And so it begins.

Given her religious conversion, perhaps she could help him with the Christian vote.

And that guy happens to be a conservative Republican, who has come out for Kerry.  Whereas Bush has just released his full Military records, including pay stubs for when he served.  Only there is a 5 month gap which indicates that he DIDN'T show up anywhere for that 5 month period.  And not a SINGLE witness who would state that they saw Dumbya in service during the year 1972.  And, Scott McLellan ADMITTED that they would have produced a witness to Bush's service if they could actually find one.  No, it's looking pretty clear that Bush WAS  AWOL for 5 months in 1972.




-- Modified on 2/10/2004 12:59:48 PM

Holding yourself up as a war hero and then joining Hanoi Jane in flaming our troops in Viet Nam just won't sit well with the American public.  I'm sure its a plus for you though.

And just think, it is just beginning!  Kerry's whole life has been a legacy of following which way the wind blows, a total lack of any conviction or integrity.  Now the wind will blow the flames over his presidential hopes.

One other thing, considering the efforts of Newsweek, Time, the NY Times, etc, etc, to make hay of your idiotic AWOL claim, the story died.  

Oh, and by the way, I was over there when Kerry and Jane were sucking Ho Chi Minh's dick!  It's a huge issue with those of us who served in the military - at any time, peacetime or wartime!

-- Modified on 2/10/2004 1:06:42 PM

... now see, that got your attention, didn't it.

Actually, I am sick and tired of hearing this overly pampered rich guy tell me how he understands my problems as a middle class taxpayer.

This turd has been sucking on the public teat for the past 20 years and married a woman worth $500M conservatively.  The only thing that Kerry has in common with the middle class is that he has to pee each morning when he gets out of bed.


-- Modified on 2/10/2004 1:15:50 PM

-- Modified on 2/10/2004 1:16:19 PM

Don't worry Kerry may follow Gore's example and try to get all of the overseas military vote disqualified because it lacked a postmark showing the date it was mailed.

And you think dumbya has anything in common with the middle class-hello!! he just wants to tell you what to do in your bedroom and which god is allowable in this country

and it will be a cold day in hell before he or any member of our family votes for the likes of Kerry!

Im am just loving these political posts, gives me a chance to laugh at all the blind idiots who bicker over party politics.

First of all John kerry had the balls to VOLUNTARILY go and put his life on the line for his country, and saved an American soldiers life in the process.  Most REPUBLICANS were too busy DRAFT DODGING service.  As the honorable VP Cheney said when asked why he did not sign up for service, quote "I had other things to do."  You republican idiots criticize a man for standing up and questioning his government and asking why American kids were dying by the thousands.  You know I think that
if you f!@#$%^ Republicans had been around in the 1700's this nation would never have been free.  Blindly, as you always do in the name of patriotism, would have accepted British rule because that was the government and we dare not question our government because that would be unpatriotic.  
   Guess what you dumb a!@ idiotic Republicans, turns out that all the anti-war marchers were right.  The whole damn Vietnam war was started based entirely on a LIE.  Had it not been for the courage of PATRIOTIC AMERICANS who questioned their government even more AMERICAN KIDS would be in graves.  No but thats not important. We must blindly support our government because they are always right and we must never question why they send children to  their deaths becuase if the politicians say so then we must without question follow blindly.  And anyone who questions the govt is unpatriotic.  Is that all you dumb a@# republicans can come up with, is a pic of Jane fonda??
  You idiots want to see really cool pictures, then try these two!!
1.  That beautiful kodak moment in the 80's where Rumsfeld has that big joker of a grin on his face shaking hands with Saddam Hussein the "Evil doer."  Its a really beautiful shot, honestly.
It shoul make all of you Republicans really proud.
2.  Or even better!!  Inside the 01 Cheney energy task force papers there are maps of Iraqi oil fields with divisions drawn up by the honorable VP on who should get the respective contracts to develop those oil fields.  I would love to see the honorable draft dodging Cheney hold the maps of those oil fields next to his face and explain to the American public throughout the campaign how there is any f!@#$%^ explanation as to the division of Iraqi oil fields way back in 01.  How is that possible??  How could Cheney have known in 01 that the US would get those oil fields and who the development contracts would be given to??  Hmmmmmmm makes you think doesn't it??  Cheney would look so honorable with his face next to those maps.  
  You f!@#$%^ Republicans have the nerve to criticize a man who questions his government because he didn't want to see kids die.
Yet you have no problem with Rumsfeld shaking hands with a "Evil Doer" and have no problem with the fact that SOMEHOW Cheney had maps of Iraqi oil fields in his energy papers way back in 01.  
  BTW I despise and hate John Kerry.  However, just trying to point out he hypocrisy on the Republican side...

I'm really curious.  Why do you think that those traits make a good president?  I would think that you'd be at least as offended by his personal cowardice and hypocrisy as you are by Kerry, who at least had the BALLS to serve courageously.  Is it that you personally can empathize with Bush's cowardice?  Or just that you are unprincipled enough not to care about Bush's lack of character when he is craven on behalf of your own interests?  I REALLY want to know which of these it is?

And, BTW, the data that the Bush campaign just released actually STRENGTHEN the case that he was AWOL during half of 1972.



-- Modified on 2/10/2004 2:11:49 PM

He came home from the war and was walking around the airport in his uniform.  He was just a kid and he was so proud to have served his country.  As he was walking in the airport some hippy chick spit on his uniform.  He didn't understand why until a janitor told him that he should go in the bathroom and change because people would harass him in his uniform.  Why did so many people turn on our boys?  It wasn't their fault.

No, but we do have the nerve to call a hypocrite a hypocrite. Kerry's stands on the war shifted 180 degree between the clinton whitehouse and the Bush whitehouse. He's a true modern day politian/hypocrite.

...about the war.  

If I personally had his money, I would have lived a life that did not involve public service.  He isn't a bad guy, he just looks like a mournful hounddog!

-- Modified on 2/10/2004 2:33:00 PM

All you f!@#$%^ Republicans shut up now once and for all.  Here is what Bush said  to a Houston newspaper in 94 about service,
quote, "I WAS NOT WILLING TO SHOOT OUT MY EAR DRUM TO GET A DEFERRMENT OR MOVE TO CANADA SO I DECIDED TO JOIN THE AIR NATIONAL GUARD"

   In todays White House press briefing a reporter uncovered the above statement made by WMD Bush to a Houston newspaper in 94.  All you f!@#$%^ blind republicans you have lost all credibility when you criticize John Kerry for anti-war marches when your man WMD Bush admitted in 94 that he specifically wanted to avoid the Vietnam war.  Atleast Kerry had the BALLS to serve his country.
   And one more thing you stupid Republicans, in the papers released today, there is a gap of 5 months in 72 where there is no record of Bush showing up, hence no payroll records.  Given the above statement by WMD Bush and the missing 5 months of service, why don't all you blind a@# Republicans quit crying about a man who had the COURAGE AND CONVICTION to serve his country VOLUNTARILY...

