Jon Carry Not a Traitor...

Posted By Blackfive

...he's just a huge asshole.  Huge.

Hot Air has the details and video of that sonofabitch getting cozy with one of the most evil people on the @#$%ing planet.

“So we have a crisis of confidence in the Middle East — in the world, really. I’ve never seen our country as isolated, as much as a sort of international pariah for a number of reasons as it is today.”…

Kerry criticized what he called the “unfortunate habit” of Americans to see the world “exclusively through an American lens.”

He said this while seated next to the former CEO of one of the world’s foremost terrorist states, which as we speak is working on building nuclear weapons, bankrolling Hezbollah’s efforts to foment civil war in Lebanon and Hamas’s exterminationist jihad against Israel, and supplying Shiite militias with IEDs to kill American soldiers in Iraq. Whose current leadership, lest we forget, Kerry has previously signaled a desire to meet with. Note the bolded bit in the quote, too: given a direct choice between defending the president or siding with the Iranian government circa 2003 — whose nominal leader was, of course, Khatami himself — Lurch essentially chose the latter...

And see the post below as the Iranians most likely executed our soldiers in Iraq.  But he's friendly with them because we're the @#$%ing pariah?!

Words.

Cannot.

Describe.

My anger.

Right now.

Comments

[Steve Schippert]

Seething, Matt. I'l have an analysis published soon on the detials known (and unknown), but it is not just IED's & EFP's. Last week's Karbala attack was not an insurgent/Mahdi attack, it was Qods Force, and they summarily executed the members of the Army Public Affairs unit.

And we are the pariah.

Can't express the rage.

[Mr. Wolf]

Which is worse? Kerry in Iran, Pelosi in Iraq (and they launched rockets on the green zone.. wonder if she was there?) or Fonda on the mall?

Looks like an S-P trifecta.

Its gonna be a LONG weekend...

Wolf

[Bill Faith]

He's an asshole and a traitor. I'll add an excerpt and link to your post at  Ain't it a shame this great "American" isn't running in '08? as soon as I'm done here. It's time for the VP to take this guy hunting. Deer hunting, none of that birdshot stuff.

[Kotzabasis]

They might not be traitors, but the Democrats and their spin-offs like Chuck Hagel from the Republicans, in this clash between civilization and barbarity, will go down in history as turncoats to their historical responsibilities to the nation at a time when America is at war.

They have chosen to become populist leaders in pursuit of their narrow egotistical political interests, gamboling the vital interests of America. Instead of leading from the front, they are leading from the "tail", pushed by the whimsical winds of populism.

[twolaneflash]

The Poodle is such a circus clown act, but without the cute dog! He is, however, just one (or another) rich woman's lap-dog!

JFK's islamist buddies may not know he's pumping some Jewish blood along with that ketchyup in his America-hating heart, or that the family name Kohn was dropped by great-grandpa Fritz. They couldn't hate him any more either way; Kerry-Kohn-Heinz is a useful fool in the islamist goal to dominate. He, like we, remain the infidel that islam says must submit or die.

So, America's enemies will fawn over Kerry, to advance their purpose with false praise and deceit. They will encourage his bitter "get-back" at the America that despises him and his acts of disloyalty. The islamic enemies of freedom have too many willing allies in public positions of power in America, who need to be neutered. Kerry is already atesticular, but need his power cut off.

[crotchety]

UN-FU**-ING BELIEVABLE!
I have a take on this over at www.crotchetyoldbastard.com as well. Not only is this asshole blasting America, he's lieing through his ass while he does it!

[vincenzo4@hotmail.com]

I understand your anger very well. I personally am waiting for the bottom to fall out, and I expect it within two years of President Bush's departure.

I remain very angry and extremely loyal to my country and its government, but not to those who have exploited its grace and loving compassions.

My anger has been righteous, at a very low boil for decades. I remember the CIA Shooting and the carnage that followed, taking the life of Sherry Olds in the Nairobi, Kenya bombing; taking the lives of two team mates in Baghdad and simultaneously wounding in action two others whose injuries are disabling for life.

My colleagues and I watched for eight years as very little was done during the Clinton Presidency as the blood of innocents pured forth with little if any desire to confront purely human rights violations if nothing else.

This is an inside job par excellence.This man continually shows us what his value system is, and more deeper his own dadtardly hidden regard for human rights. Very pointedly, there is no concern whatsoever. By his own words he releases his true heart, his hidden agenda.

The bottom will fall out. It will be soon, and then all those who have been alseep with their materialism, superb intellectualisms and wealth; those whose romance with having fun laughing at those selflessness in contending with evil they ignored and criticized will have their nightmare. It will not be kewl, neato or distant in it's comeupance.

The goal of taking out this nation gathers like storm clouds at the behest of the personalities of men like Mr. Kerry whose offense is holding men like President Bush as specious. If they say it often enough and convincingly enough you have on the Capital Mall today what we have. This is pure coward Kerryesque.

Kerry and Conyers and the lot of them have no character, no ethics and have served themselves. They are nothing like our Founding Fathers and when the bottom falls out-you will see them for who they truly have been.

[vincenzo4@hotmail.com]

One more thing...I am still righteously angry about Kerry's little deceptive rant before Congress decades ago. After almost thirty years in selfless service I have indeed earned the right to make the comments I am about to make.

Here he is way back when, when he used the government to become part of it.

Then a comissioned officer making accusations which are felonies in the UCMJ against his comrades; that he does not offer any corroborative evidence of, and testifies in effect under oath that he took no UCMJ action against those he accuses of violating the UCMJ, when he as an officer was aware of or witrnessed such accused felonies. He had lied and hoodwinked his way all these years, and the public has bought it all the way. He lied to Congress, why is this man not in jail and why is he in governance?

Secondly, his activities in Paris with the North Vietnamese never seemed to have been investigated either.

How is it that those sworn to uphold the Constitution when elected can make speeches and media comments like Kerry and seemingly have no consequence.

If you pay attention to each and every word, the syntax, vocal inflection, eye contact, body language, you will see their motivation, their intent, their true heart. I am extremely concerned about a natgion claiming to be free, which does not hold its elected representatives accountable for such conduct, which in effect has abandonned the fighting man and has shown the world complete disunity and treason, sedition and subversion.

If this country does not cause consequence for this betrayal of huge proportions, we have nothing to hope for.

[jim]

It does not take an historian to see Kerry is a modern Neville Chamberlain.

[Ymarsakar]

Be proud of being the international pariah people. All of the rest of the world more or less sucks.

The more we do to kill our enemies, the more of a pariah we will become. Fine, it is always good to know who your real friends are.

[Terri]

My blood's boiling here in Texas too. Kerry is nothing more than a "yes man to the ketchup queen". It's a scary thought that the citizens of Massachusetts continue to elect him and Teddy Kennedy. Doesn't say a whole lot for them, does it?

[tom]

can't argue with this part though..

>>“unfortunate habit” of Americans to see the world “exclusively through an American lens.”<<

[arrowhead]

I feel the same visceral anger. The politicians attempting to promote themselves by turning on the President and the military, the usual Hollywood suspects parading their treason in D.C. before the fawning media - it all makes me physically sick!

[David]

And there are those who hold such people in high regard and respect? So much for the concept of we support the troops and are against the war.

What makes me upset is that there are a number of people who would be more than willing to nominate and elect this traitor to be President. It is bad enough that they elected him to be their (and our) Senator.

Lets call it what it is: He is a Traitor.

[jordan]

tom, that statement is a white elitist east coast stereotype of the ugly American. Give Americans some credit, for god's sake. They see the world as it is, and not through their own lens, as the French, the Saudis and the Nordic peoples do.

Fonda is alive due to the restraint, honor and self respect of the Vietnam era veteran. Here they are, trash talking the war as more soldiers are put in place for the surge. She's saying the poor military families and mothers and Gold Star moms are with her. Too bad she didn't have that sympathy when she passed on the note that POW gave her in Hanoi, earning him some more torture sessions.

They keep reporting this war as "unpopular" as if any war is. They keep saying the people are "war-weary". We're weary of defeatism, and they should give us the data upon which they build those assertions.

