Jump to content
Indian Motorcycle Community

Commies for kerry


Recommended Posts

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Discovered papers:

Hanoi directed Kerry

Recovered Vietnam documents

'smoking gun' researchers claim

By Art Moore

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

The first documentary evidence that Vietnamese communists were directly steering John Kerry's antiwar group Vietnam Veterans Against the War has been discovered in a U.S. archive, according to a researcher who spoke with WorldNetDaily.

One freshly unearthed document <http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=vccircular>, captured by the U.S. from Vietnamese communists in 1971 and later translated, indicates the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese delegations to the Paris peace talks that year were used as the communications link to direct the activities of Kerry and other antiwar activists who attended.

Kerry insists he attended the talks only because he happened to be in France on his honeymoon and maintains he met with both sides. But previously revealed records indicate the future senator made two, and possibly three, trips to Paris to meet with Viet Cong leader Madame Nguyen Thi Binh then promote her plan's demand for U.S. surrender.

Jerome Corsi, a specialist on the Vietnam era, told WND the new discoveries are the "most remarkable documents I've seen in the entire history of the antiwar movement."

"We're not going to say he's an agent for Vietnamese communists, but it's the next thing to it," he said. "Whether he was consciously carrying out their direction or naively doing what they wanted, it amounted to the same thing - he advanced their cause."

Corsi, co-author of the Swift Boat Vets and POWs for Truth <http://www.swiftvets.com> best-seller "Unfit for Command," and Scott Swett, who maintains the group's website, have posted a summary of the discovery on the website of Wintersoldier.com <http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=puppets>.

Corsi says the documents show how the North Vietnamese, the Viet Cong, the People's Coalition for Peace and Justice, the Communist Party of the USA and Kerry's VVAW worked closely together to achieve the Vietnamese communists' primary objective - the defeat of the U.S. in Vietnam.

"I think what we've discovered is a smoking gun," Corsi said. "We knew when we wrote 'Unfit for Command' that Kerry had met with Madame Binh and then promoted her peace plan.

"This document enables us to connect the dots," he emphasized. "We now have evidence Madame Binh was directing the antiwar movement ... and the person who implemented her strategy was John Kerry."

July 22, 1971, Kerry called on President Nixon to accept the plan at a press conference in which he surrounded himself with the families of POWs, a strategy outlined in the first document.

The two documents also connect the dots between the Vietnamese communists and the radical U.S. group People's Coalition for Peace and Justice through the person of Al Hubbard, a coordinating member of PCPJ and the executive director of VVAW while Kerry was its national spokesman.

"Al Hubbard and John Kerry were carrying out the predetermined agenda of the enemy in a coordinated fashion," Corsi said. "It's a level of collaboration that exceeded anything we had imagined."

'Return the medals'

The second document <http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=vcdirective>, captured by U.S. military forces in South Vietnam May 12, 1972, urges Vietnamese officials to promote the antiwar activities in the United States.

Significantly, the fifth paragraph makes it clear the Vietnamese communists were using, for propaganda purposes, a protest described as taking place April 19-22, 1971.

This coincides with the well-known "Dewey Canyon III" protest in Washington, D.C., highlighted by Kerry's Senate Foreign Relations testimony charging American soldiers with war crimes.

The document's description of the protest includes the "return the medals" event in which Kerry and other VVAW members threw their war decorations toward the steps of the Capitol.

Why now?

Corsi told WND the documents have been authenticated with "100 percent certainty."

But why were they unearthed now, just one week before the Nov. 2 election?

Corsi insisted the timing was unintentional.

"It's truly one of those accidents of how things develop in research," he said. "We did not spring any surprise, we just found these documents, and even the archivist didn't know they were there."

Swift Boat Vets and POWs for Truth dispatched two researchers to Texas Tech University's Vietnam-era archive in Lubbock, which has more than 2 million documents, to "see if there was anything there," Corsi said.

Many of the documents are in Vietnamese and have not been translated yet.

The two documents were found in boxes containing papers from antiwar activities during 1971-72, but they also turned out to be posted in an Internet database, which enabled further verification, Corsi said.