Oh and one more thing I would love to see.  Does anyone here have a link to that 45 second video tape of WMD Bush laughing and chuckling like a Chimpanzee right before announcing the beginning of combat in Iraq??  I remember the BBC took a lot of heat for showing it and was immediately taken off their website.  The clip shows WMD Bush laughing and having the best of times right before going on TV and acting according to Rove's direction.

When Kerry returned from Viet Nam the country didn't have that anti military mentality!  He was one reason for it developing!

And, BTW, thoughtful people have the right, or rather, the OBLIGATION to change their mind in the face of additional and contraditory information which changes the equation.

It's because he was there, and he KNEW the war was a mistake.  And he felt that it was more important to stop getting brave Americans killed on behalf of this mistake:

As Kerry testified in front of a Senate committee investigating the war effort in 1972 (right around the time Bush was AWOL from the Alabama Air National Guard):

"Mr. Chairman, how can we continue to ask more brave Americans to become the last person to die on behalf of a mistake?"

The same question needs to be asked of Bush right now concerning Iraq.  

-- Modified on 2/10/2004 4:14:35 PM

BLAH BLAH BLAH...

  Just explain to me what the f#$% maps of Iraqi oil fields were doing as part of Cheney's energy task force papers in 01.  Its the most mind f@#$%^& boggling thing I have ever seen in my entire life.  The VP of the United States had maps of Iraqi oil fields and plans on how to divide those oil fields a full 2 years before we even went to war with Saddam.  How the f#$% could Cheney be so confident that those oil fields would be ours and be thinking of development contracts for those oil fields while Saddam was in power in 01.  
  Of course Kerry switched his position, he is a politician.  However, you want to talk about a hypocrite then please explain the Cheney Iraqi oil field maps.  I would love to hear all the nonsense that is going to come out of the Republicans mouth for that on.  
"Saddam sneaked into America and put those maps in Cheneys files to make Cheney look bad, and then he sneaked back to Iraq."  or
"The democrats broke into the watergate and planted the maps in Cheneys files to make him look bad." or the best one of all
"All of you who do not blindly follow and worship Bush and the Republicans are unpatriotic and damned to eternal hell because by questioning Cheney we are incurring the wrath of god."

I just want our honorable VP Cheney to explain why he thought Iraq's oil fields were vital to our energy policy in 01.  Oh look a WMD here and a WMD there.  Saddam has nukes and he is coming after us.  Really he is I saw it in the oil well, I mean the crystal ball...

Get fucking real

Kerry's actions led to the term "baby killers" being used on all of our men in uniform, including my Dad.

Once he returned to the US, he lied about war crimes committed by US Soldiers, but as an officer made no reports while in Viet Nam.  I don't doubt that war crimes happened, I do doubt that he witnessed any.    

He joined the hippies because he thought it would get him laid.  Viable reason, but now he has to face up to his past actions and words.  I doubt that hippie pussy was worth it.

And absent people like Kerry, it would have been covered up from the American Public.  He performed a public service.  Because, very frankly, I did not wish to have babies killed on behalf of the people of the United States of America, one of whom is me, and I am damn glad to know that something was done to stop it.

WMD Bush in 94 had to say this about military service quote, "I DID NOT WANT TO BLOW AN EAR DRUM FOR A DEFERRMENT OR MOVE TO CANADA SO I JOINED THE NATIONAL GUARD."

YouThink,
   Arent you just proud of the president who had the courage and conviction to say the only reason he joined the National Guard was to avoid service.  He told this to a Houston newspaper in 94.
And you call kerry a pussy.  Keep in mind I hate John Kerry, but for any Republican to call Kerry a pussy  when your leader made the above statement is beyond hypocrisy.  Kerry had the balls to serve his nation and had the balls to question his government while you Republican cowards were blindly worshipping politicians in the proud tradition of the Taliban who also follow blindly and don't question their leaders.  If it wasn't for patriotic Americans who had the bravery and courage to question that war more of Americas young kids would have headstones.  
   You should thank your lucky stars that your dad came back alive.  There are 60,000 graves filled with American kids bodies because that cock sucker Johnson lied to start a war.  If more of you blind republicans would have questioned the validity of that war and joined the anti-war movement instead of taking a politician for a prophet unworthy of questioning, it might have ended early, and maybe not so many American children would be in their graves.  Get it through your fucking empty Republican heads that no one hates the soldiers who serve this nation we just hate the politicians who think American kids lives are expendable for a political agenda.  

Had he done so, we wouldn't have another weazelly assed Democrap running for the White House!

Sorry for that error in the heading, it was too late to change by the time I saw it  You are right that Kerry is a weazelly ass Democrap  Kerry may have been a brave soldier, and I certainly defend his bravery, but as a politician he definately has been a weazelly Democrap.

Since the stress of his job has GOT to be rough on his lousy ticker.  We can only hope.  Meanwhile, it seems that Dumbya is too oblivious to actually understand the seriousness of HIS actions, so it doesn't seem to weigh on him in the slightest that his Iraq misadventure has gotten 530 and counting brave Americans killed on false pretenses.

It's not surprising.

Viet Nam was not a very popular war.  I would bet however, you and that sdslug both did you level best not to serve either.  I can't blame Bush for not wanting to go there.  But while Bush was serving in the National Guard, Kerry was doing his best to demoralize American GI's!  I find that detestable and I think you might find a lot of American's agree with me in November.

For you to say the service in the National Guard is not honorable is more of your hypocrisy.  The National Guard had plenty of men who did not want to get off a plane in Oakland to be spit on.

I'm glad you mentioned it was the Democrats that got us into the Viet Nam war and did their level best to make sure our Military could not win.  That's Kerry's party and obviously yours.

We now have a volunteer military, those young men and women now serving are doing what they signed up to do.  You're pathetic attempt at caring for their well being is empty.  If their moral is anything like it was during my service, not many of them would bother walking across a street to piss on you or your "we support the troops" pap!

I spent 6 years in the Coast Guard , I suppose I'm not honorable in your eyes either!  But then again, I couldn't really give less of a fuck what you think.

So I never had the chance either way.  But I can tell you that I would have been on the front lines of the ANTI war protests, (in fact, I was, as much as a 10-13 year old actually could have been).  And I would have been willing to go to jail to defend my principles on the subject, of course, I know darn well that I would not have really faced jail time given my age at the time.  