It is the soldier, not the protester, who gives us freedom of speech...

[gitarcarver]

can't argue with this part though..

You can't argue with something that is not defined.

Just what exaclty is an "American lens?"

Is it a lens through which the Hispanic population of the south and southwest sees things? It is the way that the generations of children from Italy see things? It is the way that the families of people from Asia see the world? Is it the way that black men and women see the world? Is it the way the men and women who farm the land in the midewest see the world? Is it even the way that Boston elite see the world?

So what exactly is an "American lens?"

Is it a lens that sees the world through a lens that benefits this country? As opposed to the purity of race in Japan? As opposed to thr protectionism of laws in France? As ooposed to the national pride that fostered the climate that started both World War I and II?

The "American lens" is as diverse as the American people.

Only elitist hacks and snobs like you and Kerry see it through a different lens.

[Marc]

Hey BF,

I just saw this story on Fox News and was coming over here to pass it along to you. Should have known that you would have been on it already. It saddens me to no end that it has taken this country some 30 years to truly see just what a jackass John Kerry is. This man made his career on the backs of every Vietnam Vet and those POWs and MIAs still unaccounted for from Southeast Asia.

As if his lies before Congress in 1973 (?) weren't bad enough, fastforward another 20 years and take a hard look at what he did to the POW/MIA Issue while Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs. POW/MIA Researchers are still finding documents that were hidden away that shed light on the fate of these missing men. Kerry and to a lesser extend John McCain, both wanting normalization of relations with Veitnam,(each for different reasons) made sure that real evidence never made it to the Committee floor or into the final report. Imagine, just imagine for a moment, being the family member of one of those unaccounted men and finding out that evidence was generated from the investigators of the Committee and never shared with you. While establishing the Committee Kerry and his minions made sure that the Committee would not have to report back to family members.

For more on this, go to
http://www.nationalalliance.org/vietnam/19cases.htm

As if you didn't need another reason to be steaming pissed at this man, but I wanted to toss another log on the fire. I am just thankful that the American people are finally seeing what a loose cannon this guy is, now if they can just get the full picture on McCain ...

-Marc

[MadMonk]

Somebody please do us a favor and make Kerry stay away for good!

Please!

Okay, pretty please with sugar on top!

Do it.

Now.

[Chuck]

Winter soldiering across the globe is tough duty. I'm sure Tereza provides him with hazardous duty pay commensurate to the risks he takes, but the real good news is that Jon has a "bona fide" education and isn't stuck in Iraq as a pariah.

[John]

Unfortunately, a large number of the American public has amnesia. When the going gets tough, they switch sides. This phenomenon occurs not only with the public, but with elected officials. Kerry has merely had to pull the wool over the eyes of the people of Mass, and looking at their track record of public officials, we should not expect too much of our blue blood brethren of the North East. Jordan commented that we are tired of defeatism, and this I must agree. The public at large is not very tuned into what is happening on the ground other than what the LSM is telling them. And like the good little sheeple that we have become, they believe the LSM. While I’m fairly new to reading Black Five, I find that this is the only source of info I’ve heard setting forth the theory that the Iranians are behind Karbala. It makes perfect since. It worked for them with Hezbollah in Israel, and I think no one In the LSM has connected the dots to W’s latest announcement about engaging Iranians in Iraq.

[jacey]

*It's time for the VP to take this guy hunting. Deer hunting, none of that birdshot stuff.*

ROTFL! good one Bill.

I'd say Kerry's American lens remark is a non-issue because when the messenger has no crediblity anymore, the message doesn't matter. In fact if I'm not mistaken, they shoot the messenger for less.

But let Kerry keep talking, he'll make more trouble for the Dem's than Rep's could begin to hope for.

[twolaneflash]

Venting here is not relief enough! Tell these defeat-fixated, self-hating, America-loathing congress-persons directly via www.first.gov

I sent this one to Chuckles Hagel at his senate website:

'Your message of discouragement and defeat to America's military is equally comforting and encouraging to those they fight. As the father of a soldier "stop-lossed" and enroute to front-line action in Iraq, I find your recent words and actions in Congress a wound of the deepest kind.

God's mercy on you for your hurtful assault on those in harm's way and on the families who live in anxiety and fear for them.

p.s. President Hagel? Forget about it!'

[Mommynator]

gitarcarver, that was one of the most eloquent things I've read in awhile. Thank you for reminding us just what the American lens really is.

As for Mr. Kerry (gag, blech, cough, choke) - no surprises.

[jordan]

The possible connection to the similar Hezbollah Israel kidnappings suggests they did intend to keep the soldiers as hostages, as they're doing with the Israeli soldiers, but aborted for some reason. Seems likely, since the executions were messy/unplanned, i.e. one guy here, two guys there.

If so, they're still looking for live US hostages.

I hope they are establishing tougher rules and working in larger groups. Or at least re-thinking the idea of scattering small numbers on various IA bases.

[jordan]

Oops, wrong thread, sorry.

[maxxdog]

You owe apologies to assholes everywhere!

[Richard]

Once again I say, when are we going to deal with these treasonous bastards for what they are? Kerry and the like are nothing more than traitors who should suffer the appropriate consequences. Our country is becoming weak, letting these useless, self serving fools run loose. Not only are they allowed to spew their crap here but they make things worse by taking their sorry asses overseas and siding with our enemy on their ground. God help us if this country doesn't wake up to what these idiots are doing.

By the way, for those who do not realize it, John Kerry does not do a dammed thing for the State of MA. He is as useless for the state as he is for our country as a whole. He has done nothing more than keep his pipe dream of becoming President alive while ignoring his responsibilities to the citizens of MA. I know that those of you here who have brains are not surprised by that fact, but since I was on the subject of this IDIOT, I felt compelled to mention it.

[alexa kim]

Comes now the Main Stream Media as our Iago. We too willingly then, and now, cast ourselves as Othello. The noble master rendered a tragic toy by the venomous lies of his worst enemy, disguised as friend.

[Cincinnati_Bob]

I could never understand how he got 3 feet into a campaign for the White House after saying '9-11 Didn't Really Affect Me". Not to mention "I couldn't think for 30-40 minutes after 9-11"

That 48-49% of voters turned out for him in 2004 is beyond me. I must be from another planet.

No doubt the paradox will even be worse in 08.

[Cincinnati_Bob]

PS - He and many of the Democrats, and some other politicians of course are Sociopaths. This stuff simply doesn't register.

A sociopath will simply evaluate what they need to say and do to get what they want. They don't understand the "humanity" behind any situation. They're physically incapable. Textbook sociopath - Psych 101 here.

Many of the others are simply stupid dumbasses, mesmerized by the smell of the carpet in the oval office, or simply ignorant morons who have found their way to DC, thinking they can talk or buy their way out of virtually any situation.

[Ymarsakar]

very nice reference, Alexa.

[Esoterik]

Well folks... things have been getting pretty heated in here over the past couple of days, and I am not going to say that is a bad thing, but... sometimes one just needs to take a breath. It's healthy.

To that end, I recommend viewing Take Me Back To The 60's. Not only is it fun in a nostalgic fashion, but it speaks to certain events of the day.

[USMCINIRAQ]

I can't tell you how motivating it is to know these guys have my back. I'm not a big fan of chess and like it even less playing the role of a pawn. I understand these guys support the troops -at least those of us who didn't do well in school and are now over here -but not the additional troops we say we can use over here (and if any politician visited Iraq -the real iraq...the REST of Iraq (Iraq doesn't begin and end with the Green zone)...they'd be surprised how useful a few more guys could be. (by the way the ratio is backwards...we need the preponderance of troops in Al Anbar not baghdad -that is if we really needed extra troops here). but at least these politicians say they support us...so we'll still get funding, but the poor guys whose grades must've have slipped and are now being sent here won't be funded... I get it now.