First document

The first document is a "circular" outlining the Vietnamese regime's strategies to coordinate its propaganda effort with its orchestration of U.S. antiwar group activities.

The spontaneous antiwar movements in the US have received assistance and guidance from the friendly ((VC/NVN)) delegations at the Paris Peace Talks.

The phrases in double parentheses were added by U.S. translators for clarification. "VC" refers to the Viet Cong, while "NVN" is the North Vietnamese government.

Corsi and Swett point out that FBI files show Kerry returned to Paris to meet with the North Vietnamese delegation in August 1971 and planned a third trip in November.

Corsi emphasizes that before the discovery of this document, he and other researchers had no direct evidence that Hanoi actually was directing the antiwar movement to implement the regime's goals, although they assumed it to be the case based on other indications.

In her meeting with Kerry in Paris, Madame Binh instructed him on how he and the VVAW could "serve as Hanoi's surrogates in the United States," Corsi and Swett say. This included advancement of her seven-point peace plan forcing President Nixon to set a date to end the war and withdraw troops.

Hanoi cleverly constructed the plan so that the only barrier to release of American POWs was Nixon's unwillingness to set a withdrawal date.

But as Corsi and Swett emphasize, the plan amounted to a virtual surrender that included payment of reparations and an admission the U.S. was the aggressor in an immoral war against the communists.

The circular underscores the impact of the peace plan on U.S. activists, stating:

"The seven-point peace proposal ((of the SVN Provisional Revolutionary Government)) not only solved problems concerning the release of US prisoners but also motivated the people of all walks of life and even relatives of US pilots detained in NVN to participate in the antiwar movement.

Another section of the circular, again highlighting the interconnectedness of the Vietnamese communists, the U.S. antiwar movement and politics in the U.S. and South Vietnam, says Nixon and South Vietnamese leader Thieu are "very embarrassed because the seven-point peace proposal is supported by the [south Vietnamese] people's ((political struggle)) movement and the antiwar movements in the US. "

Therefore, the circular says, "all local areas, units, and branches must widely disseminate the seven-point peace proposal, step up the people's ((political struggle)) movements both in cities and rural areas, taking advantage of disturbances and dissensions in the enemy's forthcoming (RVN) Congressional and Presidential elections. They must coordinate more successfully with the antiwar movements in the US so as to isolate the Nixon-Thieu clique."

Second document

In addition to tying activities surrounding Kerry's 1971 protest to the direction of Vietnamese communists, the second document <http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=vcdirective> reveals the degree to which Hanoi worked with and through the People's Coalition for Peace and Justice.

Of the U.S. antiwar movements, the two most important ones are: The PCPJ ((the People's Committee for Peace and Justice)) and the NPAC ((National Peace Action Committee)). These two movements have gathered much strength and staged many demonstrations. The PCPJ is the most important. It maintains relations with us.

Corsi and Swett note the House Internal Securities Committee in its 1971 Annual Report described the PCPJ as an organization strongly controlled by U.S. communists.

"There is no question but what members of the Communist Party have provided a very strong degree of influence, even a guiding influence, in the evolution and formation of policies of the People's Coalition for Peace and Justice."

Corsi cites recently released FBI surveillance reports that establish a strong link between Kerry, Hubbard, the VVAW, the PCPJ and their trips to Paris to meet with Madame Binh.

Kerry shared the stage with Hubbard - who recruited Kerry into the group - during the Dewey Canyon III protest, and they appeared together on NBC's Meet the Press April 18, 1971. Hubbard's claimed to have been a transport pilot wounded in combat, but the Department of Defense released documents showing he was neither a pilot nor an officer and had never served in Vietnam.

An FBI field surveillance report <http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=fbi111171> stamped Nov. 11, 1971, showed Kerry and Hubbard were planning to travel to Paris later that month to engage in talks with Vietnamese communist delegations. Other FBI reports clearly show the Communist Party of the USA was paying for Hubbard's trips to Paris, Corsi notes.

Another FBI report <http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=fbi112471>, dated Nov. 24, 1971, gives details of Hubbard's presentation to a VVAW meeting of the Executive and Steering committees in Kansas City, Mo., Nov. 12-15, 1971.

