Republican National Convention Schedule:*Revised, July 2004

[paul]

Hey Mixmachine, Johann. Don't forget go to the girls topic from time to time. That will mellow us out after our heated discussions
OK. I guess you are referring to the last elected President, Bill Clinton. When did he confess to being a chickenhawk/chickenhack? Based on the definition I gave you for chickenhawk, can you demonstrate how this applies to President Clinton? Yes he avoided the draft but I must have missed his relentless drumbeats for a war somewhere.
The closest thing to a well known Dem being a chickenhawk is Lieberman. He didn't have a shot with the democrats for Pres in part because of that. Interestingly, repugs love him. Oh, not all repugs are chickenhawks. Colin Powell's service is well documented. I guess being part of the Bush team he seemingly reluctantly supported Bush's Iraq war. Isn't it interesting though that the one guy in the inner circles in the Bush junta that least supported the war was the one that was actually in a war.
By the way, I'm glad you like Repug. I'm from the Dean/Truman wing of the Democrat Party. Deaniacs are proud to be liberal. We don't eat repug shit, in fact we get in your face (ideologically that is) and put repugs on the defensive.

[markydefad]

mm,

IF you're referring to the man you love to hate Bill Clinton... (YOU KNOW YOU DOOOOOOOOOOO!!!)

Clinton admitted to Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show" that "Yes" he and Bush & Cheney had ALL AVOIDED the draft to Vietnam. He included himself in the list--not just the REPUGS (love that term!!!). Believe me, if you were around at the time...you'd know NO ONE WANTED TO GO!!!!

Therefore, the FACT that Kerry (a man of priviledge who coulda pulled some strings to get a gig at the National Guard like Dubya did) ENLISTED is more than a little impressive. Not to you REPUGS of course. But to sane and rational and thinking human beings, it is. :P

[Mixmachine]

Well, videoskooter, you are sure using the same left wing propaganda in your post that can be found in many Leftist articles, so obviously that leads me to believe you must follow their rhetoric closely, Your use of derogatory names to describe those you disapproved (Dubya) and their supporters, (even manage to throw in a slant on my handle Mixmaster for good measure) leads me to believe you really don’t respect my views at all in spite of what you may say in your post so….., I know perfectly well the Belgium is a different country, the “French Cuisine” remark was not specifically directed at you , its was use to describe in few words what has been a very common American opinion of Europeans for years, when the going gets tough everyone takes off and leaves it to America to resolve, UN resolution or not… terrorism is not an American problem only as you know.

[Mixmachine]

Originally Posted by paul

Hey Mixmachine, Johann. Don't forget go to the girls topic from time to time. That will mellow us out after our heated discussions

Yeah, I feel like Pacino in Godfather III "just when I thought I was out they pull me back in!!!!

I've been provoked in this board!!!!!! :lol:

OK. I guess you are referring to the last elected President, Bill Clinton. When did he confess to being a chickenhawk/chickenhack?

Yeap, he also confessed during his Covention speech, I see you didn't watch, they may revoke your voting card now :lol:

Based on the definition I gave you for chickenhawk, can you demonstrate how this applies to President Clinton?

Just yesterday again in the History channel they metioned his plans to attack North Korea :o

I meant "chickenhawk" since Marky told me my spelling sucks (I knew that!)I've been using more spellchecker :lol: and apparently it changed it without me noticing.

this reply was not checked I'm tired already...


[/quote]

[Videoskooter]

But that's exactly the problem here. I call him Dubya because I don't trust him, nor do I trust his government. And I do respect republicans because there are good people in the GOP but they just aren't in the government right now.

This government is a collection of the extreme and you know that well. Bush is simply too arrogant and has offended many people with his decisions. He insulted the whole of Europe when we said that invading Iraq was illegal and he pushed his ideas and called us cowards and "OLD" people.

All the international treatys about trade, the Kyotorules, they are all gone. He doesn't discuss them, he simply says no and go to hell if you don't agree.