[rick554]

From a Viet Vet and the Proud parent of a SOLDIER,
This clown is a traitor, coward AND asshole. Its all good, at least most of us know he's one of THEM. Jawn will never be anything more . God bless our TROOPS and G W BUSH

[jordan]

The shot of Kerry snarling about America sitting next to the ex-Iranian President is right up there with the Hanoi Jane shot with her NVA pals, and the winter soldier one of Kerry before Congress trash talking his fellow soldiers. A gallery of scum, of dishonor, of egotmania disguised as something noble. These pictures will live in infamy.

Kerry is so filled with a spitting rage against Bush and Republicans that he will spend the rest of his days tearing them down and trying to destroy them. That's why he's not running this time -- it leaves him free to say and do whatever he wants, as we have seen. He's turning into a rejected, bitter old man, swatting at windmills, and so is Kennedy.

USMC, if you know anything about Pelosi and Murtha's reception over there, I'd like to hear it. Did Murtha visit any Marine Corps units? I heaerd a little of Pelosi telling soldiers she supported them and were behind them, but didn't talk about the nonbinding resolution of nonsupport for the additional troops. If there are pictures out there of these two w/soldiers, that would be good.

[BloodSpite]

I woke up this morning and it seems to be 1973 all over again

Fonda in an anti-war protest

Kerry back stabbing American troops and citizens to a foreign national

At what point will this madness end?

At the exact same time we start enforcing the law.

[Richard]

Bloodspite,

"At what point will this madness end?"

"At the exact same time we start enforcing the law."

My point exactly! When are we going to start dealing with traitors as they should be? If we don't start doing that in this country, and very soon at that, we are going to continue heading down the path of putting our troops and the rest of us in further peril.

[jordan]

I think one reason why the rabble against the troops fighting this war has gotten this far is because this Administration hasn't done its duty to enforce those laws. They haven't stood up for the military against these idiots. They have enabled these protesters who tear down the military by neglecting to hold them accountable, whether it's Senators conducting their own foreign policy with heads of state to undermine the troops, or newspapers exposing secret national security information. Frankly, that end of things is Bush's fault.

[Ozzman002]

Kerry should be tried for sedition.

[USMCINIRAQ]

Jordan,
I am so far out in the hinterlands of Al Anbar that no one from higher comes to see us...Toby Keith came to a camp nearby to us...just no one of any rank from Higher cares to walk the perimeter. And politicians damn sure don't stray from the green zone. they learn all they need to know from a powerpoint presentation. So I'm the wrong guy to ask. You'll have to ask a pogue or REMF from MNC-I, MNF-I or MNSTC-I...but I'll bet the reception was choreographed, or a few malcontents begged to go. No one where i'm at has anything but disdain for treasonous or seditious politicians

[jordan]

Thanks, USMC. Don't hesitate to ask if you need anything. We are behind you. Alot in the MSM purport to speak for the troops who are actually in the fight. Suddenly, they're all experts. Maybe they need to hear it directly from the source. You guys are awesome.

[monk]

Which is worse?
George W. Bush and Dick Cheney in the White House. You failed to mention that option. Two men who never wore the uniform who now somehow know better than the men who do. If they don't like what the generals tell them, well just get rid of them. (Go read Joseph Heller's Catch 22, if you haven't read it already. Written by a man who wore the uniform in WW II. You can see parralels with Bush's generals) Two men who shirked their responsibilty when it was their time to serve. Two men with documentatd DWI's now steering the "ship of state."
And now we have another vet, Chuck Hagel, who like Kerry, is willing to come forward and speak the truth. Good on ya Chuck.
God help this country.

[gitarcarver]

monk,

Posts like yours just make me feel tired all over.

Besides the obvious factually incorrect statements, you manage to not only dismiss the service of the men and women that serve in all Guard units. You also show a discinct lack of understanding of the Constititution where the military is under civilian direction.

Lincoln never served in the regular military, and yet he not only did not listen to many generals, he replaced them. The same can be said for FDR. Is your criticism directed at Lincoln and FDR as well?

Your lack of historical knowledge and civics is appalling.

[monk]

I refuse to buy revisionist history. My brother served in Vietnam at the time Bush "served" in the TANG. It was widely understood at the time that service in the Guard for some (like the sons of the priveledged and the well connected) was a way of avoiding combat in Vietnam without looking like a draft dodger or traitor. Bush's buddies in the TANG included the son of Texas Senator, Lloyd Benson, as well as a pro football player, among others. Service in the Guard now is a far cry from what it was back then. So I stand corrected. Literally speaking Bush wore a uniform. Did he serve his full committment? That remains a question.
Dick Cheney received five deferments. He never wore the uniform.
I fully understand that the military is under civillian direction. Upon rereading my post I cannot see how you would think I suggested otherwise. In fact, I fully support that arrangement.
Now to the real issue. For you to equate our currnet Commander- in- Chief to Lincoln and FDR boggles the mind. His less than distinguished intellect as evidenced by the catastrophes created in Iraq and in New Orleans, prohibits any reasonable thinking person from including Bush in the same paragraph with Lincoln and FDR. That is unless, one is trying to draw sharp contrast.

[gitarcarver]

I refuse to buy revisionist history.

In other words, you won't let the facts get in the way of your opinion.

Did he serve his full committment? That remains a question.

There is no doubt the Bush served his committment. Once again facts do not agree with your opinions.

For you to equate our currnet Commander- in- Chief to Lincoln and FDR boggles the mind.

So when I apply the same criteria to different presidents to show the fallacy of your argument, it boggles the mind? Sorry, it only shows the fallacy of your position.

His less than distinguished intellect as evidenced by the catastrophes created in Iraq and in New Orleans,

You mean the higher intellect and grade better than Clinton? You mean the intellect that followed the law and the Constitution in New Orleans while the residents and local leaders did nothing?

Your opinion on Bush is noted. It is not supported by any consistant criteria or historical facts, but it is your opinion.

You have the right to be wrong.

[monk]

In other words, you won't let the facts get in the way of your opinion.
Excuse me, but "revisionist history" suggests playing with the facts.

There is no doubt the Bush served his committment. Once again facts do not agree with your opinions.

Not one person has ever stepped forward to attest to Bush's required service in the AL Nat'l Guard after he moved there to work on a campaign.

So when I apply the same criteria to different presidents to show the fallacy of your argument, it boggles the mind? Sorry, it only shows the fallacy of your position.

My arguement is this....While Lincoln and FDR may have chosen to replace generals, they did so with an understanding of the facts and what they were up against. Not only did Bush declare "Mission Accomplished" when that was far from the truth, he has regularly made statements that reveal his appalling lack of understanding of the sectarian animosites that exist in Iraq.
To dismiss a general after careful consideration of the facts is a hell of a lot different from dismissing a general because they don't agree with your obstinate stance which happens to fly in the face of facts.

You mean the higher intellect and grade better than Clinton?

Please understand that I am not a Bill Clinton fan, but I will not let that stand in the way of me accepting the fact that Bush was a C student at Yale and Clinton was a Fullbright Scholar. Bush was admitted to Yale, not because of an accomplished record at Andover, but rather, because he was a "legacy." His father and grandfather had gone to Yale and the family donated lots of money to the university. Legacy, in essence, is affirmative action for unaccomplished rich folk.

You mean the intellect that followed the law and the Constitution in New Orleans while the residents and local leaders did nothing?

Again, I am no fan of "Brownie", however, it is clear from his testimony and that of others on the ground in New Orleans, that decisions about how to respond to the disaster were being motivated by partisan politics. LA was low on the priority list because Mayor Nagin is a Dem as is Sen Mary Landrieu.

[Ymarsakar]

I wonder if fighting ignorance is like the paradoxical question of what came first, the chicken or the egg. Or whether it is in fact simply a psychic experience of notorious proportion.

[Peg C.]

Simply beyond sickening.

"Pariah" is now as much a compliment as "infidel" is. And I'd tell it to that jacka$$'s face.

[ozzman002]

Can't wait for my "American Pariah" shirt to arrive so I can were it in Low-Do @ the DNC...
LOL!!!

[gregdn]

Sedition? I'd like to see the government try to prosecute somebody on the charge of sedition. It would be worth the price of admission.