At that meeting, the VVAW considered and then rejected a plan to assassinate several pro-war U.S. Senators. Kerry is listed as present.

The FBI document shows communist coordination in Hubbard's trip to Paris.

[bLACK OUT] advised that Hubbard gave the following information regarding his Paris trip:

Two foreign groups, which are Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) and Peoples Republic Government (PRG) (phonetic), invited representatives of the VVAW, Communist Party USA (CP USA), and a Left Wing group in Paris, to attend meeting of the above inviting groups in Paris. Hubbard advised he was elected to represent the VVAW. An unknown male was invited to represent the CP USA and an unknown individual was elected to represent the Left Wing group from Paris. He advised at the meeting that his trip was financed by CP USA.

Corsi and Swett cite an appeal letter written by Hubbard <http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/PCPJ_Hubbard.gif> April 20, 1971, demonstrating the strong coordination between Vietnam Veterans Against the War and People's Coalition for Peace and Justice.

Addressed from the offices of the VVAW in Washington, D.C., the letter asks VVAW members to provide assistance to the PCPJ. It discusses several ways in which the two organizations have worked closely together:

This is an appeal for help for the Peoples Coalition for Peace and Justice. Over the past months the Peoples Coalition has supported the Vietnam Vets Against the War in many ways. The Coalition has made office space available at no charge, and permitted the use of all necessary office equipment such as mimeograph machines, stencil-making machines, folders and typewriters. They have loaned us cars, bullhorns, and public address equipment. Their staff has taken messages for us and joined fraternally in building our progress. Now we can return this support.

Saturday, April 24, the Coalition needs help collecting money and selling buttons at the great march and rally. Collectors and sellers must be energetic and determined. There will be security problems in taking large amounts of money to banks. The Coalition needs people power, hundreds of workers.

I earnestly hope that you will come forward to support our friends in this emergency.

Two days after Hubbard's letter was written, Kerry told Sen. William Fulbright's Foreign Relations Committee that American military in Vietnam were committing war crimes in the manner of Genghis Khan.

The event mentioned in the letter was PCPJ's massive April 24 demonstration in Washington that followed the VVAW's Dewey Canyon III protest.  :no:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The shit keeps getting deeper.  And I guess Kennedy was a commie too because he wanted to pull out of Vietnam and saved American lives.  Look, I don't like Kerry and I can't stand Bush but all these lies coming from both sides is more than one can swallow.  That's why I'm not voting for either of these jokers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:sleep3:

Yep, just snooze away.

 

While your candidates picture hangs in the commie hall of fame...

 

Ignorance is bliss...Is  why Kerry appeals to the uneducated,The Liberals...

I'ts why his get out the vote groups are counting on the ghettos to get him elected...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:sleep3:

Yep, just snooze away.

 

While your candidates picture hangs in the commie hall of fame...

 

Ignorance is bliss...Is  why Kerry appeals to the uneducated,The Liberals...

I'ts why his get out the vote groups are counting on the ghettos to get him elected...

I'm a liberal that's voting for Bush. Guess you just made your point about my ignorant, uneducated ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:sleep3:

Yep, just snooze away.

 

While your candidates picture hangs in the commie hall of fame...

 

Ignorance is bliss...Is  why Kerry appeals to the uneducated,The Liberals...

I'ts why his get out the vote groups are counting on the ghettos to get him elected...

I'm a liberal that's voting for Bush. Guess you just made your point about my ignorant, uneducated ass.

You obviously weren't snoozing. And might I say You and

Zell Miller are.

 

"Smarter than the average bears! "   :nod:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't know how representative Iira board is of the populace in general. While I think that this forum is frequented by a somewhat representative cross-section of America I also hope that many of the posters here are not representative of the majority. I am really disheartened by the rabid partisanship and name calling that I see on a daily basis. And these flame wars lead me to believe that less and less of Americans hold moderate beliefs. Judging by this board, the enemy isn't simply bin Laden or any other terrorist. The enemy is really within us. I also hold a very pessimistic view of where we are heading. This is not a Middle East crisis. This is a crisis in America that has been boiling long before September 11 and contrary to what our media broadcasts, we are not united.

