Koch Tries to Make New York Bush-Friendly

No, JFK and FDR weren't republicrats. Bill Clinton was strong on defense, so was Jimmy Carter. John Kerry will be stronger on defense than Bush is. Clinton was stronger than Bush Sr. was. Miller is not trying to take the party back to the days of FDR and JFK, he's trying to hand it over to the Republican Party. As I said before, if Miller has such a problem with our party, he is free to go and join the Republicans. I'm sick and tired of him trying to subvert and divide our party so he can get his name in the paper.

If Miller was honorable, like Jeffords is, he would simply leave the party and either become an Independent or join the Republicans instead of trying to divide the party into ideological factions.

acludem
 
Originally posted by acludem
John Kerry will be stronger on defense than Bush is.

Out of 60,000+ posts on the board, that has EASILY got to be the funniest thing I've read here yet. You've got to be fucking kidding me! This guy has voted against so much military over the years. If it were up to him our military would be disbanded.

Seriously, I don't mean to be rude. But this guys track record on miltary funding and support is hilarious.
 
Voting for more military funding doesn't necessarily make you strong on defense. Having good ideas, sound foreign policy, and the ability and willingness to use the military effectively makes you strong on defense. Bush has no idea, an arrogant, inane foreign policy, and has, thus far, not been very effective with the military.

acludem
 
That's the second funniest one! :laugh:

Hey, vote for who you want. I'm voting with reality. Kerry has been busted lying and flip flopping so many times that it's no longer funny, it's actually sad. How anyone can believe a word this man says is beyond comprehension.
 
Sen. Kerry Voted Against B-1 Bomber. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against B-2 Stealth Bomber. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against F-14. (H. R. 5803, CQ Vote #319: Adopted 80-17: R 37-6; D 43-11, 10/26/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against F-15. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against F-16. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against AV-8B Harrier Vertical Takeoff And Landing Jet Fighters. (H.R. 2126, CQ Vote #579: Adopted 59-39: R 48-5; D 11-34, 11/16/95, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against AH-64 Apache Helicopters. (H.R. 2126, CQ Vote #579: Adopted 59-39: R 48-5; D 11-34, 11/16/95, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against Patriot Missiles. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against Aegis Air Defense Cruiser. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against Trident Missile System For U.S. Submarines. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against M-1 Abrams Tanks. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against Bradley Fighting Vehicle. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

Sen. Kerry Voted Against Tomahawk Cruise Missile. (S. 3189, CQ Vote #273: Passed 79-16: R 37-5; D 42-11, 10/15/90, Kerry Voted Nay)

http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=3941
 
About His Record

RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie On Sen. John Kerry’s Defense And Intelligence Record: “What he’s not proud of, apparently, is his votes in the United States Senate when it comes to national security policy: votes against the Apache helicopter, votes against the Stealth bomber … He voted against the first Gulf War in 1991. Those are legitimate, public policy issues. I can cite chapter and verse in the congressional record of his statements on the Senate floor of the votes he has cast. He offered an amendment to cut $1 1/2 billion from our intelligence funds at a time we were engaged and--and needed to be engaged in serious intelligence work relative to the war against terror, a $300 million cut the year before the USS Cole was attacked, a $300 million cut the year before the embassies in East Africa were attacked, a $300 million cut the year before the Khobar Towers were attacked by the terrorists, two years after the first attack on the World Trade Center. That’s legitimate discourse and I can cite documentation.” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 2/22/04)

Kerry’s Rhetorical Response

“And, you know, it’s curious to me, George, how angry they get and how, sort of, they throw patriotism around and so forth. I don’t know what it is that all these Republicans who didn’t serve in Vietnam or fight in a war have against those of us who did.” (ABC’s “This Week,” 2/22/04)

About His Record

Gov. Mark Racicot On Sen. John Kerry’s Defense And Intelligence Record: “Your proposals and votes as a Senator should be known to the voters as they evaluate the candidates, including: your proposal to cut intelligence spending by $1.5 billion for the five years prior to 2001 (S. 1290, Introduced 9/29/95), your 1996 proposal to cut defense spending by $6.5 billion (S. 1580, Introduced 2/29/96), and your support for canceling or cutting funding for the B-2 Stealth Bomber, the B-1B, the F-15, the F-16, the M1 Abrams, the Patriot Missile, the AH-64 Apache Helicopter, the Tomahawk Cruise Missile, and the Aegis Air-Defense Cruiser. (Brian C. Mooney, “Taking One Prize, Then A Bigger One,” The Boston Globe, 6/19/03)” (Bush Cheney ‘04 Chairman Gov. Mark Racicot, Letter To Senator John Kerry, 2/22/04)