[tom]

Jordan, maybe Americans are "war weary" from remarks such as

-Iraq will be a slam dunk
-Insurgency is in it's final throes
-bring it on
-mission accomplished
-insurgency is made up of deadenders and criminals

and so on and so on. almost sounds like a bad 70's KTEL record. This was supposed to be over a couple years ago. now there is no end in sight. outstanding.

[ReaganEraGrunt]

Hey Monk

Good job slamming the Air National Guard, that will make you friends. If 2LT George W. Bush was looking for a cushie job that would keep his ass safe, he damn sure didn't do a very good job. Instead of getting a nice desk job, perhaps Public Affairs like Al Gore, he volunteered to fly a F-102. If you check the history of this aircraft you will find it holds the record for killing more pilots than any other high performance A/C in USAF history. So not only did he take considerable risk flying a high performance A/C, he was pretty damn good at it according to his fellow pilots.

Quit recycling Dan Rather's old lies and stop drinking the kool-aid!

CM!

[gitarcarver]

Excuse me, but "revisionist history" suggests playing with the facts.

I see. So an unfounded charge of "revisionist history" which "suggests" playing with fact is your position. I get it now. You have no factual support so you make unfounded charges.

Not one person has ever stepped forward to attest to Bush's required service in the AL Nat'l Guard after he moved there to work on a campaign.

Sorry, but the records indicate he fulfilled his committment and obligation to the ANG. Once again, the facts are aligned against you.

My arguement is this....While Lincoln and FDR may have chosen to replace generals, they did so with an understanding of the facts and what they were up against.

But you based that "understanding" on military service. That was your initial point - that Bush and Cheney can't understand the military because they did not serve in the military. Now not only has your point about Bush not serving been shown to be false, your argument has been shown to be without basis. You throw the "no service" or "chickenhawk" argument as if it will somehow augment the strength of your point. It doesn't. All it does is shows your ignorance and hypocrisy.

By the way, you opinion that "every one new about the National Guard" from the VietNam era still denigrates and demeans the people that served and served well in those units.

Legacy, in essence, is affirmative action for unaccomplished rich folk.

Too bad the actual grades each received at school once again demonstrate the fallacy of your position.

however, it is clear from his testimony and that of others on the ground in New Orleans, that decisions about how to respond to the disaster were being motivated by partisan politics. LA was low on the priority list because Mayor Nagin is a Dem as is Sen Mary Landrieu.

The testimony indicated that while mistakes were made, those mistakes started at the local levels. Citizens who knew the hurricane was coming failed to plan or prepare even in the least sense. The NOLA emergency plan was not followed or implimented until much too late. That is the fault of the local officials. There was also testimony and actually evidence that Nagin and the governor or LA refused to ask for federal assistance because it would make the Bush administration look good. THERE is your politics.

I really hope that someday you can sit down and actually read and learn the difference between facts and your opinions. Yet as I said, you have the right to be wrong. You also have the right to remain ignorant.

[jordan]

You're absolutely right, tom. This should have been over a long time ago, and would have been had our soldiers been allowed to fight and do what was necessary to decisively defeat the enemy. Instead, they were hamstrung and hogtied by restrictions born out of fear among politicians of an impolitic "incident". It's very ironic that the same protesters who brought that concern about are now complaining that it's taking "so long, even longer than WWII". Ask yourselves why, protesters.

You're right on, there's no end in sight as long as we are afraid to do what's necessary to win this war. I would add that the brass, and military leadership, should be leading and reminding the public that the military is protecting their freedom to speak and protest. We've got alot of Generals here in Washington. Anyone of them could maybe stand up for the troops a little bit before this confused and wobbly public.

[monk]

If you read my statement correctly, you will understand that I said I do not buy revsionist history.
It is a fact that the man in charge of approving candidates to the TANG during the Vietnam War, admitted that he allowed George HW Bush's pull to influence his decision re W. He admitted that he disregarded the waitng list and allowed W to jump to the head of the list. There were approximately 100 men ahead of Bush, all with exams scores higher than his. His scores are a matter of public record. He received the lowest possible score allowable for entrance into the Guard.
The records may show that he completed his duty, but the records also show that he stopped flying his missions as required. So we have a contradiction here don't we?
No I am not denigrating those who got into the ANG on their own merits, and who completed their service to the ANG as required. I will however, criticize those who used the ANG as a way to avoid combat in Vietnam (allowing men like my brother to sweat it out in Khe Sanh) and who failed to live up to their commitment. I am able to understand that that there are those who served admirably, and at the same time, there were those who did not. One does not nullify the other. Both are true.
I think you really need to go back and read up on Clinon. He is many things, but a C student is not one of them.
Finally, I read a lot. And I read not only those who support my beliefs, I read those who oppose them as well. Hence my decision to read this site. Perhaps, if you did the same, you too might learn that the world is far from black and white, and most often it is a maddening shade of grey. You seem to have bought Bush's line "you're either for us or against us" hook, line and sinker. Far better to think critically and support those who earn your allegiance.

[gitarcarver]

If you read my statement correctly, you will understand that I said I do not buy revsionist history.

The problem is that your statement that Bush never completed his service is revisionist history. So I guess you do buy "revisionist history."

He received the lowest possible score allowable for entrance into the Guard.

Factually wrong. His scores were low on testing to be a pilot. Nice try though. Once again, you are buying into revisionist history.

The records may show that he completed his duty, but the records also show that he stopped flying his missions as required. So we have a contradiction here don't we?

I see. You believe the records that show that he stopped flying (and he has said that he did) but you don't believe the records that show he complete his service.

There is no contradiction. He asked for, and was granted, a leave from the ANG to work on a campaign. The leave was grnted as there was a surplus of pilots for the aircraft Bush flew. This leave was not uncommon and not becaue of priviledge.

Your own premise is inconsistant, flawed, and at best hypocritical.

No I am not denigrating those who got into the ANG on their own merits, and who completed their service to the ANG as required. I will however, criticize those who used the ANG as a way to avoid combat in Vietnam

Sorry, but that won't work. You said that Bush and Cheney never served in the military. That means that to you, anyone who served in the National Guard has never served. Anything you write or try to backpeddle to say anything differently is "revisionist history."

Far better to think critically and support those who earn your allegiance.

If your posts here are examples of what you perceive as "critical thinking," you haven't read, studied or done anything.

You have, however, continued to exercise your right to remain ignorant and your right to be wrong.

[Ymarsakar]

That isn't critical thinking, monk. That is a critical wound. Didn't you monks learn about those?

Git em, Git em, Git em.

Gita's carving monk up all right.

[monk]

"His scores were low on testing to be a pilot."
Please explain what appears to be a contradiction in your arguement.

The records show that he completed his duty and the records show that he stopped flying missions, which begs the question, how and why did they state he had completed his duty if he stopped flying required missions?

Wrong. He asked for and was granted a leave to attend Harvare Business School.

Now did you research Clinton's academic career? Again, the man was no C student.

[gitarcarver]

The records show that he completed his duty and the records show that he stopped flying missions, which begs the question, how and why did they state he had completed his duty if he stopped flying required missions?

The ignorance you demonstrate is astounding.

George Bush 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 released records, 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.

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.

Got it now?

Wrong. He asked for and was granted a leave to attend Harvare Business School.

You really need to work on researching before you make statements. It is sad to see someone demonstrating such ignorance of the subject at hand. As referenced above, he initially stopped flying to work on a Senatorial campaign. Later he left to attend Harvard.

In both cases the leave and permission to stop flying were approved by his superior officers. Furthermore, in case you were wondering, Bush was a good pilot in a difficult aircraft. I know that doesn't mean anything to you because you think that he and other members of the National Guard never served in the military, but it is important to some of us.

Now you have choice. You can sit there and say that you were wrong or at least say the position that you were arguing was devoid of facts, or you can continue to show the ability to remain ignorant and wrong.

I know which choice I bet you make.

[Subsunk]

.............Now you have choice. You can sit there and say that you were wrong or at least say the position that you were arguing was devoid of facts, or you can continue to show the ability to remain ignorant and wrong.

I know which choice I bet you make.