I think that the botched 2000 elections provide testimony to how divided we are. I also think we live in a time where some Americans have pledged their allegiance to their party as opposed to their country, and to their pockets instead of their flag. And I think we are no wiser today than we were before the World Trade Center tragedy. I simply cannot understand why we have lost our common sense. Why do some of us focus only on the transgressions of presidents while members of the House and Senate write the majority of the laws and have long held the monopoly on corruption? Why are we so hypocritical as demand accountability from the other side of the aisle yet overlook the transgressions of our own party? And finally, why has it become almost a crime to hold a neutral political view and shun the ruling parties?

I am now convinced that we are not going to return to normalcy without major overhaul of our political system. I have indeed long held the belief that we need additional parties, term limits for Congressmen and Senators and real campaign finance reform to include bans on most soft money contributions. But this type of reform isn’t going to take place anytime soon and it won’t take place with the DNC – RNC oligopoly in place. In fact, I don’t think it will happen without a veritable revolution and awakening of the public, which means we are doomed to live in a split culture for many years to come. A split culture ruled by rabid partisanship, corrupt politicians, extremists and reactionaries. This is going to be our doom.

Many of you defended the two party system with impressive reactionary vigor. You stressed an emphasized the need to preserve the dubious duo and the Constitution. What is ironic about this, is that the modern day Constitution and the original bear almost no resemblance. And your public servants have in fact become servants of corporate conglomerates and amended that very constitution to oblivion. So the argument for preservation is moot. A changing world requires new rules and improvements and the status quo will eventually whither away. It is a matter of when.

It is my personal belief that striving for change, questioning authority and admitting reality is part of being patriotic. My perception of reality is most likely different than many of you on the board. I  believe that a majority of Congress and the Senate are corrupt. My personal beliefs make me view all organized religion with contempt and to question their premise. Do you sense a pattern here? If you do, it is no mistake. I believe that many of us strive towards a utopia or rather, the individual concept of utopia. My personal utopia shuns hypocrisy and deceit. Sadly, I think our society of has reached the height of both.  

I am a Democrat who has had family members give their all to guarantee my vote. This right was bought and paid for with blood.

I never believed in my lifetime that I would see Democracy in America die. That is exactly whats happening, and anyone with eyes can see the results.

Yes we are divided and it can only get worse. Until people sit down and figure out what all the desention is and work together to fix it, it will continue to crumble.

Through our history for the last century, the same power brokers or their decendents have had the world by the balls and they are moving in for the kill. Peons like you and I  are just collateral in their little power game. I don't even think it is the money, I think it is raw power they crave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never believed in my lifetime that I would see Democracy in America die. That is exactly whats happening, and anyone with eyes can see the results.

We are not a Democracy. And I think God for that everyday. I would never want to live in a Democracy. I like the fact that minority rights are protected in our Republic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization,

it expects what never was and never will be."

Thomas Jefferson, 1816.

 

 

REPUBLIC vs. DEMOCRACY

 

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

 

In the Pledge of Allegiance we all pledge allegiance to our Republic, not to a democracy. "Republic" is the proper description of our government, not "democracy." I invite you to join me in raising public awareness regarding that distinction.

 

The distinction between our Republic and a democracy is not an idle one. It has great legal significance.

 

The Constitution guarantees to every state a Republican form of government (Art. 4, Sec. 4). No state may join the United States unless it is a Republic. Our Republic is one dedicated to "liberty and justice for all." Minority individual rights are the priority. The people have natural rights instead of civil rights. The people are protected by the Bill of Rights from the majority. One vote in a jury can stop all of the majority from depriving any one of the people of his rights; this would not be so if the United States were a democracy. (see People's rights vs Citizens' rights)

 

In a pure democracy 51 beats 49[%]. In a democracy there is no such thing as a significant minority: there are no minority rights except civil rights (privileges) granted by a condescending majority. Only five of the U.S. Constitution's first ten amendments apply to Citizens of the United States. Simply stated, a democracy is a dictatorship of the majority. Socrates was executed by a democracy: though he harmed no one, the majority found him intolerable.

