... says they are going to vote for Kerry.  I hop some of the Bush supporters will answer my informal survey below.

Thanks in advance... Harry

We know that many of them will swear that they don't read books (RLTW, for example).  

Probably many others cannot operate a PC.  

Here wash means doesn't affect either side.

1. Do you consider yourself Dem / GOP / Independent (Other)?
A.  Pragmatic Libertarian

2.  Does Admin actions Pre 9/11 hurt GOP / DEM / WASH?
A.  Wash  (Even with the witch hunt of the 9/11 Commission, the past administrations lack of actions resonates)

3.  Does Decision to Invade Iraq hurt GOP / DEM / WASH?
A.  Wash (the polls show the voters still support its mission)

4.  Does Political Unrest in Iraq hurt GOP / DEM / WASH?
A.  DEM (because Dem's are fueling it and it is obvious)

5.  Does Economy hurt GOP / DEM / Wash.
A.  DEM  (they made it an issue and its steadily improving)

6.  Do Gay Marriage Debates Hurt GOP / DEM / Wash?
A.  DEM (talk about not giving a straight answer)

7.  Do Carry's issues with Catholic Church Hurt GOP / DEM / Wash?
A.  DEM  (His lack of any core value is becoming even more obvious)

8. If you had to vote today, whom would you vote for?
A.  Bush, without reservation!

9.  Do Kerry's idiotic responses and lying about "confirmable" past actions (i.e. throwing his medals...) hurt DEM / GOP / Wash?
A.  DEM  (he is an awful candidate, but then again, half of the people out their who voted in 2000, cast their ballots for Gore.  And he too was caught in lie after lie after lie!)

10.  Does Kerry's resolve to turn over the sovereignty of the United States to the (arguably corrupt) United Nations hurt DEM / GOP/ Wash?
A.  DEM  (I guess that Kerry doesn't think Kofi has ripped off enough graft for himself yet)

11.  Is TER even close to being a viable gage of Kerry's popularity with voters?
A.  LOL

12.  Will the 2004 election hurt the DEM / GOP / Wash?
A.  Most of you might want to get your reservations on Air France soon, the (welcomed) exodus will be refreshing!

And Harry, for those of you who might be interested in how our American Soldiers feel about current events, the link below might be interesting to you.  I would like to see a valid poll of our Armed Forces support of Kerry vs Bush.  Another interesting poll would be of American Veterans, especially Vietnam Vets!  My guess is that Kerry's numbers would make Michael S. Dukakis feel loved.

... As a guy who was in Vietnam, I've been a target of worse things than your sarcasm.  In any case, I'm sorry if I left you angry and upset.

You are right, TER people who post to this board don't represent a cross section of the American people.  One of the big problems is there are too few women who post, few religious conservatives who post, few people at the low end of the economic scale, few very young voters, few very old voters, ...

They do represent a cross section of people who are reasonably smart and who have a strongly libraterian (SP?) bent.  I was interested in what all of us felt were important issues.

It seems as though one party says one thing, the other says the opposite. If they say it long enough and loud enough it will become reality?

Is the re-enlistment in support of the failing war on Iraq or in support of their brothers/sisters in arms ?

Well I am a veteran, luckily I just missed  Vietnam  by a month or 2. I support Kerry, not because I am a big fan of his, rather I believe his deceptions will hurt the USA to a lesser extent than Bush already has, and will continue to do if allowed.

how you feel about fellow Vietnam veterans protest of the war.  I cannot imagine how difficult those times were for you (I doubt I would have survived).  

Did you consider fellow veterans protest of the war a personal attack ? Do you feel the same now ?

Please, let's only hear from veterans and not those that only like to play dress up (couldn't resist).

Before you start spouting off such idiotic drivel.

RLTW

... and did not think it could be won.  I was not upset by VVAW organization.  I also wasn't a member.  I did not know anybody who was upset.  

It was pretty clear to anybody who spent time there that Vietnam wasn't a "domino" .

I think any honest thinking person would agree that it's too early to call Iraq a failing effort. It's ugly and messy in areas like Najaf, Sadir City and Fallujah for sure. In contrast, the Kurdish region to the north and the southern areas such as Basra are going pretty well. Hopefully the CPA will use the lessons learned in the hot zones to better manage those areas.

As far as re-enlistments, most of what I've read in publications like the Army Times indicates that re-enlistment goals are being met and exceeded. Especially in combat arms units. From personal experience I think the three main factors that drive re-upping are camaraderie, patriotism and sense of duty, in that order.

RLTW

-- Modified on 4/28/2004 6:04:55 PM

reading your posts (most of the time), and hope you will remember that sarcasm can cut both ways.  For the record, I read books, I can operate a PC, I have a Ph.D., I'm retired and travel a lot, and I'm voting for Bush.  I have a number of very strong reasons for doing this that I won't go into here, because it's a waste of time now.  Remember, much can happen between now and the election, mainly from exogenous sources, and it's way to early to place bets on the outcome.

I never suggested otherwise.  However, it certainly takes a good measure of naivete (or is it simply stupidity) to actually believe what has coming out of the White House on Iraq, and on economic policy, and on any number of other things.  So it would not be implausible to suggest that many of those who are dumb enough to believe that stuff might also be illiterate.