Posted by: gitarcarver | Jan 28, 2007 7:54:48 PM

The Subsunk award for best Fisking of an idiotic troll goes to.......[drum roll]....... gitarcarver for valorous wrestling with a troll pig and emerging completely unscathed and with shining armor, a feat of intrepidity unmatched in recent memory.

And great snark as well.

Good job, son. I think I'm going to take a little more time to devote to work. The site's comment section is in great hands.

Press on, Men. To Victory.

Subsunk

PS, I'm not leaving, just going to work, guys. Got traveling to do.

[monk]

I want you site references for the information you have posted here and I will follow up with my own reading of same. Without references, your claims are just that ...claims.
By the way, in addtion to my brother who served in Vietnam, I have two other sibs who served in the military and a nephew who served in Iraq. None of them can bring themselves to support this "commander-in-chief."

[Matt M]

Monk,

Do yourself a favor and just shut the hell up! You've been put through an intellectual woodchipper and think you're still intact.

[Rosemary]

Ditto plus.

[gitarcarver]

I want you site references for the information you have posted here and I will follow up with my own reading of same.

Sorry, I am not playing that game. I have seen your dishonesty first hand now and I am not falling for this.

You see, I have debated people like you before. You claim to know everything, but in reality know little. So instead of actually looking for yourself and trying to become more fluent and knowledgable in the subject, you try and put the burden on other people.

When they offer up the proof you want, you will dismiss it as being from "partisan sources" of sources having a bias. Of course, you will in reality be rejecting these sources not on the basis of truth, but rather that their content is contrary to your "reality."

At the same time, you will gobble up any source as being "expertise" and "the truth" simply because it agrees with you.

In other words, I am not playing your game.

You were the one that made the "claim" that Bush never served in the military. Back that up. You were the one that made the claim that Bush stopped flying to attend Harvard. Back that up. You were the one that said that Bush scored low to enter the ANG. Back that claim up.

See, the problem with you and people like you is that you want to apply different standards to others than you yourself are willing to abide by.

You just can't bring yourself to be consistant.

From where I am sitting, I should be the one asking for citations from you. After all, you are the one that made the ridiculous claim that service in the Guard is not military service. You were the one that made the ridiculous claim that not having served in the military somehow precluded the President of the United States and Commander in Chief from removing people in positions.

With each post you have tried to move the goalpost and shift the argument away from the beatdown of facts that you have gotten. Your own posts and words have condemned you as being ignorant, hypocritical and untruthful.

In other words, what you "want" doesn't matter a hill of beans to me. You lost that right of request when you made unsubstantiated, ridiculous claims in your first post. And to be honest with you, you haven't come close to regaining the right in any of your subsequent postings.

By the way, in addtion to my brother who served in Vietnam, I have two other sibs who served in the military and a nephew who served in Iraq. None of them can bring themselves to support this "commander-in-chief."

I thank them for their service and their support of the rights and freedoms of all Americans to agree or disagree with anyone - even the President.

Their disagreement or lack of support doesn't change anything as far as this discussion is concerned, though. By bringing their opionions forward, all you have shown is that you don't have any facts to support your own allegations. It is a nice try at moving the goalposts or even trying to distract from the topic, but it won't work.

We now return you to your "wanting state of ignorance and spurious positions."

[pst314]

"It does not take an historian to see Kerry is a modern Neville Chamberlain."

Respectfully, no. Chamberlain was a patriot. A fool but a patriot, and he learned his lesson. Kerry is more a Petain or a Quisling, and he never learned any lesson worth learning.

[monk]

Excuse me sir, but requesting verification of "facts" when no citations are offered is not game playing. It is an expectation of any debate. Indeed anyone who has written a term paper understands the need for citation.
Now that you have stated that you expect the same of me, I will gladly comply.
"What you want doesn't amount to a hill of beans to me." So certain you are of your positon that nothing else matters. God that sounds an awful lot like our deluded "commander-in-chief." He's right because he's right dam it! And don't anyone question him.

[pst314]

shorter monk: "Calling attention to Kerry's treason? Can't have that! Let's see if I can change the subject...."

[Peg C.]

gitar, where have you been? Your coolheadedness in the face of absurdity is awe-inspiring! You're no carver, you're a Cuisinart. ;-)

Amazing how every single "conversation" with a troll, even in a post about Jon Carry's sedition (I'd give him a firing squad myself but it'd be a waste of fine bullets), devolves into an argument about W's intellect and TANG duty. What is wrong with you idiot lefties?!?!? Is this the best you can do? JEEZ!! In my day, lefties were actually decent debaters (well, when they weren't high, that is). BDS truly rots the brain.

As far as intelligent presidents go, Carter and Clinton supposedly are two of our smartest. They will go down in history as two of the very worst, most traitorous and reprehensible presidents this nation has ever had the misfortune to experience. IQ certainly doesn't guarantee courage, character and leadership, and those two are proof.

[Ymarsakar]

What is wrong with you idiot lefties?!?!? Is this the best you can do? JEEZ!! In my day, lefties were actually decent debaters (well, when they weren't high, that is). BDS truly rots the brain.

It is those hallucinamafucations they recieve with the cradle to grave care.

One moment you think you are talking to an image of Bush, the next everything has shifted. That's why the Left tends to shift subjects from one to another very suddenly without any reason. It is the hallucinogens.

[gitarcarver]

Excuse me sir, but requesting verification of "facts" when no citations are offered is not game playing.

Okay. Then give me give me the citations that you used to make the comments that Bush never served in the military. Give me the citation that supports your contention that not having military service precludes the Commabder in Chief from making changes in military leadership. Please offer a citation that supports your ridiculous contention that Bush got low scores to enter the National Guard.

You started this whole debate with a series of ridiculous claims without substantiation.

Stop being a hypocrite.

It is an expectation of any debate. Indeed anyone who has written a term paper understands the need for citation.

I didn't realize that we were writing a term paper here, but given your style and running away from direct points, I can see that debate is not your strong point.

Now that you have stated that you expect the same of me, I will gladly comply.

"Will gladly comply" indicates compliance in the present or in the future. What you fail to realize is that you made unsubstantiated, un-documented, and non-cited claims in the past. I am just applying the same standard that you used in your arguments from the very beginning.

Yet to show you that I am a bigger person than you, I will offer up proofs and cites with the following conditions:

1) That you and I agree that it is the meat of the verifiable citation and not the location of the source that we will discuss. In other words, I won't discount you simply for citing the Kos if you don't dismiss my cite of say, Fox News.

2) That you adress all of the claims that you have made that I have requested. I have listed them several times and you have yet to address them other than the "I have relatives that served in the military and that makes my opinion right" defense. (Which any reasonable adult would agree is so weak as to not be noticed or deserving of comment.)

Fair enough?

"What you want doesn't amount to a hill of beans to me." So certain you are of your positon that nothing else matters.

I am certain of my position not because of what I believe, but because I have the facts to support my contention.

Frankly, what you want, even in a debate format or on the Jr High term paper that you wrote yesterday doesn't matter to me.

Truth matters.

God that sounds an awful lot like our deluded "commander-in-chief." He's right because he's right dam it! And don't anyone question him.

Ah yes, another refuge of the totally lost - the strawman attack. Have you heard me say anything about questioning the President other than thanking your family members for supporting that right? Have you?

Of course you haven't.

You make the same mistake that people of your ilk do - you believe that because I support the truth, that means I support something without question. Nothing could be further from the truth, but then again, truth isn't high on your list of things to obtain.

Yet there are glimpses of hope for you. You do call upon a supreme being who delights in truth, so maybe He will enlighten you and spur you to find that which has eluded you up until this point.

(Oh, and by the way, do you have a factual citation for saying that the President is "deluded?" Or can we dismiss that as your opinion and not relevant to the discussion?)

[Bogalusan]

monk -

You don't know what you're talking about with regard to New Orleans.

We spent days listening to the radio after Katrina - because we had no power for 2 weeks. I can assure you it was the state and local officials who behaved like boobs, including some of them in Washington Parish - that part, I was a personal witness to. You may not have heard what we did on radio, it was several local New Orleans stations that banded together and broadcast during the emergency.