 

 

SOME DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS

Government. ....the government is but an agency of the state, distinguished as it must be in accurate thought from its scheme and machinery of government. ....In a colloquial sense, the United States or its representatives, considered as the prosecutor in a criminal action; as in the phrase, "the government objects to the witness." [black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 625]

 

Government; Republican government. One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whom those powers are specially delegated. In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. [black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 626]

 

Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, pp. 388-389.

 

Note: Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, can be found in any law library and most law offices.

 

 

COMMENTS

Notice that in a Democracy, the sovereignty is in the whole body of the free citizens. The sovereignty is not divided to smaller units such as individual citizens. To solve a problem, only the whole body politic is authorized to act. Also, being citizens, individuals have duties and obligations to the government. The government's only obligations to the citizens are those legislatively pre-defined for it by the whole body politic.

 

In a Republic, the sovereignty resides in the people themselves, whether one or many. In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives as he chooses to solve a problem. Further, the people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government being hired by the people, is obliged to its owner, the people.

 

The people own the government agencies. The government agencies own the citizens. In the United States we have a three-tiered cast system consisting of people ---> government agencies ---> and citizens.

 

The people did "ordain and establish this Constitution," not for themselves, but "for the United States of America." In delegating powers to the government agencies the people gave up none of their own. (See Preamble of U.S. Constitution). This adoption of this concept is why the U.S. has been called the "Great Experiment in self government." The People govern themselves, while their agents (government agencies) perform tasks listed in the Preamble for the benefit of the People. The experiment is to answer the question, "Can self-governing people coexist and prevail over government agencies that have no authority over the People?"

 

The citizens of the United States are totally subject to the laws of the United States (See 14th Amendment of U.S. Constitution). NOTE: U.S. citizenship did not exist until July 28, 1868.

 

Actually, the United States is a mixture of the two systems of government (Republican under Common Law, and democratic under statutory law). The People enjoy their God-given natural rights in the Republic. In a democracy, the Citizens enjoy only government granted privileges (also known as civil rights).

 

There was a great political division between two major philosophers, Hobbes and Locke. Hobbes was on the side of government. He believed that sovereignty was vested in the state. Locke was on the side of the People. He believed that the fountain of sovereignty was the People of the state. Statists prefer Hobbes. Populists choose Locke. In California, the Government Code sides with Locke. Sections 11120 and 54950 both say, "The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them." The preambles of the U.S. and California Constitutions also affirm the choice of Locke by the People.

 

It is my hope that the U.S. will always remain a Republic, because I value individual freedom.

 

Thomas Jefferson said that liberty and ignorance cannot coexist.* Will you help to preserve minority rights by fulfilling the promise in the Pledge of Allegiance to support the Republic? Will you help by raising public awareness of the difference between the Republic and a democracy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of you have seen the reprint of this document. If you have, it's worth reading again. If you have not, it is worth reading, studying, and reciting to your friends, family, and neighbors. It is copied from Training Manual No. 2000-25 that was published by the then War Department, Washington, D.C., November 30, 1928.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

--------------------------

Official Definition of DEMOCRACY

 

NOTE

 

Here are four (4) facsimile section reproductions taken from a 156 page book officially compiled and issued by the U.S. War Department, November 30,1928, setting forth exact and truthful definitions of a Democracy and of a Republic, explaining the difference between both. These definitions were published by the authority of the United States Government and must be accepted as authentic in any court of proper jurisdiction. These precise and scholarly definitions of a Democracy and a Republic were carefully considered as a proper guide for U.S. soldiers and U.S. citizens by the Chief of Staff of the United States Army. Such definition stake precedence over any "definition" that may be found in the present commercial dictionaries which have suffered periodical "modification" to please "the powers in office. Shortly after the "bank holiday" in the thirties, hush-hush orders from the White House suddenly demanded that all copies of this book be withdrawn from the Government Printing Office and the Army posts, to be suppressed and destroyed without explanation. This was the beginning of the complete red control of the Government from within, not from without.

 

-------------------

 

Prepared under the direction of the Chief of Staff.

 

CITIZENSHIP

 

This manual supersedes Manual of Citizenship Training The use of the publication "The Constitution of the United States," by Harry Atwood, is by permission and courtesy of the author.

