Arab Guide to the 2004 US Election

[Elisheba]

The Arab and Iranian press have increasingly discussed the upcoming American presidential election. Most journalists are pulling for a Kerry victory. Other commentators have said that the choice between the two is like "choosing between cholera and the plague."

The Iranian press has been particularly active in monitoring the elections. The editor of the Egyptian Al-Gil newspaper, Nagi Al Shihabi, was interviewed by the Iranian Al-Alam TV on June 13, and said: "The U.S. wants to eradicate our religious and Islamic identity. Bush declared a Crusader war following the events of 9/11…The U.S. established its country over the body parts of 120 million Indians. We must first define the enemy. The no. 1 enemy of the Arab and Islamic peoples is the U.S. and not only Israel…Bush, Allah willing, will go to hell in this coming November."

During his Friday sermon in the city of Qom, broadcast by Channel 2 of Iranian TV on June 19, preacher Ayatollah Javadi-Amoli called on Americans to vote against Mr. Bush: "We advise the people of America not to continue to tolerate this oppressing, ignorant, pillaging, criminal, and discriminating administration. In the future, do not vote for Bush and his ilk."

Writing in the Tehran Times on June 17, Kian Nader Mokhtari praised Senator Kerry, and hoped that he would triumph over the "neo-Nazis" of the Bush administration: "It has long been a tradition in U.S. politics for irresponsible gun-toting Republican presidents to pass on unresolved dilemmas to their Democratic replacements, and Bush will be no exception…Kerry is exactly what the U.S. needs… Kerry's sensible and methodical approach will no doubt go some distance in solving the stinking heap of a mess left over by Bush and his neo-conservatives — for a minute there I was going to type neo-Nazis!...He [Kerry] may be remembered as the president whose decisions saved the U.S..."

The Lebanese minister of information, Michael Samaha, also discussed the election on Syrian TV on March 30: "The most important thing that could happen in the coming American elections if Kerry wins is that the neo-conservatives leave. They have a complete ideology regarding their treatment of the world and specifically the Middle East and the Near East to which we belong. If they leave, the real American America will return."

In an article in Al-Ahram weekly on April 18, an Arab-Israeli member of Knesset, Azmi Bishara, called on Arab-Americans to "rethink their alliance with Bush" and "shift their votes from Bush to Kerry."


By Steven Stalinsky
Isralert@aol.com source: http://www.jewishworldreview.com

[Mediocrates]

It shows how stupid and pathetic the French/Arab political front is. They naturally assume that anyone who is not the person they hate the most is the person they love the most. Does any rational person actually believe that John Kerry is some kind of Manchurian Candidate who's going to get elected and then proclaim the US the People's Islamic Republic of Americastan?

Look to American history, the biggest hawks on foreign policy have always been the Democrats.

[SteveMetch]

No Republican has ever attacked anyone with a nuclear weapon though this is only due to the lack of opportunity. Maybe Iran and North Korea will help the Republican’s pull ahead.

I wonder if the Kerry Campaign will list the Iranian endorsements on their web site.

”Terrorists for Kerry” we can’t survive four more years of Bush

I can’t see how any American could bring themselves to vote for a candidate so popular with our enemies. It would be like Israeli voters following the suggestion of Arafat.

My Motto is to do the exact opposite of what your enemies want you to do.

[philingraham]

No Republican has ever attacked anyone with a nuclear weapon though this is only due to the lack of opportunity. Maybe Iran and North Korea will help the Republican’s pull ahead.

I wonder if the Kerry Campaign will list the Iranian endorsements on their web site.

”Terrorists for Kerry” we can’t survive four more years of Bush

I can’t see how any American could bring themselves to vote for a candidate so popular with our enemies. It would be like Israeli voters following the suggestion of Arafat.

My Motto is to do the exact opposite of what your enemies want you to do.

How do you know exactly what it is our enemies want us to do ?
You could make a good case that invading Iraq was exactly what Osama wanted us to do.

Kerry and Bush are flip sides of the same coin. The danger in a Kerry Administration is that it seems a new President always has to establish his bona fides by using the Military in yet another display of short sightedness. Bush, at least, is showing some signs of having learned from his mistakes. Is this a good enough reason to vote for Bush ? It would help if he actually developed his own Foreign Policy...

[Elisheba]

The danger in a Kerry Administration is that it seems a new President always has to establish his bona fides by using the Military in yet another display of short sightedness. Bush, at least, is showing some signs of having learned from his mistakes. Is this a good enough reason to vote for Bush ? It would help if he actually developed his own Foreign Policy...

There's more danger in a possible Kerry Administration than your post indicates.

Mrs. Kerry's support of The Tides Foundation is ominous indeed.

Speakers at the Democratic Convention indicated great hostility toward the State of Israel. Democrats who are now winning primaries include such Jew-haters as Cynthia McKinney.

