Which Fool Should I Vote For? Bush or Kerry?

Kerry at worst will do no harm...

That is, of course, if you classify further erosion of the Bill of Rights, rasing taxes, increasing dependancy on government, more senseless "hate crime" legislation, continued government endorsement of racial & sexual discrimination, and the weakening & demoralization of the US military as "no harm."

Now then, I believe I owe you a few details regarding Kerry in Vietnam. Kerry was a reluctant warrior, so to speak. His first trip to Southeast Asia didn't bring him anywhere near the mainland or combat.

Kery volunteered to return to Vietnam on a swift boat. It is important to note that the reason he chose swift boat duty was because (at that time) it was a cushy, non-combat detail. Much to his chagrin, the role of swift boats changed shortly after he arrived in country.

Kerry's first Purple Heart was awarded under dubious circumstances. Essentially, Kerry showed up holding a piece of an M79 grenade (which he had just fired, oddly enough) and pointing to a scratch on his arm and demanded a Purple Heart. His commander didn't feel a Purple Heart was warranted, but Kerry kept pushing the issue until someone appeased his sense of entitlement.

Although Kerry's second Purple Heart was for a similarly trivial scratch, his third was indeed earned.

Fast forward to Kerry's leaving Vietnam... his transfer was not automatic. He requested it, using his dubious Purple Hearts as the vehicle to facilitate his return home.

His actions when he returned home, such as characterizing American troops as war criminals (which he now denies saying) are pretty well known.

The cover of Kerry's book, "The New Soldier" is rather distasteful not only because is mocks the Marines at Iwo Jima, but it is also demonstrates disrespect for the flag of our nation.

Sorry, but this is not the man I would have lead our nation.

you classify further erosion of the Bill of Rights

What do you call the patriot act?

The point Brian was making was that Bush is able to accomplish at least some of his agenda. While Kerry would be weak enough due to the political climate of the congress that he would not be able to accomplish any of his agenda.

In my opinion both are a danger to our society and country, but there is not an alternative candidate that stands for the freedoms first envisioned by the founding fathers that has the financial or political power to be a threat to the two parties (that are in reality so similiar as to be one).

Dan,
I never said that the BoR wasn't being eroded by the current admin. Rather, I was stating that the assumption that "Kerry will do no harm" is erroneous, even with a Republican-controlled Congress.

I agree with the notion that kerry will do no harm.
We will never harm an animal rights activist, a terrorist, a liberal with an anti American agenda, and God knows he would never harm the environment (even though he claims he is against SUVs but at the same time he owns 3. When questioned about this flip flop Kerry replied, "I dont own them, they are family cars".
Someone wake this idiot up and tell him that he is a part of his family! Kerry will vote that a manger scene at Christmas is illegal, but a murdered baby has no rights. (He voted against the Lacy law.) Kerry would say that a gun in the hands of a law abiding citizen is more of a threat than biological weapons are in the hands of a terrorist. Yeah I want this flip flop protecting me.


At least Bush has the balls to take a stand and stick with it. Kerry however when addressing Israel says "I support the wall in Israel protecting its citizens". Then when addressing Palastine stated that "I see no need for this wall." When speaking to abortionists says, "I believe a woman has freedom to abort an unwanted child, but when speaking to a more conservative croud says, "I believe life begins at conception".

Me too, and that tells me that Kerry believes in the right to murder the innocent. The point cant be argued that if life begins at conception, as Kerry says he believes, and he is pro abortion, he has no problem with murdering a child. No wonder he voted against Lacy's law!

Even his wife while sitting right beside himon national tv said she would give up all of her money for her late husband back. She also made Kerry sign a prenump. Well, if Mrs. Kerry would rather have the late husband than the riches, but didn't trust Kerry with the riches, what should that tell us. Simply put, if she dont really want or trust him, maybe we shouldn't either.