That's one difference between myself and Bush.  I have my principles and I am willing to stand up for them.  I might well be wrong, but I am no coward about it like Bush is.  Bush was just a partying layabout who was to the manor born, in his formative years.  He has never demonstrated character or personal courage in ANYTHING he has ever done in his life.  Never in our nation's HISTORY, has a man of lower personal character occupied the office.  At best, Bush belongs in the class of Harding, Nixon, and Clinton for personal character.

But then again, when Kerry was in Viet Nam, the country was behind the war.  The wind was blowing that way, so he went along.   A couple of years later, wind changes direction and he has a full memory of war crimes.

I was there, really in it, killing people, watchiing my friends die or have horrible wounds.  Two fucking tours!  Plenty of jewelry to show for it.  I never once witnessed a war crime committed by  an American Soldier!  I saw plenty of it committed by the Viet Cong and the North Viet Nam Army against the Viet Nam People and American Soldiers.

What I remember is American Marines sharing their rations with children who were starving, medics giving aid to Viet Nam nationals.  That America believed that lying sack of excrement Kerry et. al., really enrages me.

When the My Lai Massacre was reported, the military took swift action.  There are other stories and they too were investigated and delt with.  That is what I remember.

You don't have a fucking clue.

That our country had friendly relations with Saddam while he was kicking Iran's ass?

Or that our leaders take the oil reserves in the area seriously so that you can have your gas for under $2.00 per gallon while the rest of the world pays over $4.00?

Or that Haliburton or  Bechtel or Flour got the contracts?  Since there really are no other companies qualified to do the work.  I suppose that you and emeraldvodka's would rather have seen us send in "Jose Rodriguez Contracting" to rebuild the infrastructure?

Since the democrats blocked our oil companies from drilling for oil on one of the largest reserves on the planet in Alaska, I'm pretty fucking glad our leadership had their eye on the ONLY FUCKING ASSET in that God forsaken country.

StartThinking, you might consider Critical Thinking, you're thinking with your dick.

sdstud, you and I may find ourselves on the same side of many issues, but I have to disagree with you on this one. I grew up in a domocratic home where "republican" was a dirty word. But I cannot understand what appears to be hatred here. I may not agree with Bush on many issues, but I cannot understand why you and many other democrats who are good honorable people cannot just give the man his due. I see no evidence of the lack of character or courage you shout about. In fact when I look at the real facts by doing my own research I see the opposite. Lets stop the angry rhetoric and stick to the facts. He has shown the courage to do what he thought was right and in the best interest of the greater good, regardless of what he thought would be popular or politically correct. Unfortunately for Kerry, that is the definition of a good leader. Bush has been a good leader in a tough time. Lets all be careful not to be blinded by emotion on this and all issues. Anytime we give in to hate, we must question why and do some self analysis.

I don't care what John Kerry did 25-30 yrs ago. A lot of us were against the war. That said, many of us ended up fighting a war in which we didn't believe. When my number came up as 28, I enlisted in the Navy. We went and we served. John Kerry went and served with distinction.
  Three purple hearts and the Navy Cross are testament to John Kerry's courage. Upon my discharge, I don't recall signing any papers abridging my constitutional right to free speech i.e. you can't demonstrate against the war.
  My daddy wasn't a congressman who had the pull or the friends who could jump me over 500+ other men to a safe spot in the Texas Air National Guard. My daddy certainly didn't have the pull to allow me to go AWOL while helping a family friend get elected to Congress.
  However, by two biggest beefs with "Dumbya" is that:
     a) he put American fighting men (and women) in harm's way under false pretenses. Yesterday, on AOL, I read the evolving list of reasons that he has used since before the invasion of Iraq. Short version: this guy has more stories than Mother Goose.
     b) This President campaigned on a platform of fiscal responsibility. We've gone from budget suplusses to massive, record budget deficits. The Congressional Budget Office ("CBO") estimates that 36% of the budget deficit comes from this president's tax cuts. His own party, behind closed doors, reviles him for a 2005 budget that borders on fiscal insanity.
  The facts are that John Kerry served his country with courage and distinction in combat. George W. Bush, at the very least, hid from his obligation by being the beneficiary of preferential treatment which was not available to the rest of us.
  IMHO, Mr Bush put American lives at risk for reasons which are not the reasons he stated. Further, Mr. Bush has started us down the slippery slope of deficit spending for which our children and grandchildren shall pay for 40 years. When called by his country, John Kerry did not shirk his obligation.

  First of all Im only 26, so I wasn't even thought of back then.  Secondly if you read my post carefully you would see that Im not insulting National Guard service, Im trying to point out the fact that WMD Bush only enlisted in the Guard because he saw no other way of avoiding service abroad.  Read carefully WMD's own statement where he implies that  this was the last thing he could do besides blowing his ear drums and moving to Canada.
  I belong to no party, Im an American.  Im smart enough to realize that both parties are full of liars and cowards.  Both Democrats and Republicans would lie to the public in a heartbeat as long as it keeps them in power.  
  Your service, and any man/womans service to this nation is worthy of all due respect and honor.
  You are right those kids are doing what they signed up to do, and Im doing what I signed up to do.  Our great nation fought a just war and sacrificed over 500,000 lives in WW2 and defeated some of the worst tyrants and dictators of the last century because the cause was just and the purpose was noble.  We should all be proud of that legacy and thankful to those who lay buried for preserving that freedom here and around the globe.
  You think not any of them would walk across the street to spit
on my "we support our troops" pap.  Well if most of the public had crossed the street and united in the 60's those soldiers would be alive and be able to walk across to me.  
   Every soldier that puts on that uniform is my brother, my sister, my mother and my father.  And if you think for one moment we should stay silent and not question the politicians that send them to their deaths then you don't understand the fundemental truth of freedom.  
  If it was up to me Johnson would die in the electric chair in front of the entire country for a lie that took 60,000 sould from my country.  You automatically assumed I was a democrat because I ranted about the Vietnam war.  I could write a book on all the bloody lies Democrats have spewed but its useless.
  THE PROBLEM WITH YOU REPUBLICANS IS THAT YOU THINK PRESIDENTS ARE ONLY CAPABLE OF LYING ABOUT BJ'S AND NOT WARS.  THE PROBLEM WITH YOU DEMOCRATS IS THAT YOU THINK ONLY REPUBLICANS ARE CAPABLE OF SELLING OUT TO THE BIGGEST SPECIAL INTERESTS AND LYING ABOUT WARS.
 