For the first time, Jews might actually desert the Democratic Party ... that is, if they/we don't wish to be partners in our own destruction.

[Elisheba]

The Council on American – Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a news release congratulating Cynthia McKinney on her win in Georgia’s 4th Congressional District primary.

McKinney, who lost her seat in the last election, is strongly supported by CAIR, as indicated by the following statements from their news release:

“We congratulate Cynthia McKinney on her strong showing in Tuesday's primary. Throughout her political career, she has been a consistent friend of the American Muslim community and a strong advocate for issues of concern to Muslims, particularly the promotion of social justice and the defense of civil liberties.”

"Ms. McKinney's integrity has long been reflected in her commitment to the concerns of ordinary Americans and her promotion of balanced and forward-looking foreign policies."


Anti-CAIR (ACAIR) is immediately suspect of anyone so strongly supported by CAIR. As for McKinney herself, we feel we are justified in saying those voters in her district who support her simply do not know what she is about.

A little background: Two years ago, prior to the Iraq invasion, McKinney had this to say about the attacks of September 11, 2001:

“We know there were numerous warnings of the events to come on September 11th.... What did this administration know and when did it know it, about the events of September 11th? Who else knew, and why did they not warn the innocent people of New York who were needlessly murdered?... What do they have to hide?”

Who was giving McKinney direction to make this outrageous statement?

"Radical Islamic groups are supporting the congressional candidacy of Cynthia McKinney, who seems a shoo-in over her GOP opponent as she seeks to regain the seat in Congress she lost in 2002. McKinney may be the "Manchurian Candidate" of Islamic terrorism.”

The people of the 4th district in Georgia have made their choice and it appears not much stands in the way of McKinney’s election…except common sense. Maybe it will rain common sense on the 4th district prior to the election?

[philingraham]

The Council on American – Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a news release congratulating Cynthia McKinney on her win in Georgia’s 4th Congressional District primary.

McKinney, who lost her seat in the last election, is strongly supported by CAIR, as indicated by the following statements from their news release:

“We congratulate Cynthia McKinney on her strong showing in Tuesday's primary. Throughout her political career, she has been a consistent friend of the American Muslim community and a strong advocate for issues of concern to Muslims, particularly the promotion of social justice and the defense of civil liberties.”

"Ms. McKinney's integrity has long been reflected in her commitment to the concerns of ordinary Americans and her promotion of balanced and forward-looking foreign policies."


Anti-CAIR (ACAIR) is immediately suspect of anyone so strongly supported by CAIR. As for McKinney herself, we feel we are justified in saying those voters in her district who support her simply do not know what she is about.

A little background: Two years ago, prior to the Iraq invasion, McKinney had this to say about the attacks of September 11, 2001:

“We know there were numerous warnings of the events to come on September 11th.... What did this administration know and when did it know it, about the events of September 11th? Who else knew, and why did they not warn the innocent people of New York who were needlessly murdered?... What do they have to hide?”

Who was giving McKinney direction to make this outrageous statement?

"Radical Islamic groups are supporting the congressional candidacy of Cynthia McKinney, who seems a shoo-in over her GOP opponent as she seeks to regain the seat in Congress she lost in 2002. McKinney may be the "Manchurian Candidate" of Islamic terrorism.”

The people of the 4th district in Georgia have made their choice and it appears not much stands in the way of McKinney’s election…except common sense. Maybe it will rain common sense on the 4th district prior to the election?

Suggesting that Kerry is in the pocket of Radical Islamic groups is absurd. It conributes only confusion to the debate. Regardless of what Cynthia McKinney has to say it will have NO influence on a Kerry Administration.

[Elisheba]

Suggesting that Kerry is in the pocket of Radical Islamic groups is absurd. It conributes only confusion to the debate. Regardless of what Cynthia McKinney has to say it will have NO influence on a Kerry Administration.


Right. :rolleyes:

Just like Teresa's contributions to terrorist front organizations will have NO influence on a Kerry administration.

Just like Kerry's announcing of recycled Israel-haters as those he would like to send as 'peacemakers' to Israel.

Just like Kerry's faith in the UN and the IC(IN)J.

Right. :rolleyes:

[philingraham]

Right. :rolleyes:

Just like Teresa's contributions to terrorist front organizations will have NO influence on a Kerry administration.

Just like Kerry's announcing of recycled Israel-haters as those he would like to send as 'peacemakers' to Israel.

Just like Kerry's faith in the UN and the IC(IN)J.

Right. :rolleyes:

Kerry's entire record in the US Senate supports Israel.

Since when does Israel pay any attention to "US Peacekeepers" ?

Teresa will go the way of Hillary, Laura, Barbara, Nancy etc etc...

[Elisheba]

Kerry's entire record in the US Senate supports Israel.

