I need to clear something up for Kerry and any other idiot that keeps spouting off about our troops not being properly equipped (as if we sent them over knowing they were not equipped properly)!

He mentioned last night (again) how ALL the hummers were not amored and so the troops in those hummers were not properly equipped - I.E. open to bombings and rifle fire. Newsflash for the non-military types!....all hummers were NOT supposed to be amored. My HMMWV wasn't, for example. I was in communications and there was supposed to be no need for an amored hummer. My hummer had a shelter on the back with commo equipment in it and I pulled around a 10 KW diesel generator. The only amored hummers I saw were in combat units and MP units. The vast majority of all hummers had plastic/canvas doors, plastic/canvas tops. plastic windows (on the sides) and very thin aluminum floorboards with holes to let the water drain out. The amored hummers I did see were few and far between, but that's because I wasn't in a combat unit. I was mainly in a signal battalion. In our entire battalion, we had ZERO amored hummers. That's just the way it was. Don't think the politicians on either side decided that how it should be. The military decided on these configurations. So Kerry, please shut your trap about this. You don't know that the hell you're talking about.

P.S. I personally think Bush is a horrible debater, but he always tells it like it is and sticks to what he believes. Imagine if we were back in the 1800's. Do you think someone as ugly as Abe Lincoln could get elected these days with all the media requirements that you look and sound good? I doubt it. Bush is still my man.

I wonder how much a 1992 Bush/Quayle campaign poster with George W's signature on it would go for? I have one from 92 when I was at Ft Polk. W came to town campaigning for his dad, running for re-election at the time. May not be worth anything, but I'll keep it for historical reasons.

 

Anybody actually read over his plans to save the country? What a joke. Sorry Kerry, the million/billionares in the country are not going to pay for all your ideas alone. Your gonna have to tax everyone! Middle class tax cuts that Bush gave out? Yup, your gonna have to bring those back, and them some.

Kerry did present himself better, but the content was lacking. I heard a lot of "Kerry looked better, I'll vote for him"... Are you kidding people?! Hell, I'm a stud and *BEGIN SELF HORN-TOOTING* a pretty darn good public speaker. I'm clear, smart, and am a pillar of strength. You gonna vote for me?! I'll launch nukes faster than Kerry switches sides if I got it office, but I'm good behind a podium!!!

 

oh, and Kerry's comparison to attacking Mexico as a result of Pearl Harbor was absolutely idiotic. Had he used a country like Korea, that would have been better, but Mexico?

A recurring theme is that Kerry is a better debater, but lacks any substance. If most of us can see it, I would tend to think the majority of the general public will too...

 

I don't care how good of a debater he is. I don't like Kerry's position on gun control, taxes, abortion, size of government (although Bush needs to be better about limiting the size of gov't), etc. In general, I believe his view is that government should be a nanny to it's citizens. I just want the gov't to leave me alone and nuture an environment that allows for access to opportunity. I'll take it from there. The only thing I need the government for is good roads, strong military, good police force and a few other things. Government isn't the answer to every problem, as I'm sure Kerry and liberal types believe.

 

I heard what he said. His implication was that Bush is personally responsible for sending hummers to Iraq that have no amor. It's the military's job to tell someone that they need to modify more hummers. If the generals had come to Bush and said, Yo...we need to modify some hummers with amor...and Bush said, no, I don't think so - then Kerry would have a point. But you see, he's trying to pin the fact that some hummers have no amor on Bush. I don't remember Bush calling AM General and ordering a bunch of hummers with no amor. The military did that. So they need to correct it if they believe it's a problem. Same goes for the flak jackets. If they need them, they should ask for them. It's what happens after asking that counts.

 

Just so you know he was quoting Richard Clark who made that statement while serving as one of Bush's top national security officials. And heres the actual quote

and I think its dead on.

 

That's what worries me, I'm not sure the mindless lemmings in this country can see what's really going on.

And that remark on Mexico Kerry made wasn't even his own, he was spewing what someone else had said! Get your own thoughts jackarse!

EDIT: Uhg, never hit the reply before I left, someone else beat me to it!