  JonB166 I can agree with you that there is too much partisan bickering.  But you see there are some leaders who cross the line
and expect to get away with murder.  I don't hate Bush because of economic policy, social policy, education or any other issues.  Those are all legitimate philosophical differences to be debated.
However when a President makes the decision to send kids to their deaths and has the attitude that any one questioning his is playing partisan political games, he loses all respect.  My problem is that here is a man whose 2nd in command, VP Cheney wields great influence over policy.  The VP of this nation is found to have, exactly 2 years before the war, actual maps of oil fields in Iraq and their future development plans.  
  Bush offers one conference before the war refuses to answer questions from the most senior journalist at the White House.  He calls people who dissent against the war a "focus group."  And he never once questions his own VP as to why his VP is pushing so hard for a war in Iraq and had maps of oil fields of a country he is pushing so aggressively to go to war with.  
  Am I the only one who sees this as one of the biggest govt scandals ever in govt history??  Cheney's job was developing
US energy policy so why then would maps of Iraqi oil fields be in there.  He was supposed to develop an energy policy in 01 and Saddam was in power back then so how did Cheney figure that those oil fields would be useful to our energy policy in 01.  Why would the VP of the US possibly have those maps and how could that possibly have helped our energy needs in 01.  
  Don't tell me that doesn't make you the least bit curious as to motives behind this war.  On top of that Halliburton gets most of the contracts for redevelopment.  I see the maps of those oil fields in my head every time I hear another soldier has died, so pardon me for getting a sick feeling in my stomach every time I see Bush on TV saying this war was about WMD's.  How the hell am I not supposed to think that this war was for anything but energy policy based on global dominance of oil supplies achieved by a foreign policy that supports and keeps rogue regimes in power in the Middle East, and overthrowing any who do not comply or hinder that dominance.  And then I see another dead soldier, I see a kid, wife, mother, father mourning the disappearance of the light of their life forever.  When I hear of that dead soldier, I again see the maps of Iraqi oil fields in my head.  Call me crazy and stupid for seeing a connection.

Reo you think Kerry can get Hanoi Jane to campaign for him?

O.k., the bottom line is, you're all right and you're all wrong.  It doesn't make a bit of difference which party is in the Whitehouse.  Politicians are liars by their nature.  To borrow from Chris Rock (with a few changes), calling politicians liars or idiots is like playing basketball with someone you know is retarded, and then calling them for double dribbling.  Unfortunately, we (the nation of sheep that we are) not only condone it, but actively participate.  We play into their game of us (republicans) against them (democrats), while both parties rob and cheat us all, and like the energizer bunny, it goes on and on and on...  Sedagive.

You make some good points. On This map issue, where do you get your information? I am not questioning your passion on this, but I always like to verify before I form an opinion. If we were debating the issue, I might ask you why you would be surprized that Cheney had a map of Iraqui oil fields in the first place. Those maps existed long before Dubyas time, as they were detailed by the french and Germans years before. Lots of companies, many of them from across the globe including Haliburton who has been known to have had some unsavory alliances with the french, had designs on profits from those fields back in the first gulf war, and again when Clinton threatened Sadam. Also, if as you say it was Cheneys job to develop US energy policy, I might ask why he would not have those kinds of maps. Would we not expect our expert to understand one of the largest oil reserves in the world? Its future would certainly have a huge impact on our national ecomomy as well as the future of companies like Haliburton, where ne obviously has freinds, among all the other companies bidding for that business. I did some consulting work for a company who hoped for a slice of that action. They are a good american company who deserved consideration. They were overlooked in favor of Haliburton. As I saw it, though, it was because the other bid had more merit. I hated it, because it personally cost me lots more business, but I looked fair from my angle. Believe me I tried to use any influence I had to help them win that bid. That was just trying to make a living. Not that much diferent from those guys is it. You have to try to take the emotion out of these things and be logical. I just returned an email to a co-worker of mine who is a reservist serving at the Bagdad airport. He is a good guy who I have known for many years. He sent me a picture of himself sitting in one of Saddams throne rooms. Since I do not have any better information, I must beleive him when he tells me that he hates being there, but is proud to have been a part of what he calls a necessary action. he works with Iraqui people every day. He is convinced that it has improved the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. He is there. He puts his butt on the line every day. If he can still believe in the cause I am willing to listen, even when I dont agree. Just my 2 cents. Thanks for the discussion. America at its best. I love this country!!!

Bribite, we probably cannot agree on anything else but as a fellow American read this post and in your own spare time see if you can research this one topic I am asking you to.  I sincerely ask you as a fellow American.  Reading my posts you know Im not a Democrat either so Im not asking for political reasons, just as an American.  Honestly, regardless of what you think of me friend do yourself a favor and research alternative sources of energy. Look at all the scientific advancements first then tell me that we do not have the power to drive our SUV's without oil in 10 years.  Before you even give your answer, trust me I know what Im talking about.  Take a month to research all the alternative energy source technologies out there and in one month you will stop supporting any politician who says we need to still rely on oil.
  I mean this in all sincerety and as a fellow American.  Just take one month to  completely research alternative energy technologies out there and you will  personally come to realize that if we spend $180 billion on those technologies like we spend on Iraq, this country and this world could stop using oil in less than 10 years, and the economic boom those technologies would transform world economies, would have huge positive impacts on poor nations, and make the Internet boom look like a little firecracker.  
Relying on oil in this day and age is like relying on a paddle boat for oceanic travel when there are 747 jets available, unless of course the paddle boat lobby controls congress and doesn't want to allow the change to 747 jets.  This is not a political issue, its a matter of national security.  
   Our scientists have technology to let us keep our SUV's without using oil.  The technology exists to harness unlimited sources of power and energy that are clean and will never be depleated.  The technologies can create an economic boom across the world unimaginable.  Planes, trains, automobiles could run on clean, virtually free energy.  Just imagine that.  Well its no longer a matter of imagining, its possible.  But there is a huge oil lobby that is hindering that power.  you don't believe me Bribite, look for yourself.  Then tell me what you think of politicians who want to keep this country reliant on oil.  I ask you as an American and nothing more.

...that failed to evolve over time. Just as the political/social climate in this country changed over time so did the execution of the war in Vietnam. Vietnam was a war that simply never should have happened. Just as this war in Iraq is a war that never should have happened.

Our understanding, particularly our government's understanding of
the history and culture of Vietnam was so flawed, so myopic, that the war was virtually doomed to failure from the outset. Add to that the increasing micromanaging of the war by the politicians
in Washington, and yes that includes Johnson and his Secretary of Defense McNamara, and goes on to Nixon who made promises to extricate us from that mess and yet it was well into his second term before we really began to withdraw.

As the war in Vietnam evolved it became increasingly apparent to the people at home that their sons and daughters were dying for a cause that became increasingly corrupted, pursued by those whose ego's were on the line while American servicemen's lives were on the line.