Since when does Israel pay any attention to "US Peacekeepers" ?

Teresa will go the way of Hillary, Laura, Barbara, Nancy etc etc...

Here's an example for you: FY2000 Foreign Aid Conference Report: Kerry opposed pro-Israel position (although it passed 51-49); however, I am more concerned about the paradigm shift between the 2 parties over Israel, i.e. the FUTURE.

What are "US Peacekeepers"? Was that perhaps a Freudian slip and you meant "UN Peacekeepers"? Of course, Israel pays no attention to the UN, an organization which is blatantly anti-Israel! However, with a January 2005 US policy change which will include a pro-Eurabia POV, a sea change will occur. Again, I speak of the FUTURE.

You really think Teresa will go the way of the other first ladies you listed? How adorably naive of you! She holds the purse strings for her husband and she strongly supports anti-Israel positions.

[Alfred]

We must first define the enemy. The no. 1 enemy of the Arab and Islamic peoples is the U.S. and not only IsraelAllah willing, will go to hell in this coming November."

"We advise the people of America not to continue to tolerate this oppressing, ignorant, pillaging, criminal, and discriminating administration. In the future, do not vote for Bush and his ilk."




This is shocking!!!!

I never realized that Bush was so bad.

I think I will join Medio and vote for the pro-Israeli Kerry. After all, Kerry, the French, the other Europeans and the UN have only the best interest of Israel in mind.

And of course....Kerry is a real soldier's soldier. So, as a Vet I can relate to his macho possiblities in striking terror in the mind of Islamic untermenchen.


:)

[Elisheba]

This is shocking!!!!

I never realized that Bush was so bad.

I think I will join Medio and vote for the pro-Israeli Kerry. After all, Kerry, the French, the other Europeans and the UN have only the best interest of Israel in mind.

And of course....Kerry is a real soldier's soldier. So, as a Vet I can relate to his macho possiblities in striking terror in the mind of Islamic untermenchen.


:)

;)

I'm likin' you! :D

[philingraham]

This is shocking!!!!

I never realized that Bush was so bad.

I think I will join Medio and vote for the pro-Israeli Kerry. After all, Kerry, the French, the other Europeans and the UN have only the best interest of Israel in mind.

And of course....Kerry is a real soldier's soldier. So, as a Vet I can relate to his macho possiblities in striking terror in the mind of Islamic untermenchen.


:)

As a Vietnam Vet I can relate to the fact that he VOLUNTEERED, served, came back and told the current Rumfelds that the war was fu*ked.

[Elisheba]

As a Vietnam Vet I can relate to the fact that he VOLUNTEERED, served, came back and told the current Rumfelds that the war was fu*ked.

Thank you for your service.

Kerry served 4 months and then threw other men's medals away; stating they were his own. Not cool ...

I wish we didn't have to make this about Vietnam. I don't believe the present situation is the same at all.

[philingraham]

Thank you for your service.

Kerry served 4 months and then threw other men's medals away; stating they were his own. Not cool ...

I wish we didn't have to make this about Vietnam. I don't believe the present situation is the same at all.

The current situation bears a relationship to Vietnam only in the sense that it is about Nationalism. Any occupying army could expect the same thing we are experiencing now. The Baathist, the Shias, the Kurds will sooner or later determine what the future face of Iraq will be. They will track down and kill al queda once we get the hell out of there.

In the meantime they have justified suspicions about our real motivations and will try to act together. If our intent is to create a democracy, regardless of how absurd that may be, that is one thing. However, if our intent is to secure "The American Way of Life", for a few more years then we can expect more of the same...

[MichaelC]

As a Vietnam Vet I can relate to the fact that he VOLUNTEERED, served, came back and told the current Rumfelds that the war was fu*ked.
As another Viet Nam vet who volunteered, served and came back, I have the point of view that his actions at the time were self serving and demeaning to the honorable soldiers who did so much more for their country than he has ever done. The mere fact of service does not make a person's public utterances beyond reproach and should not be used as an argument to quiet those who might hesitate to criticize a "vet".

[philingraham]

As another Viet Nam vet who volunteered, served and came back, I have the point of view that his actions at the time were self serving and demeaning to the honorable soldiers who did so much more for their country than he has ever done. The mere fact of service does not make a person's public utterances beyond reproach and should not be used as an argument to quiet those who might hesitate to criticize a "vet".

As near as I can tell, there is no hesitation on the part of The Forum to critcize a "vet". I don't defend Kerry in all of his past actions. You are right up to a point. I was responding to Alfred, however. His cavalier way of rejecting Kerry out of hand lead me to respond in kind...