Our sky was filled with helicopters going south - to pull people off rooftops. That was the feds rescuing folks. The Hammond, La. airport was turned into a military base; I saw that with my own eyes. That was the feds, sir.

While Nagin was stuttering and raving, while the former head of NOPD was spreading lies about what was happening in the Superdome, while Blanco stalled trying to figure out what decision she could make that would glorify her, and that moron Aaron Broussard who was president of Jefferson Parish or something was crying and lying on the air about a nursing home patient, our military was saving lives.

Ya'll probably saw some of it on TV. We didn't, because we didn't have a generator, we just had the radio. There was so much air traffic in and near New Orleans, it was a wonder there weren't any mid-air collisions. We are 50+ miles north, and it was constant chopper traffic over us for days.

G*d bless our military.

Shame on you, monk.

[Trauma Chick]

John Kerry is the finest Massachusetts has to offer, a traitor in the first degree, not to mention being a real moron. But all the ranting about sedition and traitorous behavior here is not going to change the fact that the people of his state loved him enough to elect him. They must have a lot of rose colored glasses in that state. OOOOPs Illinois isn't any better, sorry to ya'll. Barak Hussain should take a few lessons from Hanoi Jonny. What are the chances? Slim to none, yeah I thought so.

[alexa kim]

Danke Ymar. From you, high praise. ;)

[Roger TG]

I would like to comment on Kerry/Bush issue of whether either was fit to lead the country or was Kerry's combat experience make him more palatable as Commander in Chief.

The question is President? Combat or no combat. Some people here remind us daily that Bush is a big draft dodger and he shouldn't be President. Boo hoo.

These same people who carp endlessley about Bush, gush about how Kerry whacked VC grunts with his 13 inch dong.

Naturally this guy should be President because he was such a big war hero and we need a war hero leading us in the war on Terror right.

I'm not crazy about Bush, but I voted for him twice. I'd prefer Teddy Roosvelt or Patton, or even Oliver North, but they weren't on the ballot.

Now most of the people who hyped Kerry and his combat consider two things that are completely unrelated.

Adolf Hitler was a highly decorated WW I vet. He was eventually democratically elected. I don't think you would nominate Hitler would you? I'm not saying that any traumatized Desert Storm vets are unfit for command, all I'm saying is that combat is neither a must nor a disqualifier President.

Now that being said I have a few things on John Kerry I'd like to point out. To quote Oliver North: "There is two things we know about John Kerry; he is either a war criminal or a liar".

Being both a liar and a war criminal are automatic no no's for President.
Besides Kerry had a career in the Senate voting against Military spending. Now after spending his career essentially abolishing America's defense you want to give him the keys to the sports car?

[monk]

My brother suffers from the after effects of agent orange exposure and is now on kidney dialysis. John Kerry fought to provide medical benefits for vets who were exposed to agent orange. It was his legislation.

[gitarcarver]

You know monk, I sat here and debated whether you would even want to trade citations concerning the points I made in relation to the military service of the President. After all, you haven't shown a big propensity for searching out or facts, truth, or supporting citations. Yet I am compelled to admit that your behaviour and attitudes do not determine mine.

First, let me say that a good friend pointed out that while you were saying "Clinton" in your points about intelligence, I was thinking "Kerry." My apologies for my mistake in that. Clinton was or is a smart guy. It goes to show you that being smart doesn't make you wise.

With that said, on to our real discussion:

A summary of the Bush service controversy can be found here:

Bush’s National Guard years and here: Military service

Fact Check has an interesting summary of his service and supporting documentation including one document that I know you want to dismiss - the "Reserve Personnel Record Card" for the period ending May 26, 1973. Notice that in the previous 12 months despite not flying, Bush did in fact accrue the points I said he did.

(end of part one)

[gitarcarver]

(part two)

Fact Check also has this summary of quotes from notoriously anti-Bush papers admitting that the records do indicate that Bush fullfiled his service:

George Magazine reported in October of 2000:

It's time to set the record straight . . . . Bush may have received favorable treatment to get into the Guard, served irregularly after the spring of 1972 and got an expedited discharge, but he did accumulate the days of service required of him for his ultimate honorable discharge.

The New York Times reported Nov. 3, 2000:

But a review of records by The New York Times indicated that some of those concerns (about Bush’s absence) may be unfounded . . . . A review by The Times showed that after a seven-month gap, he appeared for duty in late November 1972 at least through July 1973.

The Washington Post also reviewed records and concluded:

It is safe to say that Bush did very light duty in his last two years in the Guard and that his superiors made it easy for him.

The Department of Defense has the documents released under the Freedom of Information Act for Bush's service in Texas. FindLaw has the pay documents released by the same FOIA request showing the Military Pay Records for President Bush during his service in Alabama (which you say didn't happen.)

(end of part two)

[gitarcarver]

(third and final part)

In fact, even though you made the unsubstantiated and undocumented claim that Not one person has ever stepped forward to attest to Bush's required service in the AL Nat'l Guard after he moved there to work on a campaign, there is this article from CNN that contradicts you directly:

On Friday, a retired officer with the Alabama Air National Guard told CNN that he witnessed Bush serving his weekend duty in 1972 -- an account that could be significant given the persistent Democratic questions.

Speaking Friday from Daytona Beach, Florida, John B. "Bill" Calhoun said he commanded Bush and that Bush attended four to six weekend drills at Dannelly Field in Montgomery. He said Bush was with the 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group in Alabama in 1972.

As for Bush's "lack of intelligence,": The records also indicate that Bush made good grades, scoring an 88 on total airmanship and earning perfect 100s for flying without navigational instruments, operating a T-38 System and studying applied aerodynamics. Other scores ranged from 89 in flight planning to 98 in aviation physiology.

Once again you are faced with a choice of learning and embracing the truth, even though it is painful and against your preconceived notions or you can continue to live in denial and ignorance.

I know what choice I am betting on. And to be honest with you, my bets on your choices in this discussion have been perfect.

(NOTE: Sorry for the multiple posts. It seems that typepad doesn't like posts with lots of links in them and views the post as spam. That is totally understandable, but it meant breaking down one long post into three parts.)

[monk]

And to those who knee-jerk respond to folks who hold an opposing view by dismissing them with the old stand by "you must be a lefty", I will make a suggestion. Why not listen to Jim Webb, who because of his admirable career in the military, is able to recognize a chump when he sees one...George W. Or how about listening to Colin Powell who has stated that he will forever regret his testimony before the UN in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq. Testimony he considers to be an irrevocable stain on his career. (Taught him to trust George W.) And now we have Chuck Hagel, another vet, who understands that loyalty to country and the constitution can sometimes require you to stand up against the commander-in-chief. I ask you, are these men "lefties" too?
I have also been accused here of taking hallucinogens. Another fine ad hominem attack. So let me ask this, do you unquestioningly accept the arguments of Rush Limbaugh, an admitted, conviceted narcotics user?

[alexa kim]

monk, you can maybe redeem yourself here by ceding the win to Gitarcarver. Supply the cites. Absent substance, I cannot take your posts seriously. Gitarcarver, well done.

+++

(Ymar, wow, dude, that's... harsh... you know, like, "Dave's not here" hideous... hallucinamafucations... yeah... what?... I said that right, get off my... where's the chips?)

+++

Bogalusan, thank you for posting your personal experience. I deeply regret that so many suffered such a horrible catastrophe without anyone in charge seemingly having any idea how to start helping you. That is until the Army showed up. Lieutenant General Russell Honore kicked butt, thank G*d. (Please explain to me why Ray Nagin was re-elected? Let's answer that another day, I don't mean to off-track this thread.)

+++

President Bush delegates, like any good leader of any good organzation should. He trusts his people to deliver. Sometimes they can, sometimes they can't. He tends to remain loyal, often to a fault. He is easy to demonize by those who simply hate him. Objectify him and he's easy to abuse and blame for everything bad, ever.