I too served in Vietnam. I was a USAF air traffic controller stationed at DaNang late in the war 72/73. I was in a combat support role NOT involved in any direct combat. The base was frequently subject to rocket attacks but that was as close as I got to actually being in harm's way. I never had occasion to fire my weapon.

I have the utmost respect for those like yourself who served in combat units and acquitted yourself well with respect to performing your mission. In acquitting yourself well I am largely referring to watching your buddies back and helping each other get out alive. I too am proud of the mission that those in my unit performed.

However I can make a distinction between performing the mission well, doing so honorably, and still view the war itself as unjustifed and a tragic loss for all involved.

There was almost unimaginable brutality in that war and yes it touched both sides. There were plenty of mistakes made by those involved in the antiwar movement. Specifically targeting individual servicemen as they returned from their tours was certainly one grievous mistake. In fact it was reprehensible.

That war as it evolved became a senseless meat grinder and simply had to end. The antiwar movement as flawed as it was in many respects was no more flawed than the politicians who failed us as a nation in pursuing that war in the first place and then allowing it to drag on endlesslly across two administrations, one Democratic and one Republican including a second term for the Republican.

So yes it is quite possible to have served with distinction in Vietnam and still come to the realization that the war was wrong and needed to end. No paradox there in my view. To this day I struggle somewhat with my own involvement in Vietnam, not because I feel as if I failed in the performance of my duty but because of how senseless it was. There are the names of over 58,000 Americans on the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial in Washington, DC.
Those are the one's who gave their lives. There are countless others who returned but continue to die a slow death inside. Some of us were able in large part to put the war out of our daily lives but it never really leaves us. That experience for the combat veteran is far more vivid I am sure than it is for those like myself who performed combat support roles.

If you acquitted yourself honorably in Vietnam then you are to be commended for your service. However that's where it ends. Your jewelry, as you put it, doesn't give you carte blanche to trash another American who also served in Vietnam simply because he doesn't where the same political stripe as you, or because he came to realize that the war was wrong and needed to end. The men he served with would surely share that sentiment.

I have exercised far greater restraint in addressing you here than you could possibly imagine, in part out of respect for your service. Beyond that I don't want to engage in some vitriolic rant. I do believe you are in need of some serious counseling in anger management.

Finally from one Vietnam vet to another thank you sincerely for your service, now go get some help.


-- Modified on 2/10/2004 10:11:48 PM

-- Modified on 2/10/2004 10:33:49 PM

-- Modified on 2/10/2004 10:36:30 PM

-- Modified on 2/10/2004 11:03:11 PM

A lot of our boys gave the ultimate sacrifice so you can rant like this! - Do you really believe if we pull out of Iraq that the terror will stop? Reality check time!

  Friend first let me state where I got that information, its a source you will no doubt trust.  Judicial watch, a very conservative watch dog that sued Clinton throughout his presidency to expose his lies and corruption also sued Cheney to reveal minutes and details of his energy task force meetings in early 01.  Im sure you recognize Judicial Watch.  Cheney claimed executive privelege and refused to turn over the papers.
So this went all the way up to Federal court and finally a judge forced him to turn over a part of the papers and a case is still pending to turn over all the docs.  
  Well a few months ago, on a Friday afternoon while the media was busy with Iraq Cheney obeys the judge and turns over parts of the meeting papers.  What turns up there??  Maps of Iraqi oil fields turn up.  Yahoo did a small story on it and none of the big media covered the story.  Below is a link to those maps.
  Then Wolfowitz was in SE Asia in a security conference last summer.  One reporter kept pressing him on why if national security was the real issue, the president does not go after Iran and N. korea which are clearly bigger threats.  Wolfowitz got frustrated and blurted out by mistake, "because Iraq was swimming in on a sea of oil."  That statement got posted on a British newspaper site.  All hell was about to break loose, and all the sudden in 2 hours the newspaper site removes that statement and never posts it again.  I email them asking for the link to that statement and they tell me no such statement ever existed on their site.  

http://www.judicialwatch.org/071703.c_.shtml

I just don't think my fellow American should be dying for oil.  And I don't think a man is worthy of being president, let alone worthy of an ounce of respect when he sends kids to die for oil we don't need.  Just like I think Johnson, were he alive, should be put in an electric chair live on TV for lying to this nation that led to a war in which 60,000 kids lost their lives and almost destroyed this country.  
  We don't need to rely on oil anymore.  Our scientists hold the power to help us get rid of oil in 10 years and still allow us to drive our SUV's.  Yet, because the oil industry owns the democratic and republican parties we can't have that progress.  If we got rid of oil, American kids wouldn't have to die in any more Middle East wars.  Thats all Im looking for.

And from one more vet:
Kerry is accusing our military of committing atrocities!
If he witnessed those things, he had an obligation to bring charges.

If he is just going on heresay and has no evidence to support it, then he should shut up!

Proportion your beliefs according to the evidence!

Sedagive, couldn't agree with you more.  The most interesting thing to me in all these political threads is that I NEVER see any mention of the only decent alternative party, the Liberterians.  I am amazed at the vitriol of someone who claims not to be a Republican or a Democrat, but refers to "f@*king Republicans", but not to f@*king Dems.  I guess you can call me a f@&king Liberterian.

Anyone who claims to be an American and not a Rep or Dem and then tells f@*King Republicans to shut up has some serious issues.  Anyone who tells an entire group to shut up has an agenda..  A tactic of the left when challenged is to name call and then shut down the discussion.  What's your true affiliation EV?

  Looks like you haven't read all my posts.  Did you forget to read my post where I tell all Democrats to shut their loud traps for nominating a man who voted for the war, the patriot act, and is king of special interest.  No you didn't.  If you had you would see that IMO Democrats are hypocrites for calling Bush a liar and claiming this war was political propoganda when their man Kerry voted right along with the rest of them.  Read all my posts before you make a judgement on me, or for that matter anyone else!!  Im not a politician so you are free to look at my entire record  
  And please don't be so self-righteous in claiming this is a tactic only of the left.  As if the right doesn't villify, rant, insult, and degrade poeple who do not agree with them.
  My true affiliation is American, and I point out in various posts how I hate John Kerry, and how the left is just as dumb, blind, and deaf as the right when it comes blindly supporting any politician with a R or a D in front of their name respectively.

I can't disagree with your post as far as it is historically correct in regards to the war.  That Viet Nam was doomed from the beginning is nonsense.  Our leadership didn't have the resolve to win, they did however have the resolve to throw ground troops into the fray.

As an Vet of the USAF, you know that our pilots were not allowed to bomb certain "military targets", that would have ended the war rather quickly.  Bombing Hanoi and a few NVN harbors would have ended the war in weeks if not months.