[MichaelC]

As near as I can tell, there is no hesitation on the part of The Forum to critcize a "vet". I don't defend Kerry in all of his past actions. You are right up to a point. I was responding to Alfred, however. His cavalier way of rejecting Kerry out of hand lead me to respond in kind...
Wasn't out to offend you, just to put things in perspective a little. Kerry's "vet-ness" and "medals" are rightly controversial. Not to mention the fact that once he claimed the status of war criminal and expressed shame at the behavior of all soldiers in the war and now, because it serves his ambition, he portrays himself as a heroic defender of our country, who was an honorable person when in Nam. Too big of stretch for me to meld these two self-serving views and come out with an honest man.

My comment concerning the criticism of vets was meant to indicate that the mere fact of someone being a vet does not make them infallible nor does it place them above criticism. Kerry is thumping his chest about his "heroics" in Nam and I do think he believes himself beyond criticism, but he opened himself to it by his public behavior when he returned to the U.S. and vilified his country. He cannot now argue for a free pass on that.

[philingraham]

Wasn't out to offend you, just to put things in perspective a little. Kerry's "vet-ness" and "medals" are rightly controversial. Not to mention the fact that once he claimed the status of war criminal and expressed shame at the behavior of all soldiers in the war and now, because it serves his ambition, he portrays himself as a heroic defender of our country, who was an honorable person when in Nam. Too big of stretch for me to meld these two self-serving views and come out with an honest man.

My comment concerning the criticism of vets was meant to indicate that the mere fact of someone being a vet does not make them infallible nor does it place them above criticism. Kerry is thumping his chest about his "heroics" in Nam and I do think he believes himself beyond criticism, but he opened himself to it by his public behavior when he returned to the U.S. and vilified his country. He cannot now argue for a free pass on that.


I agree, no free passes. But the Kerry performance, way back then, STILL compares favorably to Bush's non-performance, way back then. You and I both know that entry into the National Guard was a FREE PASS from Vietnam. If there is anything to glean from this conversation it has to do with the choices we made in the present. Remember that both Bush and Kerry were members of the a very pricey league. You and me were guys just trying to get by. At least Kerry made an attempt to do the right thing. What did Bush do ?

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by philingraham

I agree, no free passes. But the Kerry performance, way back then, STILL compares favorably to Bush's non-performance, way back then. You and I both know that entry into the National Guard was a FREE PASS from Vietnam. If there is anything to glean from this conversation it has to do with the choices we made in the present.
I do not see service in the National Guard as dishonorable. There were National Guard in Nam as far as I know. There are many National Guard in Iraq right now. The attempt to paint someone as dishonorable by referencing the National Guard is an unfair smear against the Guard.

I do not see Kerry's Viet Nam era service as honorable. He himself allowed as much.

I think Kerry's past is totally relevant in view of the wild and wierd claims and accusations that he made after returning from Nam and the totally different tale that he now tells. I think it is deceitful of him to hide from questions about that time and pretend that he never did what he did and said what he said.

It's late...I'm a little tired, so I don't want to search the web right now to find the name of the book that he wrote back then. But, I understand that he will not allow another printing of it in the present because he does not want to deal with the can of worms that it will open. Of course, the book is still laying around here and there.

If he had the balls to allow its reissue, it would be an instant best seller but not for the reasons that he would want a book to sell well. The refusal to reissue the book keeps it out of the hands of many who might otherwise be able to take a closer look at the guy.


At least Kerry made an attempt to do the right thing.
I have no idea what this means.

[Elisheba]

The current situation bears a relationship to Vietnam only in the sense that it is about Nationalism. Any occupying army could expect the same thing we are experiencing now. The Baathist, the Shias, the Kurds will sooner or later determine what the future face of Iraq will be. They will track down and kill al queda once we get the hell out of there.

In the meantime they have justified suspicions about our real motivations and will try to act together. If our intent is to create a democracy, regardless of how absurd that may be, that is one thing. However, if our intent is to secure "The American Way of Life", for a few more years then we can expect more of the same...

My MAIN problem with your post is this excerpt, "They will track down and kill al queda once we get the hell out of there." I don't believe that for a second, however, I DO believe that 'al queda' must be stopped. Any person of good will has just got to be against that organization, however, it knows no boundaries ... encouraging it to flourish in Iraq will IMHO hasten more 9/11's ... and not only in the USA.

[Alfred]

I agree, no free passes. But the Kerry performance, way back then, STILL compares favorably to Bush's non-performance, way back then. You and I both know that entry into the National Guard was a FREE PASS from Vietnam. If there is anything to glean from this conversation it has to do with the choices we made in the present. Remember that both Bush and Kerry were members of the a very pricey league. You and me were guys just trying to get by. At least Kerry made an attempt to do the right thing. What did Bush do ?


All of us that served in the military have seen the type that Kerry may have been. It reminds me of the movie "The Iron Cross" where the German officer was hell-bent on getting his Iron Cross...regardless of who died or what rules he needed to bend.

