Any Way You Cut It, Kerry's A Jerk!
127 RepliesJump to last post
[quote=BondGuy][quote=mikebutler222]
It's not really surprising that a thread about Kerry's foot-in-mouth issues gets twisted into how Bush has lost Afghanistan and Iraq, is it? Some form of knee-jerk Kerry defense, even if it’s just changing the subject to Bush, has to appear.
You guys feel free to continue, I have no interest in debating how we've "lost" with people that couldn't ID a Colonel from a Corporal, don’t have a shred of historic perspective of the hurdles confronted in every war in the history of mankind and allow a political desire to be "right" to cause them to speak nothing but doom and gloom with extraordinary certainty.
[/quote]
Talk about cut and run. Mike at least be honest. The people you're not interested in debating is only one person, me. [/quote]
No, it's at least you and dude. The entire "we've lost" yadda yadda yadda thing is pointless.
As soon as I start in on Iraq you start with the labels. I'm a defeatist. I have a political agenda.
You do, as this post of your points out so clearly.
And now my lack of military duty disqualifies me from any standing in a public forum.
I didn't say that. I did not "disqualify" you from any standing. In fact, in other posts, I've defended the right of people who haven't served to speak.
I simply ask what qualifies you to speak with such authority on a subject on which you have zero background. If I were to endlessly and in strong term pontificate about some complicated subject, something you did have a background in, wouldn't you ask how I come to such authority?
Which I've got to wonder how you square that with Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Rice.
I don't need to. I realize that they, unlike you, can get direct input from commanders on the ground. I also know from my own personal experience and from what I hear from friends there on the ground that what I'm hearing from the people you mentioned rings true.
Mike, the midterm elections are about one Issue, Iraq.
That's ridiculous. That's clearly what the Democrats would like to be about, and it may sway some voters, but the outcome next Tuesday means nothing about US policy going forward in Iraq, UNLESS some Democrats (should they take the House) have a complete mental breakdown and move to defund the war. Bush isn't on the ballot, he'll be the CinC no matter what.
It's also a referendum on the abuse of power that has taken place over the last six ears.
Blah blah blah... give me the whole "shredding the Constitution speech some other time...
...it's a victory for the american people. They've taken the first step for getting their government back.
Oh spare me. So that's what it means if the Democrats take the House? What does it mean if they don't? What if the GOP holds the Senate? What does that mean?
The whole "getting their government back" thing is such a self-serving Democrat BS line. If they lose, the "people" have lost their government, as if it wasn't the "people" that decided the Democrats weren't worthy to begin with. Democrats need to learn that the "people" cast the votes, whether they (Democrats) win or lose.
Not serving is a regret. However, I apologize to no one for my decision.
No one asked you to.
...it's a victory for the american people. They've taken the first step for getting their government back.
As a financial advisor I would think that you would be afraid...very afraid... for your client's portfolios and your own career if the Democrats get in and have their way with the economy, not to mention the disaster that will most likely befall us if we leave Iraq in the same fashion as we abandoned the people of South East Asia.
Can we all say Cambodia?
Try to think like a logical analytical financial professional instead with your partisan emotions.
They say they want to jump start our economy. Too bad they don't understand anything about economics, our economy is doing very very well. If it ain't broke don't fix it!!! They want to roll back the capital gains breaks that have greatly benefited my clients and the economy as a whole. The want to apply the FICA/FUTA tax on incomes over 94,200. I don't know about where you live you but in California anyone making 94,200 is just barely squeaking by. They want to reinstate the lower Uniform Credit levels which would cause practically ALL of my clients to be in high estate tax brackets.
What do you think will happen to the stock market when they re institute the punitive capital gains taxes that depressed businesses in the past? What do your small business clients plan to do when the minimum wage is raised to a level that they can't afford to keep all their employees. Ask them what they will do when mandatory health care paid for, for full time employees is made into law. Ask you clients if they would sell those investments with large capital gains if it were to be taxed at their highest marginal interest rate instead of the current 15%. How many of your business clients would adjust their incomes and stop producing when they reached an overall over 50% tax bracket? (State, Federal, Self Employment Tax, FICA, FUTA, City and Local Taxes).
