Jump to content
Clubplanet Nightlife Community
Sign in to follow this  
obby

Brothers Band Together Against Kerry

Recommended Posts

August 11, 2004

Democrats haven't been this upset about an American engaging in free speech since Juanita Broaddrick opened her yap.

Two hundred fifty-four Swift Boat Veterans have signed a letter saying John Kerry is not fit to be commander in chief, a point developed in some detail in the blockbuster new book by John O'Neill, aptly titled "Unfit for Command." At the 2003 reunion of Swift Boat Veterans, about 300 men showed up: 85 percent of them think Kerry is unfit to be president. (On the bright side, Kerry was voted, in absentia, "Most Likely to Run for President on His Phony War Record.") Fewer than 10 percent of all Swift Boat Veterans contacted refused to sign the letter.

Kerry was in Vietnam for only four months, which, coincidentally, is less than the combined airtime he's spent talking about it. It takes a special kind of person to get that many people to hate your guts in so little time. The last time this many people hated one person after only four months was when Margaret Cho had her own sitcom.

But our young Eddie Haskell managed to annoy other servicemen even before he came home and called them war criminals. About 60 eyewitnesses to Kerry's service are cited in the book, describing Kerry fleeing comrades who were under attack, disregarding orders, putting others in danger, sucking up to his commanders, creating phony film footage of his exploits with a home-movie camera, and recommending himself for medals and Purple Hearts in vainglorious reports he wrote himself. (This was apparently before the concept of "fragging" put limits on such behavior.)

After three months of combat, Kerry had collected enough film footage for his political campaigns, so he went home. He even shot three different endings to the episode where he chases down a VC guy after test audiences thought Kerry shooting a wounded teenager in the back was too much of a "downer." After filming his last staged exploit, Kerry reportedly told a buddy, "That's a wrap. See you at the convention in about 35 years."

Kerry is demanding to be made president on the basis of spending four months in Vietnam 35 years ago. And yet the men who know what he did during those four months don't think he's fit to be dogcatcher. That seems newsworthy to me, but I must be wrong since the media have engineered a total blackout of the Swift Boat Veterans.

In May, the Swiftees held a spellbinding press conference in Washington, D.C. In front of a photo being used by the Kerry campaign to tout Kerry's war service, the officers stood up, one by one, pointed to their own faces in the campaign photo, and announced that they believed Kerry unfit for command. Only one officer in the photo supports Kerry for president. Seventeen say he is not fit to be president.

The press covered it much as they covered Paula Jones' first press conference.

With the media playing their usual role as Truth Commissar for the now-dead Soviet Union, the Swiftees are having to purchase ad time in order to be heard. No Tim Russert interviews, no "Today" show appearances, no New York Times editorials or Vanity Fair hagiographies for these heretics against the liberal religion. The only way Swift Boat Veterans for Truth could get less attention would be to go on "Air America" radio.

If the 254 veterans against Kerry got one-tenth as much media coverage for calling Kerry a liar as Clown Joe Wilson did for calling Bush a liar, the veterans wouldn't need to buy ad time to get their message out. (Wilson, you'll recall, was a media darling for six or seven months before being exposed as a fantasist by Senate investigators.)

With their commitment to free speech and a robust exchange of ideas (i.e., "child pornography" and "sedition"), the Democratic National Committee is threatening to sue TV stations that run the Swift Boat Veterans' paid ads. Sue? Can you tell already that there are two lawyers at the top of the Democratic ticket? These are the same people who accuse John Ashcroft of shredding the Bill of Rights. WHY ISN'T THE PRESS COVERING THIS??? Wait, now I remember. OK, never mind. (Contribute to the Swift Boat Veterans here.)

The threat to sue is absurd, but will allow the very same TV stations that are already censoring the Swiftees to have an excuse to censor even purchased airtime.

Leave aside the fact that Kerry is a presidential candidate and - judging by the ads being run against George Bush - I gather there's nothing you can't say about a presidential candidate, including calling him Hitler. After reading "Unfit for Command," I am pretty sure Kerry doesn't want a neutral tribunal deciding who's telling the truth here.

The Swift Boat Veterans provide detailed accounts from dozens and dozens of eyewitnesses to Kerry's Uriah Heep-like behavior - which "Unfit for Command" contrasts with Kerry's boastful descriptions of the exact same incidents.

By contrast, Kerry's supporters have their usual off-the-rack denunciations of any witness against a Democrat. The veterans are: liars, bigots, idiots, politically motivated, and I was never alone in a hotel with Paula Jones.

Ron Brownstein, Los Angeles Times reporter and Bill Clinton's favorite reporter, compared the Swift Boat Veterans' ad to a "snuff film." He claimed the veterans have "strong Republican ties."