I don't want to put words in your mouth....but just in case Kerry is a hero to you for serving in Nam; see below. If half of this is true, then I suggest that Kerry is just the kind of guy to send people like you and me on a cluster-fxxx to promote his own self-glory. Just the kind of brown-nosers we hated while in the military.

Gee MichaelC, I didn't know you served in Viet Nam. Now I am going to have to take back all the nasty things I have said in the past :) But as Kerry so often says....that was in the past, let's talk about tomorrow. While I did live in Viet Nam circa 63-65, I did not fight there.

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX TUE AUG 03, 2004 21:35:02 ET XXXXX

BOOK CLAIMS KERRY WAR 'FABRICATIONS'

**Exclusive**

A veterans group seeking to deeply discredit Democrat John Kerry's military service will charge in the new bombshell book UNFIT FOR COMMAND:


Two of John Kerry's three Purple Heart decorations resulted from self-inflicted wounds, not suffered under enemy fire.


All three of Kerry's Purple Hearts were for minor injuries, not requiring a single hour of hospitalization.


A "fanny wound" was the highlight of Kerry's much touted "no man left behind" Bronze Star.


Kerry turned the tragic death of a father and small child in a Vietnamese fishing boat into an act of "heroism" by filing a false report on the incident.


Kerry entered an abandoned Vietnamese village and slaughtered the domestic animals owned by the civilians and burned down their homes with his Zippo lighter.


Kerry's reckless behavior convinced his colleagues that he had to go -- becoming the only Swift Boat veteran to serve only four months.

[philingraham]

All of us that served in the military have seen the type that Kerry may have been. It reminds me of the movie "The Iron Cross" where the German officer was hell-bent on getting his Iron Cross...regardless of who died or what rules he needed to bend.

I don't want to put words in your mouth....but just in case Kerry is a hero to you for serving in Nam; see below. If half of this is true, then I suggest that Kerry is just the kind of guy to send people like you and me on a cluster-fxxx to promote his own self-glory. Just the kind of brown-nosers we hated while in the military.

Gee MichaelC, I didn't know you served in Viet Nam. Now I am going to have to take back all the nasty things I have said in the past :) But as Kerry so often says....that was in the past, let's talk about tomorrow. While I did live in Viet Nam circa 63-65, I did not fight there.

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX TUE AUG 03, 2004 21:35:02 ET XXXXX

BOOK CLAIMS KERRY WAR 'FABRICATIONS'

**Exclusive**

A veterans group seeking to deeply discredit Democrat John Kerry's military service will charge in the new bombshell book UNFIT FOR COMMAND:


Two of John Kerry's three Purple Heart decorations resulted from self-inflicted wounds, not suffered under enemy fire.


All three of Kerry's Purple Hearts were for minor injuries, not requiring a single hour of hospitalization.


A "fanny wound" was the highlight of Kerry's much touted "no man left behind" Bronze Star.


Kerry turned the tragic death of a father and small child in a Vietnamese fishing boat into an act of "heroism" by filing a false report on the incident.


Kerry entered an abandoned Vietnamese village and slaughtered the domestic animals owned by the civilians and burned down their homes with his Zippo lighter.


Kerry's reckless behavior convinced his colleagues that he had to go -- becoming the only Swift Boat veteran to serve only four months.

I will read the book,"Unfit..." on your say so. Also, I have read numerous articles about this but am unsure what or who to believe. Are we to assume that all the guys on the stage when Kerry gave his speech are lying thru their teeth ? If what the tabloids are saying is even remotely true, I can't imagine what those very ordinary Americans on the stage have to gain by perpetuating a lie. Is it a conspiracy ? I don't know, Alfred. Maybe you're right or maybe not.

On the other hand there are also mumerous stories I have read on the Net suggesting that W skipped out on the last part of his duty in The Nat'l Guard.
There are also stories about W being into cocaine back when he was "young and irresponsible". Is it true ? I don't know.

What I do know about W is that he got a highly coveted slot in the Texas Air Nat'l Guard back when tens of thousands were trying to do anything even remotely legal to get out of going to Vietnam. By the way, I am not slurring the reps of anyone in the Guard or Reserves. What they do is real and honorable. It's ironic to note, however,that now,some 40 years later, the Guard is taking the brunt of Bush's folly.

Have you noticed that virtually the entire Republican Establishment, with the exception of Colin Powell, managed to have "other priorities" when the call went out to serve their country ? These guys are long on giving orders and short on blood and guts.

I can't imagine a similar situation existing in Israel. All of the politicians and their offspring serve as a matter of course. In the US Congress it turns out that there is only one son that is serving in Iraq. One...Maybe we should promote the a Constitutional Amendment that any son or daughter of all members of the Congress and Senate will automatically be "drafted" into the US Military. If nothing else, it would at least keep these people in the real world...