Kerry’s Rhetorical Response

“In a letter to [President] Bush on Saturday, Kerry wrote: ‘As you well know, Vietnam was a very difficult and painful period in our nation’s history, and the struggle for our veterans continues. So, it has been hard to believe that you would choose to reopen these wounds for your personal political gain. But, that is what you have chosen to do.’” (Nedra Pickler, “Kerry Decries Bush Over Attacks On Record,” The Associated Press, 2/22/04)

About His Record

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) On Sen. John Kerry’s Defense And Intelligence Record: “When at the same time, his history in United States Senate is that he has continuously voted to either reduce or eliminate funding for major weapons systems some of them which are made right here in my state like the F-22 and the C-17. There are others, like the B-2, the F-15, the F-16.” (Fox News’ “Fox News Live,” 2/22/04)

Kerry’s Rhetorical Response

“[Kerry] said the president ‘decided once again to take the low road of American politics.’ ‘Saxby Chambliss, on the part of the president and his henchmen, decided today to question my commitment to the defense of our nation …’” (Nedra Pickler, “Kerry Decries Bush Over Attacks On Record,” The Associated Press, 2/22/04)

http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=3941
 
Do you have any votes that didn't occur 15 years ago?

Once again, you all are equated being "strong on defense" with voting for defense spending. I don't see it that way. Republicans have a long history of supporting wasteful spending on weaponry the military doesn't want, including, as I seem to recall voting copious amounts of money for B-2 Bombers that the Pentagon hadn't asked for and didn't want. I'll look up a source for this later, I don't have time right now, I'm writing a research paper on Iran for my class on terrorism. I'm jumping in and out of here to keep myself awake.

acludem
 
The question should be, do you have any votes at all to show he is strong on defense. Do you seriously think voting against major military supplies makes him strong on defense?

Better yet, nevermind his abysmal voting record, tell us why he is strong on defense.
 
Originally posted by acludem
Do you have any votes that didn't occur 15 years ago?

Once again, you all are equated being "strong on defense" with voting for defense spending. I don't see it that way. Republicans have a long history of supporting wasteful spending on weaponry the military doesn't want, including, as I seem to recall voting copious amounts of money for B-2 Bombers that the Pentagon hadn't asked for and didn't want. I'll look up a source for this later, I don't have time right now, I'm writing a research paper on Iran for my class on terrorism. I'm jumping in and out of here to keep myself awake.

acludem

He voted against the iraq budget several months ago. You know the one he voted on before rather than against.
 
I wouldn't have voted for that budget either. There is no plan for how the money is going to be spent and whether it will actually benefit the troops or just funnel more money to Dick Cheney via Halliburton.

As for Kerry's voting record, I didn't bring it up you and Zell Miller did, show me some real proof that he's soft on defense. Voting against Star Wars and a bunch of other unnecessary expedintures designed to do nothing but funnel money into the hands of Republican campaign donors is not proof Kerry is soft on defense.

acludem
 
Originally posted by acludem
I wouldn't have voted for that budget either. There is no plan for how the money is going to be spent and whether it will actually benefit the troops or just funnel more money to Dick Cheney via Halliburton.

As for Kerry's voting record, I didn't bring it up you and Zell Miller did, show me some real proof that he's soft on defense. Voting against Star Wars and a bunch of other unnecessary expedintures designed to do nothing but funnel money into the hands of Republican campaign donors is not proof Kerry is soft on defense.

acludem

We've shown you the proof of him voting against defense funding. Key projects that helped end the cold war. So wheres your proof of these supposed illicit deals to Republican campaign donors and Haliburton?
 
There's nothing illicit about it. The money goes to pay contractors to rebuild Iraq. Many of those contracts have gone to Halliburton. Guess who used to be President of Halliburton and still has copious amounts of Halliburton stock? Dick Cheney of course! It's all legal and right out in the open. The so-called liberal media doesn't report it, and the American people don't seem to care that their tax dollars are being used to line the pockets of their Vice President.