They are going to put us into a recession by squashing small businesses. People on welfare don't create jobs but expect to see a rise in the unemployed and people who need public assistance if the Democrats get to control the economy with all of their feel good policies.
All the Democrats have are sound bites to pander to the uninformed and cater to those who want class warfare for their own ends. They don't really care about the economy, the military or the American people's best interests. Don't fool yourself. All they want is to be back in power.
God help us all if they succeed.
And Kerry is still an incredible dickhead
Mike,
On the withdrawl date certain response you had...come on...it's exactly my point. I didn't use that as an example, what I am saying is the ideas brought up may include milestones that are actually measureable that can lead to a withdrawl. You also mention the Baker commission - leaks being what the are aside, what's your response when Baker comes back with that as an alternative to examine? It's going to be in there and will Tony Snow respond with "It's a non-starter"?
Look, I am not taking sides on this argument my point is you can sit there and be intellectually honest with the idea that the right to include the administration are open and willing to work while the left are just out to destroy him/us/whoever. I agree most are self serving and are hell bent on doing that, but I also see the right as just flat blind to reality.
Thanks for your time..
Mike,
On the withdrawl date certain response you had...come on...it's exactly my point.
What's your point? That a date certain proposal, one that would allow the terrorists to mark a date on their calender afterwhich US forces would be gone, was rejected out of hand? My point is it should have been rejected out of hand. It's a terrible idea. I can't see how you fault anyone for rejecting it. It says we're leaving based on a DATE, not conditions on the ground. What sort of plan for victory is that? What does it say to the enemy?
I didn't use that as an example, what I am saying is the ideas brought up may include milestones that are actually measureable that can lead to a withdrawl.
That much is BEING done, as I pointed out. It's gotten considerable press play.
You also mention the Baker commission - leaks being what the are aside, what's your response when Baker comes back with that as an alternative to examine? It's going to be in there and will Tony Snow respond with "It's a non-starter"?
It's pretty hard to see your point here. Bush should be getting credit from you for appointing a bi-partisan commission, instead he's getting bashed for what he might reject, before it's ever proposed. Snow's already said they'd consider anything the commission brings to them.
Look, I am not taking sides on this argument my point is you can sit there and be intellectually honest with the idea that the right to include the administration are open and willing to work while the left are just out to destroy him/us/whoever.
Really, I think you're so intent on spreading the wealth of blame that you're trying to tag the administration for something it isn't guilty of. Thus far, everything I've heard rejected as a "non-starter" deserved that response. The bi-partisan commission's very creation seems to me undermines your "they won't listen" claims.
[quote=joedabrkr] [quote=csmelnix]
MikeB - you and I along with Dude had a very long and dragged out debate several months back on the Iraq war and I agree it's no use to debate and carry on our own expert analysis again.
As blind as we are on the side that feels the war in Iraq has been mishandled and improperly planned and executed are - equally those who defend the war in it's execution as well. You and I know that Murphy enters the equation early and often; I believe what separates a good leader from bad is how one adapts and overcomes what Murphy throws. Many things involved with this war, certainly as I see it, have been bungled because of stubborness and arrogance but not for lack of desire and at the end of the day, not for lack of belief in the "mission" at hand.
Unfortunately, regardless of what side we sit, are nation and politicians have become so stinking polarized that neither side can work together for the betterment of our nation and to see this mission through. And as a result, those wearing the uniform are once again the pawns of the process who are suffering the results and are caught in the middle of our nation's arguments. To me, this is most disheartening, as I believe, regardless of level of education, those who sign their name, raise their right hand, put on the uniform and stand their post are the best of what our nation has to offer - better than anybody else who has never served for what ever their reasons. And it is simply unfortunate that politicians on both sides can not do them justice when they need it most; while at war.
As citizens, our best course of action may be not to take our own podiums to debate to no avail our own beliefs, but to start demanding our politicians do their damn jobs and start working together to solve this or we need to throw ALL OF THEM out on their arses!
[/quote]
I completely agree, especially with the last paragraph.