Apparently, before being permitted to engage in free speech against Democrats in this country you have to: (1) prove that you are not a Republican, (2) take a vow of poverty, and (3) purchase the right to speak in a TV ad. On the basis of Clown Wilson, Michael Moore, George Soros, Moveon.org, etc., etc., etc., I gather the requirements for engaging in free speech against a Republican are somewhat less rigorous. Hey! Maybe John Edwards is right: There really are two Americas!

O'Neill, the author of "Unfit for Command" and founder of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, can be heard on the Nixon tapes - unaware that he was being taped - telling Nixon that he came from a family of Democrats and voted for Hubert Humphrey in the prior election. Unlike Joe Wilson, Anita Hill or Richard Clarke, Woodward and Bernstein, et al., O'Neill has said he will take no royalties on his book but will donate all his profits to the Navy. So I think even under liberals' rules, O'Neill is allowed to have an opinion.

Before the book was released and O'Neill could appear to defend it, liberals were on television denouncing the book. If memory serves, the last book Democrats tried this hard to suppress was the Bible. The DNC is threatening to sue to prevent the Swift Boat Veterans from buying ad time. When Democrats are this terrified of a book, it's not because they have a good answer. Howard Dean can accuse Ashcroft of book-burning all he wants, but it's the Democrats who are doing everything in their power to prevent you from reading "Unfit for Command." In bookstores beginning this week

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol3::lol3: 4 months more than any of the "hawkish" fucks that run this country .

And you would be the same douchebag who if lived during those times, would have been the jerkoff spitting our our returning troops....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And you would be the same douchebag who if lived during those times, would have been the jerkoff spitting our our returning troops....

I CHALLENGE you to prove my point wrong !!! :rofl::rofl: ...you came back with a nice Spin though , avoided my point nice & cleanly .

Oh and on your spitting comment ........ Your wrong my lil USDA choice skirt steak , I support the troops , I simply don't support "hawkish" fucks that send em to war for fucked up reasons ...all while never put their own lifes on the line .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I CHALLENGE you to prove my point wrong !!! :rofl::rofl: ...you came back with a nice Spin though , avoided my point nice & cleanly .

Oh and on your spitting comment ........ Your wrong my lil USDA choice skirt steak , I support the troops , I simply don't support "hawkish" fucks that send em to war for fucked up reasons ...all while never put their own lifes on the line .

..

(1) You are not allowed to issue "challenges" unless you answer the countless ones you have ignored......don't you think? Pretty embarassing..

(2) Obvious you would be the jerkoff in the 60's and 70's spitting on troops.....Now you say you support the troops because you live in this era, and lesson were learned...but if you lived then, no doubt you have the inner core of a jerkoff who would havebehaved like a douchebag...

(3) President Bush--Air National Guard...VP Cheney (did not serve)....SecDef Rumsfield--U.S. Navy...SecState Powell--Hopefully you know.

I think you would also agree that there are a host of "hawks that served, and a host of "hawks" that did not serve....and this is in ANY administration, up and down the chain....

Just at there are "doves' that served, and "doves" that did not serve.

Just wondering, do feel the same of say President Clinton, who dodged the draft, and launched a few military excursions in his 8 years too....was he a chicken hawk?.......or is simply that we will have some Presidents who served, and some who did not, and each will have those in their administrations that did or did not--but all of them will be faced with teh challenge of committing troops in harms way...

Your "chicken hawk" comment was assinine, as you are.....your attempts of intellect only make you more foolish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name=igloo

(2) Obvious you would be the jerkoff in the 60's and 70's spitting on troops.....Now you say you support the troops because you live in this era' date=' and lesson were learned...but if you lived then, no doubt you have the inner core of a jerkoff who would havebehaved like a douchebag...

(3) President Bush--Air National Guard...VP Cheney (did not serve)....SecDef Rumsfield--U.S. Navy...SecState Powell--Hopefully you know.

Just wondering, do feel the same of say President Clinton, who dodged the draft, and launched a few military excursions in his 8 years too....was he a chicken hawk?.......

you can't prove that someone would spit on our troops through this BS board. Regardless of his political views that is just disrespectful. Kerry never spit on Troops but did tell of the atrocities that went on there. (which i don't think is wrong) , and so did the young soldier at Abu Ghraib who told of the injustices there. Is he disrespecting soliders?

To make a big deal that he only served 4 months is crazy, both my uncles served and if they had the chance to get out they would of. Anyone would of. Get off this military service of his, at least he served

Bush in the air guard yes, was he there all the time? the jury is out on that. He trained to fly an aircraft that was being phased out.I want to hear from his national air guard buddies like we hear from Kerry's. ?No one can find anyone. hmmm what does that say?

Cheney did not serve b/c he said he had other things to do?