In considering if it was a just war, you might remember that over 1,000,000 Vietnamese nationals were murdered by Ho Chi Minh in Viet Nam, and the atrocities that Pol Pot committed in Cambodia, another 2,000,000 plus dead after our retreat!   I have to wonder why not Viet Nam when we sent our troops in Bosnia?  Where was this anti war movement in regards to Bosnia?  Is it because they were considered White and the SE Asians were not?

As far as Kerry's right to free speech, my problem is that if he actually witnessed what he claims to have, he was honor bound as an Officer of the United States Navy to report it - when it happened!  He did not, he only recalled it after the political winds started to go against the war.  I believe he is a liar.

The comment about my jewelry was meant to state just that!  It doesn't give ANYONE carte blanche!  Not even Kerry!  If he is going to hold up his medals as a gauge of his character, then he's got some "splaining" to do about his anti-war/anti-soldier activities after his service!  His association with Jane Fonda should be rightfully acknowledged.  (How she avoided treason charges is beyond me)  If the medals are fair, then attacking his actions after service are too.

Just to ease your mind, I have adjusted very well thank you.  I have owned a profitable business for almost 30 years, raised two outstanding children and participated in helping my fellow VN Vets in adjusting, all wth no police record.  You might think I need anger management, but I think my anger in this case is very healthy and justified.

BTW, 26 of those names on the Viet Nam Memorial were guys from my company, from my service years, guys I knew on a first name, nick name basis.  I loved and still love those guys.  Kerry giving speeches about us being "Baby Killers" just doesn't sit well with me, then or now!  He said what was politically expedient, his life is a legacy of the same.  And if it's OK with you Blue672, I will just go on giving my opinion of John Forbes Kerry, I believe I still have that right too!

The problem with Iraq, aside from the 530 brave Americans killed in in the name of a bogus national security claim, but actually in pursuit of big money for Cheney and Bush's oil interests, is that it DE-FOCUSED us from the terrorism campaign in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and let Al Queda off the hook to re-constitute itself.

And, Iraq has proven to be the greatest recruiting tool that we ever could have handed Al Queda.  I never said that pulling out of Iraq at this point would lessen terrorism.  Just that going INTO Iraq as we did helped to foster it.

Certainly, we know this:

While Kerry and You both DID have the guts to put your lives on the line, Bush had his daddy make a call, in order to get Dumbya jumped over 500 places in line, for a safe spot in the Texas Air National Guard.

Then, while Kerry and You were both earning plenty of jewelry in combat, for bravery under fire, while burying buddies that you loved, Dumbya was getting transferred to the Alabama National Guard, where he NEVER showed up for over 5 months - According to his OWN release of his service records.  

When You and Kerry returned to the states, Kerry was personally convinced that his service to the country was essentially worthless, because it was in pursuit of a tragically mistaken policy.  And he did all that he could to reverse that policy, eventually successfully.  Obviously, YOU don't feel that YOUR service was anything but valid, and that you made sacrifices that you believed in, and you are clearly embittered that the country chose to belittle them by turning it's back on our Vietnam campaign, and you hold Kerry as partly to blame for this.
 
I can understand your hatred for Kerry based on his entirely DIFFERENT interpretation of the value of his milirary service than you have for yours, and the degree that he helped to form public opinion.  But I CAN'T understand why your hatred for Bush isn't far worse, as he lacked the guts to even take a stand on the issue.  Please explain this to us all.

I have certainly cast the occassional protest vote when I consider both major party candidates to be relatively equal in their uselessness.  But there is no way that a Libertarian can win THIS election.  So I MUST do what I can to insure that Bush doesn't.  As I said earlier,  Bush is a social reactionary conservative (who believes in allowing the Government to legislate morality and personal behavior in private), and an economic radical liberal (with the biggest government spending agenda in HISTORY).  That is the MOST NON-Libertarian stance that it is POSSIBLE to undertake.  He must be defeated at all costs, and doing so is the biggest Libertarian statement that one could make.

Thanks again for the rsponse. I will go look at the link. Perhaps I have my head in the sand on this. Can I ask you a question? Have you ever owned or run a business? If the oil companies have the kind of power you ascribe to them, as pure profit machines why would they not capitalize on this technology that you claim exists. Why would one of these scientists not come out of the oil companies closet and spill the beans for his own profit. I think that one thing that we can have confidence in is that greed runs across most barriers, including social, economic, political divides. I remember some years back when the cold fussion myth was popular that the government and the oil companies were accused then of having long known about it and had supressed the infomation from the puplic through some huge profit motivated conspiracy. If they knew, it was that it was just that, a myth. I am in business. If it would make a buck, I would try it. I am a mercinary from that perspective. I operate within the legal bounds of business, but would love to have access to a technology that would replace oil in our society as long as the consequences of change were not to negative. Thats how the free market works. It works because it is brutally fair. I just dont buy all this conspiracy stuff. Come on, lets face it, these guys are not that smart! They cant even hide a blow job in the most secure office in the world, let alone some big hairy plot to keep the secret of the century! Again, just my 2 cents.

I have a son who is working on his masters in engineering with an Automotive Emphasis.  His school worked on grant money from Honda to develop the Honda Hybrid engine/battery car that they are producing now.

I am aware of the research being done in alternative energy sources.  My son is working with hydrogen engines.  I have no doubt that this technology will be perfected in the coming years.

However, I am a pragmatist.  Our country cannot survive without oil now.  Nobody wants to pay European prices for gas, or home heating oil, or electricity generated from fossil fuel plants.  We currently DO need the oil.  Our economy is fueled by it.  We don't currently have 10 years to wait.  

I believe in free enterprise and I believe that the free market will develop clean fuels on its own.  I know that much of the money currently raised in grants at my son's school is from Standard Oil, Shell Oil and a few smaller oil companies.  You might not realize that Shell is not an American company,

Having been raised by a father who was employed by North American Rockwell, I understand that food was put on my table because of the race for the Moon.  The spin off technology in computers, metals, fabric, and so on has fueled our economy for decades.

I think that if Congress allocates the funds to put men on Mars, the spin-off technology will include a plethora of new technologies including clean unlimited fuels.  American freedom breeds invention and unbelievable tasks as having a man walk on the Moon proves this.  Our ingenuity is our greatest asset.  The unbelievable task of putting a man on Mars will yield the same results and given America's track record, you will see it in your lifetime.

BTW, I too am an independent, more libertarian than anything else.  I am a conservative though.

He is as UN-Libertarian as anyone could be.  His economic policy involves the largest dose of Govt. spending EVER, only it's spending on War, and Oil-based energy policy.

And his social policy involves the MOST INVASIVE views on government regulation of personal behavior in the history of our Republic as well.

A constitutional amendment against gay marriage is FUNDAMENTALLY non-Libertarian.