[Elisheba]

I can't imagine a similar situation existing in Israel. All of the politicians and their offspring serve as a matter of course. In the US Congress it turns out that there is only one son that is serving in Iraq. One...Maybe we should promote the a Constitutional Amendment that any son or daughter of all members of the Congress and Senate will automatically be "drafted" into the US Military. If nothing else, it would at least keep these people in the real world...


There has been a lot of TALK about a new draft which would include everyone. If one isn't 'fit to serve' in combat, there would still be mandatory service without exception.

I realize this is not likely to happen, but it seems only right & fair and I do wish we would elect a president with the cajones to put a national service into place in the USA now.

Rehashing Vietnam, IMHO, is just not getting us anywhere. Yes, BushCo appears to be filled with those who send others to die and, yes, Kerry went to Vietnam. However, there are vets who support Kerry and vets who DESPISE him.

Why can't we let the Vietnam nightmare go for the purposes of this election and just vote for who we believe will serve the best interests of the USA?

[Elisheba]

I just went back and re-read the article with which I started this thread.

Doesn't it mean anything to people that the terrorists want Kerry to be our next president? Doesn't that tell you something?

[philingraham]

There has been a lot of TALK about a new draft which would include everyone. If one isn't 'fit to serve' in combat, there would still be mandatory service without exception.

I realize this is not likely to happen, but it seems only right & fair and I do wish we would elect a president with the cajones to put a national service into place in the USA now.

Rehashing Vietnam, IMHO, is just not getting us anywhere. Yes, BushCo appears to be filled with those who send others to die and, yes, Kerry went to Vietnam. However, there are vets who support Kerry and vets who DESPISE him.

Why can't we let the Vietnam nightmare go for the purposes of this election and just vote for who we believe will serve the best interests of the USA?

Believe me, Elisheba, I would love to drop Vietnam. It's an old story that gets older by the minute. But we're stuck with creating a framework in order to understand our current predicament. And the recent past offers some lessons. It's not unlike asking the previous generation to drop WWII. I am 57 years old and I'm stuck with my experience.

I'll tell you what. If you drop your experience, I will drop mine... Absurd ? Probably. But I sympathize with your feelings about this. So I'll make an honest effort to remain in the present.

[Elisheba]

I'll tell you what. If you drop your experience, I will drop mine... Absurd ? Probably. But I sympathize with your feelings about this. So I'll make an honest effort to remain in the present.

My bad: I didn't make myself clear.

My wishes are to drop the Vietnam horror ONLY for the purposes of the November election and that is only because it seems so many from 'each side' are for each candidate.

I don't want you to drop your experiences; they are a part of you. Your post actually brought tears to my eyes. I can't even imagine what it must have been like to have served in Vietnam and my posts were NEVER meant to try to take any of your feelings away from you.

[MichaelC]

My bad: I didn't make myself clear.

My wishes are to drop the Vietnam horror ONLY for the purposes of the November election and that is only because it seems so many from 'each side' are for each candidate.

I don't want you to drop your experiences; they are a part of you. Your post actually brought tears to my eyes. I can't even imagine what it must have been like to have served in Vietnam and my posts were NEVER meant to try to take any of your feelings away from you.
I know this isn't the particular reason that you opened this thread, but any guide to the U.S. Election is necessarily going to involve some of the nitty gritty of the process. Viet Nam is relevant to this election because of the original behavior of the democratic candidate upon his return from that theater of war. Even then it might not have been an issue except for the fact that he has wrapped himself in the flag and and let on that he is a great war hero who has it over Bush in this regard. He has made it an issue and it will (and must) continue to be examined. I'm sorry if this brings up things that are not especially relevant to you but that's the way these things work I'm afraid.

[Alfred]

All of you need to see this! It just came out from a bunch of guys who served with Kerry.

http://humaneventsonline.com.edgesuite.net/unfit_video_wmv.html


VietNam is relevent because Kerry is basically saying he is fit to lead this country because of his war record. If his war record is a sham then that is important to know. It is an important view into his "character." That's all he talked about during the convention.

I would be willing to bet you that Kerry would have joined the Guard in 1968 if he could have. But he joined in 1965 after he found out he would be drafted (CNN report several nights ago). A big difference, as the war was treated much differently in 65 than in 68.

As far as skipping out on duty? If you are a weekend warrior and you miss a drill once and awhile, big deal. They probably sat around and played checkers most of the time anyway. I bet you he flew when he could as most pilots hate the military silliness and just love to fly. It is not like he was dodging combat duty or putting his crew in danger.

Elisheba:

The only ones pushing a draft are on the Left. It was the draft that caused the massive protests and riots in the 60's. That is what the Left is trying to bring back. Not saying that the war would not have brought on protests at some point...

