :"We are looking into prosecuting them" (the 527 groups). And yes...you can prosecute a party for making public (false) statements in print or on film that damage someones "personal reputation". This is called Libel and is a crime in this country.

For example; You can say john doe recieved three purple hearts...that is fact. You cannot say...John doe faked his wounds (without actual proof)and represent it as fact, as by doing so you are attacking his character with a possibly false statement. That is illegal.

And yes...Mikey the film maker is also a possible candidate for Libel charges if he attacked Bush falsely on a personal level. (I did not see the film).

(Of course since Bush said it...If he is wrong then again it would illustrate his incompetency).

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

For example; You can say john doe received three purple hearts...that is fact. You cannot say...John doe faked his wounds (without actual proof)and represent it as fact, as by doing so you are attacking his character with a possibly false statement

The problem with this argument is that you don't consider that there are rules that go along with getting a purple heart. One of them is that you must get hurt during combat if the wound that occurred is accidentally self inflicted. An accidentally self inflicted wound that didn't occur during combat is not eligible. That is where the fraud comes in, not whether Kerry was actually hurt or not. No one disputes that. Kerry shipmates, other swift boat personnel, and Kerry's own log/diary all contradict his eligibility. They all say it was accidental (from a grenade that Kerry threw and didn't get far enough away from) and not while under combat conditions. And when that is compounded by the fact that his doctor and commanding officer swore in an affidavit that they refused his request for a purple heart, and the fact that he got one by getting another doctor/brass to sigh off on it later, supports this argument.

Rodney

He threw a grenade -not in combat conditions? Ok, WHY? I'd like to hear a better explanation for that one (it sounds suspicious as hell and goes against what I know of Navy Regs....and part of my job in being a quartermaster was being familiar with military regulations).

What is their explanation? Are they trying to claim it was a training execise that went bad? I don't know of any Navy Officers who threw grenades just for the fun of it.

My understanding is that you can only get a Purple Heart if you recieve a wound in COMBAT. Otherwise, I would have one for my ruined knee. And your saying that he pulled the wool over the USN three times by faking injuries?

Can't buy that as it falls under it's own weight in absurdity...

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Kerry was throwing a grenade, in one instance, to try and destroy a pile of rice. (a possible food source for the Viet cong)

He was standing too close and when it went off, he got a sliver from the grenade, and a piece of rice shrapnel in his butt. His shipmates laughed at him because it looked so funny, (and the fact that he got injured by his own actions, in the butt) The other instance he got a purple heart for was also self inflicted and also not under fire. (a very small scratch on his arm from an ejected shell casing from a gun he was shooting with I believe)

I suspect part of the reason he wanted out of Vietman so badly was because his men didn't respect him. (laughed at him when he did stupid things)

Rodney

Actually no....I had not seen anything on this....Makes me wonder. The timing is very very interesting....

Just like all these "newly Found" reports that say Bush dodged Nam duty by calling in important political contacts (one of which has a punctuation mark not from that era's typewriters (with some rare exceptions). As I have said....The dirtiest year ever.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

"Die dümmsten Kälber wählen ihren Schlächter selber"

In English language (unfortunately it doesn't rhyme in English):

"The most stupid calfs chose the butcher by themselves"