The Patriot Act is FUNDAMENTALLY non-Libertarian.

Bribite, If you support Bush's policies, you are about the furthest thing froma Libertarian that there is.

Bribite thanks for you post, as this is a really important topic.

  I understand what you are saying about you father working for North American Rockwell and putting food on the table.  Oil is not the culprit here.  It was the only fuel available for a long time whose usage made the massive economice expansion over the decades possible
  My problem is that free enterprise is being obstructed every step of the way by oil lobby puppets in Congress.  Our scientists have made great strides and discoveries since the 70's that could help rid this nation and the world of oil for good.  But at every step of the way the big oil companies prevent those inventions and technologies from reaching the consumer.  They have been at it since the 70's.  They go in and do forced buyouts of any company with promising technology that will help us eliminate our dependancy on oil.  There is no free market or free enterprise in the energy industry.
   I understand Shell and those companies give huge grants to your sons college.  Its a propaganda scheme to dupe the public into thinking these oil companies are working hard to find hard solutions that are still far from our reach.  Its BULL SHIT.  GM is the king of this propagands.  GM had a hydrogen test lab with some great scientists working on producing car that would run entirely on hydrogen.  Lo and behold those scientists came up with just such a car that was a large sedan, went up to 140MPH, and ran only on hydrogen gas.  GM started getting factory orders for those cars at unprecedented levels.  So what does GM do??  Shuts down all research on the car and tells all the consumers that they will get a refund on their deposits because GM has decided not to produce those cars anymore.  
   Honestly why do you think that happened??  20/20 did a piece on this car a few years back and GM shut down operations right after that.  Now GM has started advertising some new research that holds great promise about 20 years down the road.  
   George Bush senior has a huge mansion in Maine.  A little known secret is that the mansion's roof is made of solar panels.
Typically a mansion of that size would incur over $1500 in monthly electric bills.  Yet Bush Sr pays less than a $100 in electric bills because the solar panels harness natural sunlight and convert it into usable power to run everything in the house.
The solar panel industry has been asking state and fed govts to allow solar panels to be tax deductions if purchased by consumers.  Consumers would no doubt would pay $10,000 dollars, specially if that was a tax deduction to lower their monthly electric bills by over 85% for as long at they own the home.  
  All SUV's get accelerated tax deductions of up to 80% yet the solar panel industry for the last 10 years can't even get a 10% tax deduction.  DO YOU RELLAY BELIEVE THERE IS FREE ENTERPRISE IN THE ENERGY INDUSTRY??  There are a 1000 other cases I can cite for you of how the govt simply refuses to allow those technologies to come to the market.  Trust me we don't need to wait 25 years, they are here now!!

Any number of scenarios would be better for our country than 4 more years of Bush / Cheney.  Even some of what you might consider to be "Worst Case" scenarios.  Because the current administration IS a Worst Case scenario.

My point about my Dad is that the space race fueled our economy for decades.  I believe that if as a nation we are going to invest, it should be in space.  The spin off technology will pay huge dividends.

The work my son is doing is in hydrogen production.  Sure water is two parts hydrogen, but separating it economically and on a grand scale is not so simple.

We have engines that run on propane, its clean, why aren't more people converting their autos to propane?  Two reasons, it costs more (mpg) and its not readily available.

You seem to have the idea that GM had a marketable, potentially profitable product and just junked it.  If a hydrogen engine had a feasible, convenient fuel supply, believe me they would have jumped all over it for the PROFIT!  Your reasoning is naive.  

GM produced an electric car, I live in Southern California, I see a shit load of cars every day.  I think I have seen fewer than 20 of GM's electric cars over the last 5 years.  Why?  Nobody buys them!

Clean fuels will become a reality when it becomes convenient and affordable for the consumer to switch.  Simply building the car won't change that elementary fact of personal economics.

I am not aware of that 80% accelerated tax deduction on SUV's, I'm going to call my accountant.  If its true, I think I might just go out and buy that Hummer 2, the bright yellow one!

I would rather my elected officials make the calls for my country than turning it over to the UN.

Kerry, Edwards, Clark and Dean would do that.  Kerry has stated that!

I said I was "mostly" a libertarian.  I am not a libertarian because I am Pro Life, against same sex marriage and am willing to temporarily subject my personal freedoms to the Patriot Act in order to secure our country from the plague of terrorism.  Not unlike what American's did during WWII.  And yes, I think the threat is just as great, if not greater!

I have no problem with deficit spending in regards to national security, I do have problems with social programs like Bush's Medicare Medicine program and his Alien worker program.  

But alas, as always, it is a choice of lesser evils.  I believe Bush is the lesser, much lesser evil.

Oh, by the way, as a sober alcoholic for 16 years, I respect Bush for quiting drinking.  It shows me a strong character, most alcoholics die drunk.

Bribite,

   The prerequisite is that you have to be self-employed.  If so then you can buy an SUV, specially one that is over 3 tons gross weight and get an accelerated 80% depreciation tax rideoff the first year.  Meaning that if you buy that H2 for $60,000, in the very first year you can ride off $48,000 of the cost.  How nice!!
   Lexus is coming out with a hybrid RX330(the midsize SUV) next year which will be half battery/half fuel operated.  This hybrid technology has been around for years, yet only now after massive pressure from environmental lobbies have a couple companies decided to start using hybrid technology.
  What does that mean to you as a consumer?  Well you get the safety of the SUV, you get higher gas mileage than most sedans, and the SUV doesn't have to be reduced in power or cubic feet size.  What do you think would happend to the economy if SUV's and sdeans started giving 40-60MPG.  Imagine driving that big Sequoia, Escalade, or Expedition and getting over 30MPG instead of the measley 12-15 you get now.  Do you really think that would hurt the economy?  No, the sale of automobiles would skyrocket.  Why not start using this technology on almost every vehicle??
   CAFE(Corporate Fuel Economy Standards) can be tweaked on every single vehicle in the US to increase output by 2-3MPG.  That law was bought up in the 90's twice and fiercely struck down by the Republican Congress.  Wonder why?  Why wouldn't they allow for a tweaking that would allow consumers to get an average of 25-30miles extra for every fillup.
  I understand space exploration is necessary.  Yet it would only take about 150-200 billion over the next 10 years to achieve independence of oil.  It is just as important because we are there right now keeping and financing corrupt regimes so oil isn't disrupted.  
  There are so many other technologies that could reduce and even eliminate our dependancy yet are blocked every time by the oil lobby.  They don't want the transformation because they are raking in BILLIONS. And when you are raking in billions you don't want to give up that chicken laying the black golden eggs.  