Frankly, so what if he said "bring it on." I wish he had said it even louder and then let My Soldiers loose. If he had, the war would have been over long ago, with many fewer lost American lives. It would not, however, have been nearly as "kind" and "gentle" as this has been, relatively speaking. It would have compressed the violence of the past 4 years into a smaller period, with more Iraqi civilians collaterally hurt. However, many more Iraqis would still be alive. Far more bad guys would be dirt napped out of car bomb duty. But no, we decided we wanted My Soldiers to be "nice." And the brief aberration that was Abu Ghraib would not have had a chance to happen.

Did President Clinton serve in the military? Not that that matters, right?

[monk]

Thank you for your citations. I will review them and will post my own tomorrow. It is now 2:00 AM here.

[alexa kim]

Jim Webb, a man incapable of accepting in the spirit offered a gracious inquiry into the well-being of his son, made by President Bush, choosing to behave disrespectfully of the Office of the President, which treatment he would have found offensive were he in the Office. Notwithstanding, I found his piece, written about 10 years ago, to be of interest.

Read it here:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26631

I can only watch and see if Webb demonstrates that he remembers it.

[Michael in MI]

"So let me ask this, do you unquestioningly accept the arguments of Rush Limbaugh, an admitted, conviceted narcotics user?"

What does this have to do with Mr. Limbaugh's discussion of politics? Do you even know what is Oxycotin? I have a friend who is a military veteran who became hooked on it when suffering and recovering from injuries sustained during her deployment. Is she now not credible in any opinion she may have, because of her past addiction?

Please, debate the issues that Rush debates, instead of ad hominem attacks on the person.

[Michael in MI]

Ya know, alexa, we should listen to Jim Webb. He suggested we threaten our enemies with nuclear war in order to end the war effort in Iraq (and presumably stave off war with Iran).

[David]

Monk, let's be clear. I believe you are a liar. No, and, ifs, or buts. I don't believe you have a brother that is a victim of agent orange. I believe you are a victim of agent stupid and ignorance. All you have is a list of ignorant and thoughtless bullet points that you, as a useful idiot, are crapping here.

[Eric Jette , SantaFe , USA]

Dear Mr. Burden,

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know all that much about Senate procedure, but there comes a point where freedom of speech and "siding with the enemy" give way to actionable cause for sanction by the Senate and removal from public office.

Let us then, as honorable folk, invest our anger in public petition to do just that in John Kerry's case, as the man has crossed a point of no return.

Something on the order of:

To: The Honorable Richard Cheney,President of the United States Senate

Comes now the undersigned individual citizens of the United States, wishing the following be considered by for sponsorship to be read aloud for the record, and entered as Congressional testimony, state the following:

We the people signatory to this petition to Congress, loyal to the principals on which this nation was founded upon, many of whom have given oath "to defend against all enemies" of the union, and risk life and limb to safeguard the citizens of this great nation in a time of war, wish to express our great concern that any member of this body would be willfully ingnorant of the fact, as stated by law, that "giving sucor and sustanance to the enemy" is a treasonous act, and actionable thereby.

It is our firm belief that to refer to America as an "International Pariah" (qualifying this as "sort of a.." notwithstanding) as Sen. John Kerry has done, may be considered as freedom of speech in its own right; but placed in the context and in the presence of the former president of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mr. Khatami, represents circumstance worthy of sanction by his fellow members of the Senate.

Recalling: The Islamic Republic of Iran has been declared an official state sponsor of terrorism by the US Dept. of State. prior to and continuing through Mr. Khatami's presidency of that nation.

Recalling: Kidnapping and terrorist acts resulting in the deaths of American citizens.

Recalling: Sanctions placed upon the Islamic Republic of Iran by the United States, and the international community.

Recalling: That no formal diplomatic relations exist with the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Recalling: Ongoing investigation into the Iranian government's terrorist activities in a war zone today in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Where as: The Islamic Republic of Iran has declared the United States an "International Pariah" in the recent past by it's current leadership.

Where as: Giving aid and comfort to a self declared enemy of the United States, intellectually or otherwise, may be considered a treasonous act under US law.

Where as: A member of Congress is beholden to his oath of office.

We the undersigned hereby petition the United States Senate to conduct a full investigation into these matters, and act upon its findings in accordance with procedure, as the Senate and the laws of this nation allow.

Sincerely,

( Myself, tens of thousands of US troops in the field, and thousands of US citizens of Iranian origin, as a rough estimate.)

Where there's a will, there's a way.

[bthun]

Gitarcarver,

That was a thorough stomp! Having to yet again debunk the Bush did not serve meme lo these many years hence is astonishing. I’m surprised that poor monk did not revert to the tried and tested Tommy Smothers pre-concession ‘Oh, Oh, OH YEAH?! Well mom always liked you best.’™ debate tactic used so often by the latter day loyal opposition when overwhelmed by fact.

One other little point monk, almost every male in my family going back three generations (WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and OIF) has served in this nation’s military… so what? In spite of my and my forbearers’ service I might be an ignorant fool… Past performance does not guarantee future results.

I'm glad all you folks are willing to devote the time and energy to try to educate the mass of strong willed and ignorant who do not pick up on the fact that repeating a lie does not work in the age of information, so digging deep to verify before you fire off your mouth is not only a wise move for your own sake, but also a public service… ya know, For the Children©.

As for myself, I have to be in the rare mood and have the time available plus be willing to fact check (memory ain't what it used to be) not to mention be willing to invest time in trying (usually in vain) to bring the unwashed to the light. Quite often, I'd rather just invite them to go with me on a dove hunt. Doesn’t hurt to ask. ;-}

Peg C. you're absolutely spot on, at least in the 60's and 70's the left could offer an engagingly intelligent and well constructed debate to support their position, even if it was opposed to all things that I hold dear. True that the discussion/debate could often be interrupted by moments of distraction whist they searched for their roach-clip, followed by another variable period of time to once again seize that train of thought, but their argument was on the whole much better than the quality of debate that they offer today. And don’t that say a lot?

[Rita]

John Kerry, still an Ass Clown as always. Can someone please get his ass out of office? That no good Frankenstein POS. He cannot even offer anything constructive but showing how much of a true ass he really has become.

[bthun]

News Flash on the editors floor at the AP:
Monsieur Kerry announced that he will release his military records... when Sandy Berger can locate them in his bvd's.

[gitarcarver]

This statement of yours caught my eye:

So let me ask this, do you unquestioningly accept the arguments of Rush Limbaugh, an admitted, conviceted (sic) narcotics user?

Something about that statement seemed wrong to me. I knew that you would never make a spurious attack on someone or say something about them without proof (all evidence to the contrary). After all, I am sure that you would have sources to back up your attacks, right?

So I am now requestiong your citation for saying that Limbaugh was a "convicted narcotics user."

CNN, CBS, The Washington Post, and many others state that Limbaugh was not conviceted and if he completes the terms of an agreement with the prosecutor's office, the charge against him will be dropped.

In case you can't follow with this means, the bottom line is that contrary to your statement and attack, Limbaugh was not "convicted."

I guess I should take back my original premise that you would never post anything that wasn't true after our conversation on citations, eh?

[jeb]

I understand your rules. When you don't like what someone has to say, you baselessly label them a "leftie" and drug user. Then you block them from accessing the site to resond to the attacks and you label that a "thorough stomp" Well like the insurgents after Bush decalre "Mission Accomplished" I am back to share a revealing article about Bush's TANG service. Perhaps after reading it, you will understand why Jim Webb determined that Bush wasn't deserving of a response.

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/09/02/allison/index.html

Oh and by the way, in fact I do know about oxyconin. I work with cancer patients. And it is because of low life like Limabaugh we have to deal with all kinds of red tape to ensure that patients who really need it can get it. Thanks for that Rush.

[jemcelina]

How does one who is so obviously against the US become one of its Senators? I'm not always happy with the things that happen here, but you can damn sure bet I wouldn't say that to anyone outside our borders.

[bthun]

Was monk blocked from the site? That would be unusual. Matt rarely blocks anyone.

I was looking forward to a response to gitarcarver with links aplenty to support monks charges.

As far as thoroughly stomped... I calls em as I sees em. My opinion.

[gitarcarver]

Well, I read your cited article jeb, and it was no surprise to me that it has not logical connection to the subject at hand, or Bush's service in the ANG.