I also happen to think that Mike is correct, that the libs are so vehement in their blind hatred of GW that they are going to oppose ANYTHING he plans in Iraq, regardless of its merits. As you said, sadly the members of our armed forces end up in the middle.
[/quote]
I'll third the motion put forth in the last paragraph. Exactly the problem.
"Thank God we're not getting all the government we're paying for" Will Rogers
How about this:
In your town is a shopping center. It's not the mall, and it's well past it's prime. Yet, it's fully occupied, a good neighbor, and on time with it's taxes. But there is a black cloud over its future. The local political boss has a new dream. He wants to own a minor league hockey team. Problem is, to get into the league he needs an arena. No problem, he'll get the local improvement authority, all his party, all members placed by politicians in his debt, to exercise eminent domain on some unlucky property owner of his choosing. He choses the shopping center. The center fights, but looses. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money gets funneled to party lawyers to bring the fight. The boss, through the IA starts evicting tenants from the center. Peoples livelihoods are destroyed. The IA brings in equipment and levels the buildings. Then in a turn around, after millions of dollars have been spent, after peoples lives have been disrupted, the boss changes his mind and decides he doesn't want to be a hockey team owner afterall. All the reasoning to build an arena is spun into how it wouldn't serve taxpayers. Residents are left with a multi million dollar hole in the ground, a huge tax bill, and no place to shop.
That's what can happen when one party has too much control. This boss owned everyone in a position to stop him from the local counci ,and county freeholders to the state senators. All one party. All in debt to him. If one party in control doesn't work on a local level, there is no way it will work on national level.
If anyone wants to google this, the boss is George Norcross, the county is Camden County NJ. This is the least of the problems here.
Electing the dems won't change a thing unless they grow a set and start acting as our government leaders should. They need to be a check on the executive branch, not a rubber stamp. If need be, they should be obstructionist. Hopefully, they won't have to be. Compromise can be found and maybe we'll get the government we're paying for.
To avoid feeling totally shallow (posting about some new TV show) I am going to say I can’t think of anyone in my circle (Rep. or Dem.) that doesn’t want our troops home. If voters take those sentiments with them into the polls, then I feel the Republican’s chances are slim next Tuesday.
The Dems smell blood and have called out both Kerry and Clinton to do the heavy work. Kerry, as always, continues to be a jack-ass.
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS.
[quote=babbling looney]
...it's a victory for the american people. They've taken the first step for getting their government back.
As a financial advisor I would think that you would be afraid...very afraid... for your client's portfolios and your own career if the Democrats get in and have their way with the economy, not to mention the disaster that will most likely befall us if we leave Iraq in the same fashion as we abandoned the people of South East Asia.
Can we all say Cambodia?
Try to think like a logical analytical financial professional instead with your partisan emotions.
They say they want to jump start our economy. Too bad they don't understand anything about economics, our economy is doing very very well. If it ain't broke don't fix it!!! They want to roll back the capital gains breaks that have greatly benefited my clients and the economy as a whole. The want to apply the FICA/FUTA tax on incomes over 94,200. I don't know about where you live you but in California anyone making 94,200 is just barely squeaking by. They want to reinstate the lower Uniform Credit levels which would cause practically ALL of my clients to be in high estate tax brackets.
What do you think will happen to the stock market when they re institute the punitive capital gains taxes that depressed businesses in the past? What do your small business clients plan to do when the minimum wage is raised to a level that they can't afford to keep all their employees. Ask them what they will do when mandatory health care paid for, for full time employees is made into law. Ask you clients if they would sell those investments with large capital gains if it were to be taxed at their highest marginal interest rate instead of the current 15%. How many of your business clients would adjust their incomes and stop producing when they reached an overall over 50% tax bracket? (State, Federal, Self Employment Tax, FICA, FUTA, City and Local Taxes).
They are going to put us into a recession by squashing small businesses. People on welfare don't create jobs but expect to see a rise in the unemployed and people who need public assistance if the Democrats get to control the economy with all of their feel good policies.