-- Modified on 4/29/2004 9:43:01 AM

Oh come on now.

It has been just over a year since Bush claimed the war was over.

Remember this?

Yeah, I remember that. It was a really dumb idea, no doubt about it. But you're right about another thing too - "it's been just over a year". Call it mismanaged, but it's too early to call Iraq a miserable failure. And if you're relying on Indymedia sites for your information then you don't fall under the category of "honest thinking".

RLTW

-- Modified on 4/28/2004 10:14:32 PM

or possibly Washington DC.

And if you follow some of the links from that one particular weblog you'd also discover views like this, from a female Iraqi:

"Did someone plan to make Iraq the battlefield for the war between terrorists and their enemies??
Were ignoring borders' security and the state of lawlessness a planned thing to draw America's enemies into Iraq where they can be fought?
When did the battlefield became Iraq instead of the US?
Iraq instead of Afghanistan?
what did We- innocent civilians- do?
Who cares about us?
Who defends us?"

She also comments on a USA Today reporter who did a story on Iraqi blogs:
"USA Today reporter visited us few days ago. We talked about this site, when we started to blog and why. Then I called the women and chidren from Falloja who were staying with their relatives next door so he would interview them. The fighting at Falloja was very intense at that time. Then the article was published... It was tasteless and meaningless and he didn't write a word about the Falloja residents he met."

RLTW

-- Modified on 4/29/2004 4:30:50 PM

My 3.96 GPA for my BS was obtained from comic books.

Your arrogance and condecension are on a par with Huffington and Kerry.

And while one might have the book-smarts to hoodwink the occassional college professor at a party school, the lack of common sense that is evidenced by a willingness to believe the drivel being spewed by the White House on Iraq is quite telling.  So perhaps facility with a PC keyboard is actually more of a useful indicator of intelligence than is college GPA, in this era of grade inflation.

-- Modified on 4/30/2004 12:00:29 PM

not me though - I'm quite impressed.

It depends on where and how it was earned.  Certainly, studying a liberal arts curriculum at party school is a far cry from studying a rigorous scientific discipline at a leading reasearch institution.  We have no idea whether it was a strong achievement without any context behind it.  And the fact that it was offerred without context leads me to simply to dismiss it.

Especially when it was offerred in conjunction with the fact that the individual actually believes the stuff coming out of the White House about why we went to war in Iraq.  That by itself would cause me to be skeptical of any real depth there.

And, while perhaps those folks might be book smart enough to hoodwink a few college professors at a party school, the simple fact that they believe the drivel being spewed out by the White House is obvious evidence of a lack of common sense.  Perhaps facilitiy with a PC keyboard is a better indicator of overall intelligence than college GPA, in this era of grade inflation.

It was an insulting post in a similar vein that got you moderated on the General Board.

You post stated that anyone who was supportive of the current admin, and therefore in direct opposition to your point of view, was illiterate. The insult is consistent with your narrow minded, arrogant view of those who disagree with your political views.

My reply was merely to indicate that not all of us fall into that category. You apparently should review YOUR literacy skillset as well. A BS is NOT a liberal arts degree and I never indicated where I received my degree. As a side note, my degree is in information technology (i.e.- computer science) and I should complete my MS fairly soon.

Although I may not measure up to your standards of intelligence, I hardly think I can be categorized as being one of the dimmer bulbs in the light fixture.

As far as operating a keyboard, yes, I cannot type. In my area of expertise, typing is not a significant requirement.

Perhaps we should judge literacy not on the content of the posts, instead on the supporting evidence that is provided to validate the contents. Were THAT criteria used SD, YOU would fail the literacy standards since you consistantly refuse to substantiate your assertions and rely on condecension, insults and general putdowns. You rarely supply sources for your statements, instead you try and portray yourself as some type of superior intellectual who has a greater understanding of politics than others. In reality, all you are voicing is your personal opinions that the liberal majority all agree with.

Many might mean several thousand out of 40 million.  In which case, I'm sure you'd agree that probably several thousand Bush supporters in this nation are illiterate.

It is also illiterate to ASSUME that a general statement was meant to SPECIFICALLY apply to YOU.  If YOU feel it is an accurate portrayal of YOURSELF, who am I to argue.  But I simply pointed out that many (like say, several thousand) of the millions of Bush supporters are functionally illiterate, or PC illiterate.  How YOU interpret that is your business, but thou doth protest too much.

I also made my comment about a liberal arts degree from a party school as a GENERAL comment about not being able to judge a 3.96 without context.  For all I know, the context is that you studied Biomedical Engineering at MIT, and that would certainly be the kind of context that might impress me.  I simply said that WITHOUT such context, the comment was nothing but empty puffery.

Once again, I am sorry that YOU seem to feel that my GENERAL statements apply directly to you specifically.  But I can't argue with you if your interpretation is that the shoe fits,  since you have direct information on that score, and I do not.

It IS true, however that YOU felt some need to post your GPA, and James86 felt some need to post his SAT scores on the board.  As if anyone cared.  Personally, I'm quite comfortable with my own educational credentials.  But I certainly wouldn't expect anyone else to give my posts any more credence if I hung them out in public for people to see.  I would rather that my statements be evaluated on the basis of their actual content.