And terrorism? Yes , it must be fought the hard way but not the wrong way. Do you realise how much hate he is creating in the middle-east right now. Beware, coz' those young kids are the fundamentalists of tomorrow and believe me, my heart is also with all the brave American soldiers who are risking their lives there. And don't start insulting me now by referring to the 9/11 attacks because I can assure you that I am just as much disgusted by them as you are. But is he fighting all that the right way?

Maybe but maybe not. You see, my friend, that's a discussion! A change of ideas.

And maybe if I was an American I would vote Republican or maybe Democrat, depending on who is on the ballot and whose ideas are stroking with my vision. But I surely wouldn't vote for George W. Bush. If you vote Bush, that's your right.

That's my point! And if you think that all Europeans are socialists or too dumb to read the serious press, then you are wrong, ok? So let's have a discussion but let's not go to war on this forum.



And Paul, I am watching the Girls-topic very closely, don't worry :D

[paul]

You're right mm. I caught very little of the Dem convention. I missed Clinton's speech but ya know I had to see Dean's speech, even if his passionate words were vetted by Kerry and the rest of the party. Oh I forgot to mention, I voted for Clinton the 2nd time, not the first.
I'm aware of the North Korea incident but I would venture a guess that most Americans at the time had no idea how serious the situation with North Korea was. That doesn't come close to the drumbeating heard from Condi, Shrub himself, Cheney, et al. Look, let's not get ridiculous. A President or any head of state for that matter has to have a military option when another nation displays bellicose behavior as N. Korea has done often. Eventually as we all know, no military action was taken and a deal was brokered. You can either be a Teddy Roosevelt and walk softly and carry a big stick. Or, you can be like this regime and engage in gun boat diplomacy by trumping up phony reasons for a war, alienmate many of our allies, and extending troop deployment and stop loss policies for a war of choice!

[NickNack]

Originally Posted by paul

Vietnam is very controversial and unfortunately we are still debating this some 30-40 years later. I'd rather the discussion focus on the future but this is where we are right now. Hey Nicky, I'd really love your take right now pro or con, because your a man who was actually there. Fortunately the war ended some 3 or 4 years before my number came up!

I'm sorry, Paul, but I won't enter this discussion on the forum. The tone of it is just a little too nasty for me. Then again, politics always brings out the best in people. :roll:

I will say this: As a vet, I have no problem with what Kerry said against the war. Sadly, much of it is true, whether we choose to believe it or not. One of the reasons I refused to fly and risked court-martial in my last year of service was because of a bombing brought to light after a mission in Thailand. Some of the guys were laughing, actually laughing, at the attack on a non-military target and it's destruction and lives taken. I'd had enough, and I'm the first to say that my overseas duty in comparison to the guys on the ground (I was Air Force) was nothing. Later, most of us realized that the main reason we as a nation stayed in Vietnam so long was to save face. It didn't have a damn thing to do with stopping Communism.

I have two vivid memories of 'coming home'. The first is of brothers and sisters putting me down, saying our war was at home, not over there. The second, and more lasting, is of me on a New York City bus with my Mom. It was my first day back and she made me wear the uniform and come to work with her so she could tell her boss she was taking the day off. As I stood on the bus a woman tapped my leg and asked me had I just come home. I said, yes. She welcomed me back and then proceeded to tell me that her son didn't make it. She started crying and lamenting the loss of "her baby" for a war she didn't understand. I told my Mom I would never cause that much pain again by wearing that uniform in public. I never have.

I know this isn't what you wanted, Paul, but other than meeting and making some great friends and comrades, my service experience didn't leave me clamoring for more. My brother came home shell-shocked. He eventually got over it, went back in the Army and made a career. Guess it worked for him. My lover, on the other hand, spent many months in the hospital after VN. He was on the ground and after 26 years together he has never told me what he witnessed. All I know is films like "Apocolypse Now", "Hamburger Hill" or "Saving Private Ryan" have never been seen in this household.