All the Democrats have are sound bites to pander to the uninformed and cater to those who want class warfare for their own ends. They don't really care about the economy, the military or the American people's best interests. Don't fool yourself. All they want is to be back in power.
God help us all if they succeed.
And Kerry is still an incredible dickhead
[/quote]
LOL on your name for Kerry. I think you've framed him perfectly. Still, I don't dislike the guy. He exemplifies whats wrong with the dems. He's spineless in the face of controversy. Yet, he's not a spineless guy. We need people to stand up for what they believe,whether we agree or not, and not back down when their career security flashes before their eyes. To many politicians from both sides of the aile have relinquished control. Not just the dems, but the republicans too. Look at this government, spending out of control, does that look republican to you?
I don't share your fear of the dems.
As for Cambodia, not our fight. I'm not justifying it, just saying. Similarly, what about Rwanda, or Dufar? Not good, but not our fight.
All I ask for is honesty from the government. If someone makes a mistake, sac-up and admit that you made a mistake and how it can be resolved.
The population looks at politicians as dishonest monsters for creating problems whether they be fiscal, social, etc., when all they want is someone to explain to them (truthfully) why something was done the way it was. We all know that politicians have some type of agenda or, at least, something they're passionate about achieving (whether it's self-serving or not).
If someone wants to pass a law reforming the welfare system, tell me that it's because you're sick and tired of the lazy people that are on welfare and use it as a way to stay out of the workforce - don't dance around it.
I have a 'D' on my registration card and voted for Bush because the alternative sucked. I don't like John Kerry for the same reason I don't like many politicians - they can be pompous jackasses that are too high and mighty to admit fault.
Is it me, or does anyone else vote for the candidate that will screw things up the least?
[quote=BondGuy]
I think you've framed him perfectly. Still, I don't dislike the guy. He exemplifies whats wrong with the dems. [/quote]
Funny, that's one of the very reasons I do dislike the guy.
[quote=BrokerRecruit]
Is it me, or does anyone else vote for the candidate that will screw things up the least?
[/quote]
The lesser evil. A popular excuse not to vote. Not voting imbeds the ruling party. Things get worse. More voters give up. Those in power are not unhappy with this. Turnout for the midterms next week is estimated today to be about 38%.
And yes, I vote for the lesser evil. All votes are a compromise. No one candidate embodies everything we want. I try to stay focused on the big picture and not let wedge issues affect my vote. Wedge issues are a popular way of getting people to vote against their best interests. For example using gay marriage, a hot button issue, to get people to vote for a politician who will raise their taxes.
My hope for 08 is that both sides will put up viable candidates that give us a clear choice. That would be a nice change.
[quote=Incredible Hulk] [quote=Incredible Hulk] [quote=StarsAndStripes] [quote=dude]
I'm in the Navy Seals and the Special Forces.
Sometimes I moonlight as a Force Recon agent, when I'm bored.
Oh, did I mention that I'm also a Ninja in the Foot Clan too?
[/quote]
This is funny how?
[/quote]
I haven't read the rest of this thread, but I busted a gut when I read it.
I have not military service, but brother, dad, 2 uncles and a grandfather have served or are still serving.[/quote]
So I just finished the thread and I laughed out loud again when I read it.
[/quote]
Glad it made you laugh. I guess StarsAndStripes takes his X-ray vision very seriously.
I thought the Foot Clan reference was priceless. Nothing like an obscure early 90's barb to get one laughing.
Wow, a crush on a comic book girl...not too flattering.
I guess his collection is probably worthless by now then eh?
Maybe Kerry's right after all.
Well, actually, what I was trying to say is that it would be congruent for folks in the military to fall in love with fantasy characters since they are generally of lower intelligence than most.
Well, no, that's not right...what I meant to say was that I fully support enlisted individuals rights to have fantasy relationships with cartoons, comic book characters and dwarf cowboys.
Um....maybe what I was meaning to say is that I believe in the morale building ability of fantastical relationships and fully support our troops, since they are dumber than you're average bear.
Go Kerry!!!
Saturday Night Live had one of the Hardball skits with Darrell Hammond where he began referring to Kerry as “Floppy the Flip-Flopper”. Good stuff.