 

I think that the debate was interesting in the fact that if you polled 100 people 50% of which were mild Bush supporters and 50% were mild Kerry supporters; you would get a 50/50 split on who won. Kerry was clearly the better speaker and a trained debated but his biggest problem is that he is snobbish and aloof, he didn't help himself any on that front. Bush is certainly a less talented speaker and debated but I think that he did a lot of damage to Kerry last night by continuously reinforcing the perception that Kerry is a flip flopper, which was not addressed well by Kerry other than to say "No, I'm not", and leave it at that. Bush also did a lot to make it seem as if Kerry was denigrating the effort everyone is expending to do what is being done. Kerry defended himself better against this but bush still drew a lot of blood here. Kerry continuously reinforced the point that Bush is wrong and made a mess in Iraq, but that point has been beat to death and he needed to make himself look more competent, mostly he just said "I'm better" and left it at that. Kerry may have won the debate and been more elegant and better spoken but I think that bush did more damage to Kerry last night than Kerry did to bush, and Bush had more sound bites. Lets be honest, this campaign is more like a bar fight than a boxing match. Kerry may be ahead on points but if he gets clocked with a bar stool and cut with a broken bottle, its all over no matter how ahead on points he was.

 

Uhhh... how is that dead on? I mean, we bomb the crap out of Af-gan-ah-stan until there isn't much left except for finding that jackarse in whatever cave (and we are still over there looking), then moved onto the next threat next door. Kerry makes it out to look like we went straight into Iraq for 9/11. WTF?! Afgan was a walk in the park, Iraq isn't. We needed to move in, we did.

Did we just stop with the japs in WWII? Uhh, no. We moved onto to the other bastards. NOT going into Iraq would have been like just nuking Japan and saying "we're all done!, enjoy the rest of the war Europe!"

 

Bush may not be a great debater but he still gets my vote! At least I know where he stands.
Kerry cannot even answer a question directly. Do not tell me to go to your website to get my answer. Tell the public now what they want to know! He is about as consistent in his standings as the weather. Today it is sunny, tomorrow it may not be. Today Kerry says one thing tomorrow he will change his mind again.

As far as the hummers go, the military purchases and configures tools for the mission as required. It has nothing to do with Bush.

Maybe if Kerry hadn't cut so much defense spending in the past we would have better equipment.

Kerry/Edwards - So much ***** you need two Johns!

 

dzervit, your analogy is based on the war in europe was still going on when Japan surrendered?

Just like shrub, when you don't have facts to back up your hollow arguement, you pervert the truth to suit your needs, or you are as simple minded as shrub.
lemmings indeed.

VE-Day May 8, 1945
VJ-Day Sept 2, 1945

 

Oh, one of Kerry's biggest BS replies was when he backpeddled the issue about flat out calling Bush a liar. He basically said, "No, I'm not calling you a liar, you're just not telling the truth..."

 

You missed the point. The analogy was complete inaccurate. Mexico had just about nothing to do with Japan, nothing. Whereas even on the most basic level, everyone can agree Iraq was a "terrorist friendly-anti-U.S." nation.

Kerry was comparing apples to finding pie within Egyptian pyramid design with that one.

 

Iraq? A threat? Give me a break. Saddam had nothing but a dying regime that was doing nothing except getting weaker over time. Theyve found no evidence of WMD and no financial ties to Al Quaida. I dont know how anyone cant see through the BS.

 

As usual loudist misses the point someone was making b/c he can't wait to tell them how stupid they are for supporting Bush and rant about "shrub", ah nothing like the smell of unreasoning hatred in the morning.

Seems to me that the analogy dzervit made was that Germany had little to do with the bombing of Pearl Harbor (I have even heard that Hitler was furious with his allies for doing it) but we didn't just pursue a war against Japan and ignore the problem in Europe, even if it was not directly connected to Pearl Harbor. Just because the job got done first in Europe doesn’t mean that his analogy is wrong. By the way, in WWII we had a "Europe first plan" which meant that Europe got more attention and needed to be resolved before all the focus was put on Japan. Just to remind everyone, Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, not anyone in Europe. So dealing with something that seems unconnected to what got you into the war in the first place is hardly exclusive to GWB and may look very different 50 years later.

By the way, John Kerry talking about our troops not being properly equipped and armed is the height of hypocrisy. Not only did he vote for military action then vote against properly funding it (I don't care if he disagreed with where the money came from, its was too late once he voted to place those troops in harm's way, no one sent him out with an unarmed swift boat) but he has been a strong opponent of shrinking military budgets and cutting weapon systems.