Philingraham:

I would be willing to bet that if you took the top 50 democrats and the top 50 republicans in government, you would come out with a higher percentage of Vets with the republicans. Most of the democratics in Congress also had "other priorities." However, Politicians as a whole are devious and self-serving (in both parties), so the precentage of Vets is probably not very high in either case.

Remember Clinton? I don't think there was a Vet in his entire cabinet. And we both know how he "loathed" the military.

But this is all academic anyway.

If it is true that Kerry was a self-serving fraud in Viet Nam, then he is toast for all but the most lefty Blue States.

[Elisheba]

I know this isn't the particular reason that you opened this thread, but any guide to the U.S. Election is necessarily going to involve some of the nitty gritty of the process...I'm sorry if this brings up things that are not especially relevant to you but that's the way these things work I'm afraid.

1. You know? Really? :rolleyes:

2. Vietnam is in fact more relevant to me than you obviously "know"! :(



As I posted before, Kerry was in Vietnam about 4 months and threw other vets' medals and ribbons away. However, the democrats attack Bush, Cheney and others for either never having served or taking 'odd' leaves (AWOL?). That is why I wanted Vietnam removed; not because of your ASSumptions ... which are WRONG and offensive to me.

There is plenty to discuss and decide concerning who should be elected without getting into the whole 'Kerry did this' and 'Bush did that' back-and-forth. However, I am aware that is only my opinion and so, obviously, if all of you wish to base your voting on Vietnam: fine, go ahead!

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by Elisheba

1. You know? Really? :rolleyes:

2. Vietnam is in fact more relevant to me than you obviously "know"! :(


Don't get your undies in bunch young lady. In post # 25 you said and I quote:


I just went back and re-read the article with which I started this thread.

Doesn't it mean anything to people that the terrorists want Kerry to be our next president? Doesn't that tell you something?

Now, I understood this to mean that you would rather deal with other issues, the ones you mentioned when you began this thread. Are you saying that that is not what you actually meant?

I know how to read. I understand nuance in language. There was no need to brace me for anything.


As I posted before, Kerry was in Vietnam about 4 months and threw other vets' medals and ribbons away. However, the democrats attack Bush, Cheney and others for either never having served or taking 'odd' leaves (AWOL?). That is why I wanted Vietnam removed; not because of your ASSumptions ... which are WRONG and offensive to me.

I am now assuming that you are much younger than I originally thought.


There is plenty to discuss and decide concerning who should be elected without getting into the whole 'Kerry did this' and 'Bush did that' back-and-forth. However, I am aware that is only my opinion and so, obviously, if all of you wish to base your voting on Vietnam: fine, go ahead!

This is only one issue in the campaign, but the more people fight it or try to bury it with sarcasm and rudeness, the more it will continue as a front burner issue.

[Elisheba]

Please accept my apology for being rude.

Vietnam touched my family in a personal way: death. I prefer not to elaborate.

Again, I am sorry I allowed my experience to interfere with my intent.

[MichaelC]

Please accept my apology for being rude.

Vietnam touched my family in a personal way: death. I prefer not to elaborate.

Again, I am sorry I allowed my experience to interfere with my intent.
Accepted and admired.

[Donna]

:) :) :)

[Elisheba]

Dear MichaelC and Donna:

aw, shucks, thanks ... much appreciated ... now: BACK TO BUSINESS! :cool:

[Mediocrates]

I wonder how the upcoming generation will be able to bootstrap such experiences for political gain. Kerry is probably the last American candidate to stand on a war record for any conflict that resonates with the wider public. Will there be any Panama, Grenada, Desert Storm, Kosovo, war heroes? Ummmm no probably not. I suppose we'll see Afghanistan and Iraqi campaign heroes trotted out in the near future but those are comparitively low intensity conflicts from a human story point of view.

Which got me thinking that in the future the rules of war will be changed. We will take even more cautious steps to insure that no Americans become POWs because their already small numbers insures that they will be publically beheaded. If anything, terrorism, kidnapping and beheading insures that US forces will in the future be even more eager to literally pulverize its enemy from the air, from afar. In other words future wars will begin to resemble sieges that obliterate more and more 'collateral'.

So maybe in 50 years there will be an Arab American candidate for President who runs on being victimized by a war with America. It's not all that farfetched.

[Elisheba]

So maybe in 50 years there will be an Arab American candidate for President who runs on being victimized by a war with America. It's not all that farfetched.

Well, if it happens, it's Aliyah for me! ;) :cool:

[Mediocrates]

Well I don't know who the first significant post-Reconstruction candidate from the South was but it was probably after WW2 when the South and its impact on the training and deployment of US troops became evident. At any rate that makes it about 80 years after their crushing defeat and latent defeatism and neo-Dixieism is still a potent force in national politics in the South.