 

CITIZENSHIP Democracy:

 

A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic--negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether is be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demogogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy

 

CITIZENSHIP Republic:

 

Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress. Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world. A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of

 

(1) an executive and (2) a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation, all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create (3) a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their government acts and to recognize (4) certain inherent individual rights.

 

Take away any one or more of those four elements and you are drifting into autocracy. Add one or more to those four elements and you are drifting into democracy.

 

Atwood. Superior to all others.--Autocracy declares the divine right of kings; its authority can not be questioned; its powers are arbitrarily or unjustly administered. Democracy is the "direct" rule of the people and has been repeatedly tried without success. Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They "made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy * * * and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic."

 

"By order of the Secretary of War: C.P. Summerall, Major General, Chief of Staff. Official: Lutz Wahl, Major General, The Adjutant General.

 

WHY DEMOCRACIES FAIL

 

A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship.(Written by Professor Alexander Fraser Tytler, nearly two centuries ago while our thirteen original states were still colonies of Great Britain. At the time he was writing of the decline and fall of the Athenian Republic over two thousand years before.

 

"Did I say "republic?" By God, yes, I said "republic!" Long live the glorious republic of the United States of America. Damn democracy. It is a fraudulent term used, often by ignorant persons but no less often by intellectual fakers, to describe an infamous mixture of socialism, miscegenation, graft, confiscation of property and denial of personal rights to individuals whose virtuous principles make them offensive."

 

Westbrook Pegler: New York Journal American, January 25th and 26th, 1951, under the titles- Upholds Republic of U.S. Against Phony Democracy, Democracy in the U.S. Branded Meaningless

 

Order original from:

 

Americans For Constitutional Government

P.O. Box 7012

Watchung, N.J. 07060

(201) 753-7347

 

"This idea that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves."

 

Ronald Reagan's Speech at the 1964 National Convention: A Time for Choosing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:sleep3:

Xu,

 

You are right. You will find this board somewhat weighted to the Republican side and it is not representative of the general population.

 

Neither candidate is a great choice as LR has pointed out on several occassions, but these are the choices before us. And to not vote at all, well in my world means you have no right to an opinion.

 

I am also a democrat, but I have and never will vote simply along party lines. It always comes down to the best choice in my mind. Some of these didn't really count as I was a young lad in the first two, but I went Reagan, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Gore in my history.  

 

I too get a bit upset by the Kerry bashing on this site and the lack of criticism of Bush. I found it funny nobody had anything to say when Bush got his ass whipped in the first debate, and barely kept his own in the other two. But, he is workin' hard and it is hard work. Dadgummit.

 

I don't make an issue out of it and I don't promote Kerry too much on this site or anywhere else for that matter, because quite frankly I don't like him that much, but the folks that really run the Bush Administration scare the hell out of me so whats a feller to do.

 

The only other thing I see on this board and it is representative of the general population in many states is this whole mentallity of if you're a democrat then that equals liberal. This is not true in most cases.

 

I do not consider myself liberal yet I am a democrat.

 

I favor fiscally conservative economics, clear, concise leadership on terror, but with UN support, and smaller less obtrusive government. I want to pay less in taxes and make sure the upper class pay enough, but not so much that it stumps expansion and job growth.

 

Where I differ or I guess can be seen as liberal is that I am a big supporter of protecting the environment, I don't want constitutional amendments that legislate morality (thats up to the states), I don't want big brother in my living room (patriot act), I support the ban on assault weapons, and if Reinquist retires or dies I don't want Bush setting the tone of the supreme court for the next 30 years. I don't want abortion overturned and sent back to the coat hanger, closet days, and I support stem cell research for several reasons. One because I have a cousin with cystic fibrosis and two because I don't want the europeans to steal our best scientists because we are too conservative to allow this research.

 

Anway, enough said for now. C'mon, boys let me have it!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Born and raised in Lawrence Kansas. Son of a  retired detective, now High School Automotive teacher, grandson of a Sherrif, nephew of a KBI officer.

 

Live in Bay area.

 

Not a chick last time I checked!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two thousand election was not botched.  