It's true that GM's electrical cars have not sold worth a damn, because they never built any truly competitive product.  Toyota, on the other hand, has designed and built some fantastic Hybrid vehicles, that get over 50 mpg, have good acceleration, comfortably seat 4-5 people, are cost competitive with Gasoline powered vehicles, and they can't build enough of them.  They are increasing their Hybrid Capacity 4-fold in the next year, to meet demand.  

BTW, they are also the most PROFITABLE automotive company in the world, and have the HIGHEST customer satisfaction ratings of any automotive company.  Funny how doing good can also result in doing well.

but you really need to stop deluding yourself that you're a Libertarian.  

  Sdstud, you are absolutely right.  In 1985 when congress passed the law requiring sedans to meet a minimum CAFE standard of 27.5 mpg the industry cried and screamed of how they are going to get thorwn in the orphanage with the poor and lepers and the industry will collapse.  Excuses of corrupt and backward corporate crooks.  
  The japanese companies seized the opportunity and made fuel efficient autos with great engine reliability.  Japanese automakers started to dominate the market in the late 80's specifically for that reason.  More consumers purchased cars and the entire auto industry benefitted and the US economy in general benefitted from that boom.  Japanese automakers opened plants all across the US, giving Americans good jobs and everyone was making money.  
  As Reagan said, "There you go again."  Those crooks are again crying foul and claiming the US economy is going to tank, and that every auto industry employee is going to be in the poor house and a homeless shelter because there will be no more jobs if they have to raise those CAFE standards again.  Same excuses from the same crooks.  Complete excrement
  If SUV's started giving 40+MPG as they are capable of, the demand for automobiles would explode, the consumer would travel more which would be a huge boom to the economy,  and despite that excess travel less pollutatns would be in the air.  But of course that will not happen bc that could mean diminished oil profits, which in turn would mean smaller campaign contributions for elections.  
  Damn it what is more important, my keeping my seat in the Senate/House or the damn demanding and nagging public getting cleaner and more fuel efficient cars.  I think the choice is clear so stop bugging me with your demands and let me keep my Senate/House seat without having to answer to you and make any real decisions.  Just leave me the hell alone.  Just because you vote you think demand change that is good for you.  Well how the f@#$ am I supposed to keep my seat of power and give you idiots what is good for you, how damn it

I think you might be Sean Penn, like yourself he dislikes this country, he promised to move out, but like most liberals he didn't keep his promise.  Wish you would - move out that is.

Maybe after November.

You also need to learn to read and reason, I never said I was a Libertarian, I said I was an independent.

This lack of concentration and retention is most likely why you continue to bore us with your Drunk and AWOL subject line pap.  You probably forgot you just wrote it, 10 seconds before.

for a chance at controlling terrorism is in Iraq! - Not Afghanistan, or Syria or Iran for very many reasons. What hasn't sunk into many minds is that terrorism will take many decades to eradicate! - we'll probably be dead before it is under control.
What's being done in Iraq is probably just the intro to a very long concert. IMHO.

that doesn't warrant a whole lot of love. Many guys as POW's were forced to endure that rhetoric from this creep and is comrade-in-arms, Jane!

If Kerry wins - then you will see worst-case scenario! Communism will be well on its way here too! and we may just as well invite the Chinese here and get it over with!

and then prevented us from winning it?

I attempted a response but after writing almost two hundred words
I hit a wrong button and lost the entire text.

I simply don't have the emotional/mental energy at this point to try and reconstruct it all.

Perhaps later but this thread is near the end of it's relevant life.

"And if it's OK with you Blue672, I will just go on giving my opinion of John Forbes Kerry, I believe I still have that right too!"

As for the above it is not me who is any threat to your right to express your opinion. I may certainly have a differing viewpoint than you on any number of issues and may take you to task on such issues and express my own opinion/viewpoint.

If you are concerned about the life expectancy of your right to freely express your views in this country then perhaps you should be wary of John Ashcroft, the Patriot Act and some other recent trends towards infringing on individual liberties and freedom of expression.

I had sincerely hoped to address several points in your post and I sincerely regret the loss of the 26 men in your company along with the loss of the over 58,000+ others who lost their lives in Vietnam. I had far more to say on that but I simply can't continue at this late hour.

I would welcome your response.  

My life experience has not correspond with your John Ashcroft issues.  After a short football scholarship out of state, ended by injury, I enrolled at the University of California, Irvine.  This was in the early 70's.

What I found was a very unwelcome reception to my more conservative views.  So unwelcoming that professors even reflected it in grades.  Grades that were overturned by the Chancellor of the school on the merit of my work.  I was graded down for my opinions, pretty liberal minded don't  you think.  Well that continues to be my experience with "liberals".

I have found that the so called social liberals and educated liberals in our country are the most closed minded.  My children are now or have been through the higher education system in this country and found the system has only worsened in acceptance of opposing points of view.

I keep hearing of fears of infringing of personal rights by the Patriot Act, but have yet to hear any real facts that it has occurred.  The worse thing I have ever heard and it has happened to me is that I had to take off my Nike's before getting on an airplane.  I can deal with that in exchange for a safe landing.  To me the fears of the Patriot Act are unfounded.  The benefits far outweigh the temporary reach of the PA Law.

This thread is too far out of the picture with respect to posting the response I had intended last night simply because that response was for a wider audience, particualry with respect to the loss of lives on both sides in Vietnam and the subsequent consequences of US withdrawal from SE Asia.

"I have found that the so called social liberals and educated liberals in our country are the most closed minded."

With respect to the above one who is left of center on the political spectrum or perhaps even a moderate could edit your statement. "I have found that the evangelical christians and the conservative radio talk show junkies are the most closed minded".

Statements like these paint an entire group with a broad brush and represent a personal viewpoint and political bias that comes up short of any thing approaching some absolute truth. Both liberals and conservatives engage in these tactics and although there may be some element of truth based on personal experience neither side can generally convince the other of the overwhelming
validity of their opposing position.

"To me the fears of the Patriot Act are unfounded."

It is legislation of this sort that makes its way into law not on merit but more so because of an atmosphere of irrational dread bordering on paranoia that has the potential in an insidious way
to erode away individual freedoms that we all cherish. Yes bad things happened on 9/11 and there certainly is a need to be far more vigilent but this is overkill. Simply because you or someone you know has not been personally touched by this doesn't mean that it is not to be questioned, that it does not hold out the potential for great harm. There are already cases of families of long time residency in this country being split up because of simple visa violations that in the past would have never been on the radar screen. Often times these are members of a particular ethnic group or national origin. These actions often take place without due process.

I don't necessarily see this trend as temporary. Perhaps you are right, but time will tell. This is simply one reason why the stakes are high in the upcoming election. I do not see a halt to this trend unless there is change in Washington.

Just my two cents.