One last comment: There is nothing, absolutely nothing this administration has shown me that justifies our presence in Iraq. And hopefully we can clean up our mess because we damn sure created a vile situation. If the Iraqis want 'freedom', then they, not George Bush, should be the ones saying it loud and clear for the world to hear. Do you feel the love? I sure don't. And now Americans have died again. For what? We went overseas because of 9/11 and our new 'war on terror'. Now we're occupying a country that our government has already admitted had nothing to do with that incident. And that would include it's leader, Hussein. Yet we spend billions there while poverty here at home rises and our own children are starving. Osama walks free. Al-Qaida is stronger than ever. What used to be distrust for our government has turned to hatred for America as a people.

Sorry, THIS RUNAWAY TRAIN NEEDS TO BE STOPPED. We are not the world's police and battling this ideology with bullets is going nowhere fast.

[paul]

Hey Nicky. I am just happy you shared your take. I really didn't expect anything. I truly appreciate hearing what you had to say. 8) Like the few Vets I have known, I gathered you have moved on with your life. One guy I worked with back in '76 was a brotha that was so cool. He never brought up his experience in Vietnam. In fact all I heard him say about 'Nam was in reference to his nickname, Steppenwolf. He said he got the name while serving over there.
Oh, the treatment of Vets was one of the screwed up things in that period.

[Videoskooter]

Nicky, I've read your reply very carefully and I can fully understand you won't enter this discussion.

And I will be reading it again many times because your analysis is correct. And when you point out that Al Quaida is stronger than ever I'm afraid you're right. This is not an army, it's a collection of many little armys, well trained, some of them invisible and unknown and sadly enough they have much sympathy from poor and humiliated muslims.

Europeans were strongly critized because they didn't participate in the second Gulf War but we feared what was going to happen there. Removing Hussein was not the big problem since the American troops are simply the best and strongest in the world but we were concerned of the situation after the war and our worst fears came true. The country is on the edge of a civil war and it will take much more diplomacy than military power to avoid it and to get a stable democracy over there. And, frankly, I just know that the Bush-government realises they're in trouble, but what can they say just before election-time, War is over??? It isn't!

Now we have Iran and North-Korea who are potential dangers. What does Bush say about it: "My way or the highway". What's going to happen there in the near future?
I hope he's not going to be the next president but in the case he is, I hope he's going to think and talk more before acting. They're both nuclear powers and be sure they ARE going to defend themselves. "The great danger Iraq" was a joke, remember that. Hussein didn't have nuclear weapons, he didn't have large biological or chemical stocks, because if he did have those, he would have used them! They simple had to throw him out in the first war instead of leaving him in power and apply 10 years of hard sanctions which only affected the Iraqi people and not the members of the Baath-party.

And when you say that the Americans don't have to be the police of the world, you're absolutely right too. The European union is big but instead of creating a solid force of their own they usually call in the Nato (mainly USA and GB) and that is wrong.

So, republican or democrat, the right decisions are going to be made and it better won't be the wrong ones!

[paul]

You know things are fucked up when even Bob Barr, one of the Repug inquisitors hunting down Clinton, agree that this administration is becoming dangerous.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/082804W.shtml

[judydoggie]

For many years I have been an active member of the Republican party. Hereinabove, Forum Member Videoskooter said something to the effect that there are good people in the Republican Party but they're not in the government. He's right! Today I can say that I am ashamed to be a member of the Republican party. Our president is a wooden puppet and our vice president (aw c'mon -- are we all so myopic about the relationship between his Halliburton connections and the Bush oil interests) and others are pullin' the strings. Worse, the president displays in his behavior and his affect all of the symptoms of an untreated alcoholic.

Abraham Lincoln's ideal for the Republican Party, in a nutshell, was that government was to be as compact as possible, and that if allowed to go unfettered, the businesses in a community and the people thriving in that community will take care of those who cannot help themselves.