I don't think it's right that clinton did not serve but at least he was a rhodes scholar at oxford not inhailing pot. Yes he did launch a few miliatary excursions in his 8 yrs. But how many troops died? he mostly used air strikes

most important how did repuclicans react? they sure as hell did not support it, and talked bad about clinton. Does not sound like the rhetoric of todays republicans calling anyone who disagrees un american and not supporting the troops. so now who are the flip floppers?

You guys need to find another topic to debate b/c you are losing this argument

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(1) You are not allowed to issue "challenges" unless you answer the countless ones you have ignored......don't you think? Pretty embarassing..

..Were you staring yourself in the mirror when you came up with this statement ? :blank::laugh::laugh:

Fact

: Bush didn't serve in Vietnam (probably Awol and busy drinking brews in Alabama , he was a alcoholic )

: Cheney didn't serve in Vietnam .

..ok lamb chop move along , nothing more to discuss .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
..Were you staring yourself in the mirror when you came up with this statement ? :blank::laugh::laugh:

Fact

: Bush didn't serve in Vietnam (probably Awol and busy drinking brews in Alabama , he was a alcoholic )

: Cheney didn't serve in Vietnam .

..ok lamb chop move along , nothing more to discuss .

Amazing how your posts get progressively more lame.....and it is further amazing how you don;t mind looking like a bigger and bigger clown with each post...

Nice job avoiding the ass kicking I gave you (not to mention all the threads you are ducking)....

Nice job simply using Bush and Cheney, and avoiding Powell and Rumsfield....

Nice job avoiding the facts I laid out for you, and again, exposed you as a clueless, uneducated schmuck...

Add another thread to the list where you got destroyed....give it up son...I am sure there is a Sesame Street messageboard more suited for your IQ...

Fucking retard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amazing how your posts get progressively more lame.....and it is further amazing how you don;t mind looking like a bigger and bigger clown with each post...

Nice job avoiding the ass kicking I gave you (not to mention all the threads you are ducking)....

Nice job simply using Bush and Cheney, and avoiding Powell and Rumsfield....

Nice job avoiding the facts I laid out for you, and again, exposed you as a clueless, uneducated schmuck...

Add another thread to the list where you got destroyed....give it up son...I am sure there is a Sesame Street messageboard more suited for your IQ...

Fucking retard

Bush & Cheney the top 2 chiefs of staff ....and none served in Vietnam ....STAY AWAY , YOU CANNOT SPIN THIS ...so I advise you go masterbate to your old 1988 GOP convention tapes you must have lying around .

goodnight & wishing you a wet dream w/ hannity . :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bush & Cheney the top 2 chiefs of staff ....and none served in Vietnam ....STAY AWAY , YOU CANNOT SPIN THIS ...so I advise you go masterbate to your old 1988 GOP convention tapes you must have lying around .

goodnight & wishing you a wet dream w/ hannity . :)

I am having a hard time believing youare really this dumb...I mean, it is obvious you are mentally challenged, but the depths of your idiosy is unreal....

Here is my exact statement from earlier on the thread:

(3) President Bush--Air National Guard...VP Cheney (did not serve)....SecDef Rumsfield--U.S. Navy...SecState Powell--Hopefully you know.

hmmm...I mention both Bush and Cheney.....so, where exactly is the spin.......point it out son......you do know how to read, right?

And let's not forget this was in response to your statement about the "hawkish fucks who never put their lives on the line".........

And let's see, you have completely ignored Rumsfield and Powell......hmmm, interesting selective use....is that because they served and are in the administration...I mean, they are only the SecDef and SecState...I think they are important, do you?.......nah, this would not be spinning on your point to selectively use information, would it?

Let's not forget your avoidance of the Clinton example either....a rather easy example to understand why you once again have no point......

Son, I have to ask again--Is there something wrong with you, or are you pledging a fraternity and have to attempt to be the dumbest person on earth....

Hopefully, it is the fraternity, because your chances of getting in will be excellent if they look at your performance.......if not, pease do not reproduce.....

Son, spare the lame ass spin...it is weak, ineffective, and embarassing(Unless your goal is to avoid the fact that you are pointless)......take your ass kicking and simply dry up and blow away.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*raises hand*

Hey lamb chop.. will YOU serve? Will you let your kids serve?? Should I locate you and bring a recruiter to your home???

And go Mursa!! Way to get under his skin. :D

Oh, the Michael Moore question...good job jerkoff being original ......Whether I serve, would serve, could serve is none of your fucking business (no different than someone asking you the same question)....and when I have kids, it will be their decison on that matter.....

ANd it is not a question to be thrown around lightly for your amusement either you fucking jerkoff...I have family and friends serving as we speak, so go fuck yourself...

ANd lastly, when are you and your fellow nerdboy going to stop avoiding the main topics, and simply answer the challenge on this thread and others....

It is simple, you were challenged and keep ducking it.........it is there for all to see (you can wish it away, but thatwon't happen).....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×