In fact, the only mention of his service in the ANG comes when Linda Allison disputes that Bush transfered to the Alabama Air National Guard to work on a political campaign. Later on she relates her memory of his conduct during and after that campaign. This lends credance to the Bush story, and does not reflect well on Salon's "reporting."

Furthermore, it should be noted that the article charges that found no credible witnesses to the service in the Alabama National Guard that Bush maintains he performed, despite a lack of documentary evidence."

The article, written in 2004, has now been disproven with the actual pay documents, performance reports, and personnal records of Bush while in Alabama.

Even so, the article tries, and you apparently buy into it, condemning Bush for a dispute between families and then somehow making the illogical leap between this supposed family feud and Bush's service in the ANG. You then make the even more ridiculous jump from the article to somehow applauding Webb's rude behaviour when the President was being polite. (After all, I am sure that when Bush talked to Webb, Webb thought "I remember that Salon article describing a feud between the Bushs and the Allisons. I can be rude because of that!")

Yeah..... .right.

The Bush's have disputed Linda Allison's recollections of these events and the fact that Jimmy Allison was invited to and stayed with the Bush's late in his life lends credability to the Bush recollection, rather than Linda Allison's,

I suggest that you actually read times, dates, and suporting documentation before you believe articles that have since been disproven and have an obvious bias.

[Blackfive]

bthun - monk has not been banned.

[alexa kim]

Michael in MI: Ya know, alexa, we should listen to Jim Webb. He suggested we threaten our enemies with nuclear war in order to end the war effort in Iraq (and presumably stave off war with Iran).

You could be right. Just finished reading it and if Webb did remember what Eisenhower did when refering to it in the Democrat Response, then I'd be delighted to hear them say so, out loud, citing the historical precedent. Until then, I'll listen when they say something worth hearing. Had Webb behaved more maturely in the exchange with the President, I wouldn't have a prejudice against him. That is one of the consequences of behaving like, well, a jerk. He can overcome it, but he'll have to work extra hard to win me back.

Eric Jette: I have my pen ready to sign.

[Mike]

B5,

Sorry, I'm going to have to disagree with you: Jean Francios Kerry is exactly that, a traitor. However, he is also a very big asshole, so you were partially correct. He was a traitor many years ago, when he met with the enemy in Paris while still a member of the USNR to conduct "talks". He is still pissing on the troops, as he did back then, yet he still gets elected to office by the same people that keep Teddy in office, which means that a majority of the people in Mass. don't have a problem with traitors and murderers.

[jeb]

Just tried again... despite what black five says access is blocked.
By the way guitarcarver, after I was blocked from this site, I attepted to reach you through your link and that email was blocked too. Don't accuse me of not trying to counter your arguements.
None are so blind as those who refuse to see.
So I will now turn my attention once again to the Libby trial. Ari Fleisher got immunity and just fingered Libby. Libby's lawyer has subpeonad Rove and all the rats are now turning on each other.

[bthun]

"bthun - monk has not been banned."

I did not think so Matt, you are too much of a gentleman(as per the definition of your friend ;-} ) plus it's mighty entertaining.

[bthun]

jeb,

If both Blackfive.net and gitarcarver's email are blocked, you might be encountering a firewall issue or something related... That does not mean that Matt blocked your access.

[jeb]

BS boys. I keep getting the same message that I am being screened out as spam. Nice try.

[bthun]

OMG there's a spam filter on the grassy knoll!

[bthun]

"I keep getting the same message that I am being screened out as spam."

All seriousness aside... Spam filtering is automagic based on sets of rules. I've run afoul of the spam-filters here in the past. When I did, I sent Matt a courteous email message asking what/why/how and he helped me understand what in my attempts to post were tripping the filters.

I did not assume that I'd been blocked nor did I accuse him of blocking me for a difference of opinion.

I would bet that he would do the same for you too jeb, monk or whatever.

[Blackfive]

jeb/monk - no one is banning you. If we banned for stupidity, sure, you'd be on the list.

BTW, many words in the spam filter are related to either porn or drugs (like oxy). If you think that I'm banning you, send me a email with your comment and I'll try to see what words are keeping you out.

There. I just wasted five minutes explaining to a troll how I haven't banned him and how to get around my spam filter. WTF?

[Ymarsakar]

I was screened out as spam one time. I emailed Matt O'Blackfive about it, and he told me what the problem was. I fixed the problem, and I was through.

Course, I'm not a whiner, maybe that had something to do with it. And I could also figure things out on my own without having to be lead step by step through it like some 6 year old.

Take your bs, jeb, and use it to augment your front lobes. You need it.

[Ymarsakar]

There. I just wasted five minutes explaining to a troll how I haven't banned him and how to get around my spam filter. WTF?

Posted by: Blackfive | Jan 29, 2007 3:40:33 PM

Too bad you didn't wait a minute ; )

[bthun]

"There. I just wasted five minutes explaining to a troll how I haven't banned him and how to get around my spam filter. WTF?"

Aye Matt,as I said above... a gentleman ye are.

[gitarcarver]

Just tried again... despite what black five says access is blocked.

Do you have ANY idea how idiotic it is to say that you have been blocked from posting on a site..... by posting on the site?

B5 says he didn't ban you. If he really wanted to ban you he would have banned you totally and not allowed you to use the IP that you are posting from here. Instead, his statement is backed by the fact that you are posting.

By the way guitarcarver, after I was blocked from this site, I attepted to reach you through your link and that email was blocked too.

By the way, jeb, you don't know what you are talking about. I have not blocked you or anyone other than smapbots from my email address. Anyone with basic computer skills and average intelligence can reach me.

Don't accuse me of not trying to counter your arguements.

It is not an accusation that would need to be made. Your own actions, or lack of actions, have shown that you did not counter the arguments. In fact, you made one feeble attempt with the above cited Salon article that as I pointed out, was not on point, and also has been shown to be false by impartial DOD documents.

None are so blind as those who refuse to see.

Please don't talk to yourself while typing. Sometimes what you say to yourself accidently appears on your post.

So I will now turn my attention once again to the Libby trial.

(with apologies to Monty Python...)

SINGERS: Brave Sir Robin MONK ran away.

ROBIN MONK: I didn't.

SINGERS: Bravely ran away, away.

ROBIN MONK: No, no, no.

SINGERS: When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled
Yes, Brave Sir Robin MONK turned about
And gallantly he chickened out
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat
Bravest of the brave Sir Robin Monk
Petrified of being dead
Soiled his pants then brave Sir Robin Monk
Turned away and fled.

[jeb]

Have you considered the possibility that I might be posting from someone else's computer?

[jeb]

Well at least we can agree on Monty Python. You might consider renaming the site Black Night. He's the one who got nailed to a tree.
Hey by the way did you hear the Bush interview this morning with Juan Williams when he said "Cheney is a half glass full kinda guy?" Too bad his parents didn't seek diagnostic testing for that learning disorder when it could have done some good.
guitarcarver, I am still willing to supply those citations.

[gitarcarver]

BS boys. I keep getting the same message that I am being screened out as spam. Nice try.

This just goes to show that you can't read. My last post on Jan 29, 2007 12:34:21 AM specifically states:

(NOTE: Sorry for the multiple posts. It seems that typepad doesn't like posts with lots of links in them and views the post as spam. That is totally understandable, but it meant breaking down one long post into three parts.)

What were you saying earlier about being blind and not seeing?

[bthun]

"Have you considered the possibility that I might be posting from someone else's computer?"

Why yes, which is why (before you mentioned spam) I offered the possibility of a firewall issue.

[bthun]

"Hey by the way did you hear the Bush interview this morning with Juan Williams when he said "Cheney is a half glass full kinda guy?" Too bad his parents didn't seek diagnostic testing for that learning disorder when it could have done some good."

BTW, Glass half full is a term generally used to denote one who is optimistic, not learning disabled, word sequence not withstanding.

what a pain in the ass.

being blocked as spam is not the same thing as being blocked/banned. I would show you the difference but then you'll accuse me of trying to stifle your superior intellect and wit.