Top civil servants, on the one hand, are driven by a genuine interest in making life better for those that they serve, their children, and their grandchildren, etc. However, a big, fat government, if you think about it, has no profit motive; is not driven by customer service goals -- indeed, bureaucrats have an underlying motive to create a situation in which their jobs and the jobs of their fellow bureaucrats are safe and sound. God forbid the taxpayers' money be saved.

To help along with my argument, I have an eloquent exhibit about taxes (I am staunchly against tax-and-spend government; believe me; let the private sector handle those who cannot help themselves; give it a little time and it'll work just fine). Surf to http://www.asianfusion.net/LafferCurve.htm for a brief lesson in economics and why it makes sense to reduce taxes. You don't even need a college degree to read this fine dissertation that is part of nearly every first-year economics course.

I just don't know what to do. If the Democrats had someone as charismatic as Clinton to offer up; I might vote Democrat this year... but Kerry has all of the charisma of a wet paper grocery satchel. His habit of pulling quick-change policy maneuvers really scares me. Perhaps someone will just lasso Bush and reel him in a bit. He's just such a loose cannon. He's also really fucked up our foreign relations.

Please forgive me, those of you who disagree, but I just wish that for a moment Nixon's spectre would come back and visit Bush in the oval office and give him a lesson in being a great statesman.

The freedom and riches we enjoy in this country are without compare. With these privileges come a very dear price: from time to time we must assume the role of the world's police, and sacrifice our youngest, most promisig lives to that end. It breaks my heart. I watch the news and I cry every time I see another funeral.

Nuclear War in the Koreas? I have more trust in the U.S. intelligence community than that actually becoming a reality (okay, color me naive). As far as Iraq; let 'em have a civil war and fuck up the country again; the French and the Germans are already hurting 'cause all of the "oil for food" money that Hussein was squandering on contracts with them dried up.

Why can't we just get along? I'll tell you why -- there are others in the world who have been so assured by their religion that the afterlife is so unlike anything we have here, that they are willing to commit suicide in the name of their extremist sects without regard for the lives of others of different beliefs. Each one of these individuals, in my opinion, is just as dangerous as the nuclear devices the U.S. dropped on Japan over half a century ago.

The fact that the President and his team have had four years of experience with these maniacal extremists is just about the only thing that's given me any way to justify voting for him rather than Senator Kerry.

I would love to be talked out of this decision by someone more well-intelligenced on these issues than I (sadly, I am very, very busy and get a lot of my information from the television and the car radio, which tend to be skewed left or right -- yours truly tends to prefer the right).

love to ya all!

[Boodikka]

I'm confused.....was that Zell Miller or Yosemite Sam at that Republican't thingie? Was he mad at Bugs Bunny or something? He ought to grow that big mustache back....he sure has changed since his Warner Brothers cartoon days.

[QUINNY]

JudyDoggie: I found this article interesting, so will you and anyone who's fed up with tax heavy, nosey government.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-272es.html

Apparently this makes me a bona fide paid up right wing fascist of sorts, whereas my beliefs have always been to the hard left. Let's just say that I just see income tax as the most abhorrent tax of all time and nothing short of slavery and tyranny.

[originalbigm]

We went overseas because of 9/11 and our new 'war on terror'. Now we're occupying a country that our government has already admitted had nothing to do with that incident. And that would include it's leader, Hussein. Yet we spend billions there while poverty here at home rises and our own children are starving. Osama walks free. Al-Qaida is stronger than ever.

Interesting as in a recent interview when Clinton was here in Toronto promoting his book he pointed out that in Iraq there are some 150,000 American troops deployed while in Afighanistan there are only 15,000 troops. If the premise and justification for the current state affairs is Al-Quida and Bin Laden.Should it not be the reverse?

[Videoskooter]

Indeed-strange isn't it :o

Bin Laden is the one they're supposed to be chasing and that guy is probably in the territory between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Why o why aren't they looking THERE for him in full force.

And what about the absolutely disgusting attack on the Russian school which many sources say it is again financed by some wealthy Saudi families.

What is really happening in the world????