You Bush folks are absolutely amazing. "At least Bush has the balls to take a stand and stick with it." Yep , and so did Hitler. Bush only cares about his own agenda and disregards everything and everyone else. And whoever was talking about Kerrys Vietnam service; are you serious? You would rather have some half wit who skipped out on the war AND his National Guard service be your leader. And now it looks like he is interested in Iran. Great, get those bombs ready. We've got to fight them evil doers. Im not saying that Kerry is so great, but Bush is taking this country in the wrong direction, and very quickly. I can only hope his time is close to an end.

EP

You would rather have some half wit who skipped out on the war AND his National Guard service be your leader.

If the alternative is a man who demands a Purple Heart for a scratch that apparently didn't come from enemy fire, uses that Purple Heart as part of an excuse to tuck tail, slanders American troops upon his return, mocked veterans of a previous war, showed disrespect for the American flag, and has consistently sought to deny the men and women of the US Armed Forces the tools we need to effectively do our jobs... HELL YES!!!

I got news for you folks.

Bush/ Kerry- Tweedle dee or Tweedle dum?

Doesn't make a difference!

I suggest those that want to restore our Constitution should vote for a True Man of Principles-



Mike Peroutka!

The ONLY candidate that would put the People and America First!

This election, I ain't voting for no Skull & Bonesmen!

Originally posted by repzoo44
You Bush folks are absolutely amazing.

Thank you.Thank you very much.

"At least Bush has the balls to take a stand and stick with it." Yep , and so did Hitler.

Typical liberal comeback. How would anyone with half a brain cell compare Bush to Hitler. Seems to me its the left that doesn't support the Jews. Maybe Kerry has more in common with Hitler?

Bush only cares about his own agenda and disregards everything and everyone else.

And what agenda would that be? Oh yeah, the one about defending our country.


And whoever was talking about Kerrys Vietnam service; are you serious? You would rather have some half wit who skipped out on the war AND his National Guard service be your leader.

HELL YEAH!!

And now it looks like he is interested in Iran. Great, get those bombs ready. We've got to fight them evil doers.

Damn right! First Iran, then Hollywood!

Im not saying that Kerry is so great,

Noone will argue with that.

but Bush is taking this country in the wrong direction, and very quickly. I can only hope his time is close to an end.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

EP

Typical liberal comeback. How would anyone with half a brain cell compare Bush to Hitler. Seems to me its the left that doesn't support the Jews. Maybe Kerry has more in common with Hitler?

Actually if you look at the way Hitler was able to centralize power in Germany there are many simularities to how things are run now, especially when looking at the patriot act. With the burning of the Reischtag (Sp?) Hitler quickly stepped in to "protect" the german people from the communist people (the ones he and the nazi party blamed for the burning). He jailed german citizens without trial (sound familiar? ) and called it "protective custody". I don't think Kerry is any better on civil liberaties but Bush is far from innocent.

Just for the record the common german citizen was as complacent (sp?) about the loss of freedoms as the common american citizen is now. Each right was taken away piece by piece as a reaction to a threat to the government (either real, imagined or made up).

Originally posted by dwedeking
[B

Hitler quickly stepped in to "protect" the german people from the communist people (the ones he and the nazi party blamed for the burning).

***However Bush stepped in, or was elected in to protect the United States citizen from the very real threat of radical Islam. Not that we had to place blame on them, they were proud of their attack on our soil. What was he suppose to do, give em one more chance to behave? We are indeed a country with enemies. As Americans, both republicans and democrats, our country was outraged by the attack on our soil. If Bush had sat back and did nothing, well the democrats would have accused him of not protecting our country.


He jailed german citize ns without trial (sound familiar? ) and called it "protective custody".

*** Again this is no comparison. Citizens were jailed by Hitler. Islamic Jihadist/ terrorists are jailed by Bush.


Just for the record the common german citizen was as complacent (sp?) about the loss of freedoms as the common american citizen is now.

*** I agree. Like our freedom to own our reptiles. Do you think that PETA are lining up behind Bush? Wrong my friend. In fact check the records and you will find the democratic party is the biggest supporter of animal rights extremist .
True Republicans are for big business, but hell, reptile breeding is BIG Business.

Each right was taken away piece by piece as a reaction to a threat to the government (either real, imagined or made up). [/b]