As far as the rest, you and I both know that defense contractors give massive amounts of money to Republican candidates. Dwight Eisenhower warned us about it, it's called the military-industrial complex. Republicans pass defense spending, they get rewarded with campaign donations....it stands to reason.

acludem
 
Originally posted by acludem
There's nothing illicit about it. The money goes to pay contractors to rebuild Iraq. Many of those contracts have gone to Halliburton. Guess who used to be President of Halliburton and still has copious amounts of Halliburton stock? Dick Cheney of course! It's all legal and right out in the open. The so-called liberal media doesn't report it, and the American people don't seem to care that their tax dollars are being used to line the pockets of their Vice President.

As far as the rest, you and I both know that defense contractors give massive amounts of money to Republican candidates. Dwight Eisenhower warned us about it, it's called the military-industrial complex. Republicans pass defense spending, they get rewarded with campaign donations....it stands to reason.

acludem

It's still the federal government.

Should we let America Fall just to spite dick cheney?
 
Originally posted by acludem
There's nothing illicit about it. The money goes to pay contractors to rebuild Iraq. Many of those contracts have gone to Halliburton. Guess who used to be President of Halliburton and still has copious amounts of Halliburton stock? Dick Cheney of course! It's all legal and right out in the open. The so-called liberal media doesn't report it, and the American people don't seem to care that their tax dollars are being used to line the pockets of their Vice President.

The supposed Cheney connection is a crock of shit, and I have a sneaky suspicion you knew that already.

Fact#1 - Cheney chose his salary deferrment plan before he was elected vice President. He had also taken out an insurance policy that would guarantee him his deferred salary even if Halliburton went belly up. So whether they profited or not since he left he would still get the same amount.

Fact#2 - Cheney assigned all of his Halliburton stock options to a charitable trust. This is also irrevocable. He won't see one damn penny from the stock options.

Fact#3 - The liberal media was and still is all over this false claim. You either haven't been on the internet for the past 2 years or you haven't bought a newspaper or turned on the television. Try typing in 'Cheney Halliburton connection' at any search engine and you'll see just about every paper in America covered these false claims.

So tell me, acludem, how exactly are his pockets being lined? He isn't profiting from the salary. He isn't profiting from stock options. Where are his pcokets being lined by these contracts?
 
Originally posted by acludem
I wouldn't have voted for that budget either. There is no plan for how the money is going to be spent and whether it will actually benefit the troops or just funnel more money to Dick Cheney via Halliburton.

No plan? Have you not read the bill? Have fun reading, I did!

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi...txt&directory=/diskb/wais/data/108_cong_bills


As for Kerry's voting record, I didn't bring it up you and Zell Miller did, show me some real proof that he's soft on defense. Voting against Star Wars and a bunch of other unnecessary expedintures designed to do nothing but funnel money into the hands of Republican campaign donors is not proof Kerry is soft on defense.

Plenty of proof has already been given that you simply dismissed, but the American people won't.

I asked you quite a few posts back to tell us why you think he is strong on defense as you have claimed, why haven't you answered that?
 
Kerry’s Rhetorical Response

“In a letter to [President] Bush on Saturday, Kerry wrote: ‘As you well know, Vietnam was a very difficult and painful period in our nation’s history, and the struggle for our veterans continues. So, it has been hard to believe that you would choose to reopen these wounds for your personal political gain. But, that is what you have chosen to do.’” (Nedra Pickler, “Kerry Decries Bush Over Attacks On Record,” The Associated Press, 2/22/04)


Man I'm really getting sick of this bullshit. KERRY IS THE ONE WHO BROUGHT UP THE WHOLE VIETNAM DISCUSSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Dems thought they could run their campaign on Kerry's war hero status from 30 years ago, not the repubs, THE DEMS!
Then they get caught up in the fact that he denounced his whole service (or didn't), threw his ribbons over the fence (or didn't), won his medals honorably (or didn't) released his full records (or didn't) and on and on and on.

To claim that Bush started the whole negative campaign, is a crock of shit, plain and simple. Kerry has not said 1 positive thing about anything, anytime, anywhere. He is the most negative, lying, pessimistic SOB I've seen in a long time.

I really hope he keeps this shit up, as I suspect average Joe citizen is seeing the same thing I am, and he will lose in a landslide.

Or maybe thats the Dems plan. Run this loser out there to take a few shots at GWB so they can nominate Hillary and Bill in 2008.

I'm sure the Kerry supporters on this board will answer this post with the same crap they always do. They'll try to change the subject, bring up Halliburton, WMD's, blah blah blah, because the truth hurts.

:firing: :2guns: :blowup: :flameth:

Thank you Kerry supporters, have a nice f**king day :finger:
 

Forum List

Back
Top