Or look at it this way. Al Smith was the first major American Catholic national candidate in 1924. It wasn't until 1960 we elected JFK the first Catholic president, but it did happen. So eventually we will have a major national Arab American candidate. We will have a major national muslim American candidate though I suspect he will be an African American. When? I have no idea but certainly in my lifetime.

[Elisheba]

So eventually we will have a major national Arab American candidate. We will have a major national muslim American candidate though I suspect he will be an African American. When? I have no idea but certainly in my lifetime.

Okay, taking bets here. There will be no African American presidential candidate in the 21st century.

Care to bet on the timing for the first Jewish American presidential candidate? I'd guess on NEVER. :D

[Mediocrates]

Okay, taking bets here. There will be no African American presidential candidate in the 21st century.

The 2012 Democratic primaries will have an African American candidate in the top 2 or 3. He will be a serious contender. Expect an Hispanic American to take the primary of either the Dem OR the Republicans by 2016. And an African American candidate to follow in 2020. The Conservative Right-shift of the country will begin to swing back the other way by the 2012 election as it becomes clear that the conservative Christian agenda can't solve our societal issues on its own. The Christian right will eventually marginalize itself politically as it calls for ever more strident demands to curb what we have all come to expect as civil rights and freedoms.

Care to bet on the timing for the first Jewish American presidential candidate? I'd guess on NEVER. :D

Jewish as in Joe Lieberman, Conservadox? Not in this climate or until the country becomes dissaffected in its love affair with victimization politics and terrorists who hide behind it. It's certainly plausible for a Jewish Kerry-ish candidate to be as religiously observant as most of the other Presidents in history (aka "Not Much") and have an open cultural connection to Conservative or Reform Judaism. After all there are about as many Episcopalians in the US as Jews (3.4 million adults in the US) and we've elected NINE of them President.

[Elisheba]

The 2012 Democratic primaries will have an African American candidate in the top 2 or 3. He will be a serious contender. Expect an Hispanic American to take the primary of either the Dem OR the Republicans by 2016. And an African American candidate to follow in 2020. The Conservative Right-shift of the country will begin to swing back the other way by the 2012 election as it becomes clear that the conservative Christian agenda can't solve our societal issues on its own. The Christian right will eventually marginalize itself politically as it calls for ever more strident demands to curb what we have all come to expect as civil rights and freedoms.

Okay, I'll give you Bill Richardson (or a clone), however, in NO way will an African-American candidate follow in 2020! What are we betting, BTW?


Jewish as in Joe Lieberman, Conservadox? Not in this climate or until the country becomes dissaffected in its love affair with victimization politics and terrorists who hide behind it. It's certainly plausible for a Jewish Kerry-ish candidate to be as religiously observant as most of the other Presidents in history (aka "Not Much") and have an open cultural connection to Conservative or Reform Judaism. After all there are about as many Episcopalians in the US as Jews (3.4 million adults in the US) and we've elected NINE of them President.

I beg to differ. People are in denial over Kerry's grandparental Jewish connection ... as was he. Lieberman? I don't want to go there because ... well, never mind. :cool:

If you seriously contend that Episcopalians (a Protestant denomination) are in any way equivalent to Jews, I have a bridge to sell you.

This is an easy bet! I'll take a trip to Israel, all expenses paid for 2, in - what do you say - 2020 or 2024? :D

[Mediocrates]

Okay, I'll give you Bill Richardson (or a clone), however, in NO way will an African-American candidate follow in 2020! What are we betting, BTW?

You never know. We have Condi Rice and Colin Powell. We have the RNC scrambling to gain the African American vote up from 8% in the last election.



If you seriously contend that Episcopalians (a Protestant denomination) are in any way equivalent to Jews, I have a bridge to sell you.

The point is this: smallness doen't necessarily matter. And no one thinks there is a this dark Anglican cabal that secretly rules America from behind the eye atop the pyramid, do they? It's just as likely that a candidate 'discovers' his Jewish roots before he runs instead of after.

[Elisheba]

You never know. We have Condi Rice and Colin Powell. We have the RNC scrambling to gain the African American vote up from 8% in the last election.

The point is this: smallness doen't necessarily matter. And no one thinks there is a this dark Anglican cabal that secretly rules America from behind the eye atop the pyramid, do they? It's just as likely that a candidate 'discovers' his Jewish roots before he runs instead of after.

Oy vey!

Condi Rice and Colin Powell are window dressing. My bet is still on with regard to no African-American presidential candidate from either the Republican or Democratic party this century.

The point is this: Kerry has, what, a set of Jewish grandparents tucked away dead somewhere? It is NOT just as likely that a candidate will 'discover' any Jewish roots before running ... because if s/he did, s/he wouldn't be nominated. ... and, yes, that bet is still on, too!

:p