 

the popular vote was marginal and there was some confusion as to the actual numbers for the popular vote.  

 

However, the electoral college did their job as the founding fathers intended.  

 

The election was fair and correct.  Even had the votes been EXACTLY known, the Fla vote was so close as to have given the electoral college no guidance whatsoever.

 

PS... the electoral college doesn't HAVE to follow the popular vote.  Indeed, there have been several occasions where they did not.  

 

The simple fact of the matter is:  It is truly sad that the general 'voting' public has no idea of the actual foundation of our election system.  If they had, then there would have not been the uprorar over a few 'hanging chads' or 'dimpled ballots'.  

 

Just goes to show the utter failure of the public education system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two thousand election was not botched.

Thanks man. I am glad to see someone else, at the very least, knows something other then sound bits off the TV news.

 

I was going to write a long detailed response to that BS that was posted but decided it is not worth talking to a wall.

 

I think that the botched 2000 elections provide testimony to how divided we are.

 

Botched, how? Gore tried to botch it. He only wanted to have 4 counties recounted NOT the entire state. Bush won and won again in 2 recounts and study after study that took place afterwards.  Florida Recount Study; CNN    

BBC News

 

And don’t give me this bullshit about how Gore won the popular vote. If you do not understand the electoral college, learn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:no:

So long as the majority of the electorate is heavily distracted by their own states of economic misery and sedated by sports and liquor, the country will get exactly what it deserves and what the military-industrial complex wants it to.  The two party system is the beginning of the Orwellian nightmare, and if you think W. Bush is any more president than puppet, I feel for you.

 

wake up and smell the ennui.............

 

 

Vote libertarian!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:no:

So long as the majority of the electorate is heavily distracted by their own states of economic misery and sedated by sports and liquor, the country will get exactly what it deserves and what the military-industrial complex wants it to.

 

 

Vote libertarian!

Libertarian is good in theory; too bad most of their candidates are nuts in one way or another. I mean off the map. And no, I am not some Johnny come lately to the Libertarian movement.

 

But to say “…heavily distracted by their own states of economic misery and sedated by sports and liquor” is just ignorant. The biggest problem in the US is people have it so good and easy they choose to be ignorant. If it can’t be explained to them in a thirty second sound bite they do not want to hear it. You get what you pay for a we, the collective we, choose to pay very little.

 

It is not the government that is screwed up, it is not the constitution… it’s a public that has not had to work for anything. The poorest among have access to some of the best health care in the world, own cars, computers, internet access, TV’s and have plenty of food on their table. What other country has a problem like anorexia/bulimia? People who choose to starve themselves.

 

You have it backwards.

 

I think you need to meet some people who lived in the USSR or in third world countries before you start talking about the misery we spoiled bastards live in. It is great to always struggle towards an unachievable utopia but not at the expense of losing sight of what we have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't make an issue out of it and I don't promote Kerry too much on this site or anywhere else for that matter, because quite frankly I don't like him that much, but the folks that really run the Bush Administration scare the hell out of me so whats a feller to do.

Can i get a

BIG OH HELL YEA! :wave:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest lightasafeather

:charger:

 

So, LstRsrt, I suppose you think the Patriot Act in all of its machinations is the hallmark of a free and independant society.

 

In Europe, you can travel from London to Paris on the Chunnel, and you don't have to go through a fluoroscopic exam to do it.  They have come to see that a percentage of fruitcake nutbags will always disagree with the majority social order, and not all of them resort to violence..............

 

The fearmongering Republicans in power today have only their own goals to support.  I doubt very much whether they give a shit about you privileged few in Sudden California..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:charger:

 

So, LstRsrt, I suppose you think the Patriot Act in all of its machinations is the hallmark of a free and independant society.

 

In Europe, you can travel from London to Paris on the Chunnel, and you don't have to go through a fluoroscopic exam to do it.  They have come to see that a percentage of fruitcake nutbags will always disagree with the majority social order, and not all of them resort to violence..............

 

The fearmongering Republicans in power today have only their own goals to support.  I doubt very much whether they give a shit about you privileged few in Sudden California..........

Light as a feather were you refering to your loafers?  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...