2005 will see the 2nd JFK in the White House

[Psychoblues]

What do you mean by that remark, jimnyc? I'm not one of those "cell phone" distractors or one of those LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose), or MIHOP (Make It Happen On Purpose) cpncerning 9/11 theorists and I don't take UFO's seriously. What's your point here? "Tin-foil hat", do you jest or do you just have nothing of substantiation to say?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
What do you mean by that remark, jimnyc? I'm not one of those "cell phone" distractors or one of those LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose), or MIHOP (Make It Happen On Purpose) cpncerning 9/11 theorists and I don't take UFO's seriously. What's your point here? "Tin-foil hat", do you jest or do you just have nothing of substantiation to say?

Sometimes you post your theories, although you aren't a habitual offender. Some of your posts are good, although I don't always agree. However, your last post to Jeff sounded like it came from a mental patient. Can you dig it?

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Ha, hahahahahahaha. You don't dig it at all, do you, gop_jeff? So sorry. I'll keep that in mind, can you dig it?

I haven't dug your last few posts on this thread. But what exactly did you mean by "Even yourself, gop_jeff, seems to aspire to the noun/adjective."?

 

[janeeng]

OMG, I HAVE ENTERED THE TWILIGHT ZONE!!!!! DODODODODODODO!!!! Someone's smoking something here!

 

[Psychoblues]

As have all the other opposing views here, janeeng, you indicate a somewhat induced point of view. Enjoy your smoke!!!!!!!!!! I'll enjoy reality and my occasional beer.

 

[janeeng]

I feel like I was smoking something other than a cigarette after reading this thread! haha!

 

[eric]

Can you dig it?

Nah, I have mexicans do that work for me !

Really this is 2004, I think you need come out of your time capsule! Talking as you do, it is really hard to take you seriously !

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by eric
Nah, I have mexicans do that work for me !

Really this is 2004, I think you need come out of your time capsule! Talking as you do, it is really hard to take you seriously !

Right on, brother! Seeya on the flip side. Can you dig it?

 

[nbdysfu]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
WC is a genuine American hero.
_______________ _____________________
I beg to differ, but I think that's already been discussed in another thread. You should look into his military service to see if it fits in with your view of war; specifically in the matter of civilian deaths.


Originally posted by Psychoblues
If he is nominated I will pledge my vote for him. JFK is, considering the time and definition of his service, an even greater American hero. But all the real heroes are dead and buried. But it is the "hero" aspect that appeals to so many of the unenlightened. Even yourself, gop_jeff, seems to aspire to the noun/adjective. JFK and WC are deserving of whatever accolades that the rest of us Americans are willing to bestow upon them. The presidency included. [/QUOTE]
______________ ________________

So first you're advocating the disavowal of the written word as part of Kerry's campaign blaze and now you're advocating militarist rule? Saying military service grants public office? Not a U.S. concept. Many good presidents have come from the military, but they have been of a far different character from either Kerry or Clark. That's two strikes for the NASDP.

 

[Psychoblues]

Unnecessary obfuscation, nbdysfu. Bill Clinton, whom I supported, is not a Veteran of War at all but on the other hand maybe he is. Military participation is a thing for the hawks, both chicken and war types, but it's not a consideration by Psychoblues. I reserve my inclination towards character.

 

[Annie]

I feel this thread is an 'alternative reality'. brrrrr

 

[Psychoblues]

jimnyc, if we always agreed there would not be a reason or need for this message board, don't you agree? While we're talking about disagreement, I think you have much less tolerance of it than you allow from other participants, but that is just my thought. I don't intend to document it.

Psychoblues is sometimes incoherent, I admit that. But Psychoblues is sober and does the correct thing, in his opinion, at the voting booth every time. You don't have to agree with that.

Thanks, jimnyc, for providing such a place for liberals and conservatives, including faux liberals and faux conservatives, to come and examine and remark on the issues. Special is the only word that I can come up with at this time.

 

[jimnyc]

jimnyc, if we always agreed there would not be a reason or need for this message board, don't you agree? While we're talking about disagreement, I think you have much less tolerance of it than you allow from other participants, but that is just my thought. I don't intend to document it.

What are you babbling about? I call 'em as I see 'em. I'm no different than any other participant here, except I'm not afraid to speak the way I feel.

Psychoblues is sometimes incoherent, I admit that. But Psychoblues is sober and does the correct thing, in his opinion, at the voting booth every time. You don't have to agree with that.

I have no problem with that. You've earned that right.

Thanks, jimnyc, for providing such a place for liberals and conservatives, including faux liberals and faux conservatives, to come and examine and remark on the issues. Special is the only word that I can come up with at this time.

If you're serious, thank you. If you aren't, kiss my behind.

 

[Jeff]

damn sounds like the movie the warriors is back....
Jeff

 

[eric]

You do realize that when you speak of yourself in the third person, it does indicate the need for psychological evaluation !

 

[Psychoblues]

Well, I ain't puckerin' up for kissin' your ass, jimnyc. I am seriously complimenting you for providing this wonderful place to express political views. I continue to fail to understand why you sometimes require or ask for editorial/journalistic backup while most of the time you just hooray with the warmongers, but that's a different deal altogether.

Seriously, jimnyc, I appreciate your website and I mean you no harm whatsoever.

"Let It All Hang Out", the Hombres, Memphis, 1966

 

[jimnyc]

Well, I ain't puckerin' up for kissin' your ass, jimnyc. I am seriously complimenting you for providing this wonderful place to express political views. I continue to fail to understand why you sometimes require or ask for editorial/journalistic backup while most of the time you just hooray with the warmongers, but that's a different deal altogether.

When someone voices their opinion I'll either agree or disagree and debate with them. If they state something as fact, and I disagree, I'll ask for sources. Is this not common amongst debates?

Seriously, jimnyc, I appreciate your website and I mean you no harm whatsoever.

Thanks, appreciated.

 

[nbdysfu]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Unnecessary obfuscation, nbdysfu. Bill Clinton, whom I supported, is not a Veteran of War at all but on the other hand maybe he is. Military participation is a thing for the hawks, both chicken and war types, but it's not a consideration by Psychoblues. I reserve my inclination towards character.

Okay so from this I gather that the only reason you're advocating Clark and Kerry is because they 'appeals to the hawk types,' . Is there anything redeeming then besides their claimed military laurels and there potential for obfuscation? What besides the ability to weasel votes out of imagined people you don't like is there that makes them good candidates?


Military service has little to do with the popularity of Bush. It had little to do with Reagan. Bush Sr. was a decorated hero of the Pacific, but even then he served as a long range fighter-bomber pilot, not a high officer like Clark. Unlike Kerry, Bush Sr. supported the actions of his many fellow soldiers and airmen. Unlike Kerry he did not call attention to himself by saying the only heroes were the dead ones, effectively shunning the veterans coming home and condemning the ones still alive abroad in prisons, barracks and trenches. Bush Sr. appeared merely as a person who had served his country over fourty years past in a just war, and had long been a civilian leader. Bush appears as someone who served in the national guard, rather than running away, but as he joined up towards the end of the vietnam war, his experience appears to have been similar to what many in the military were experiencing. The last republican to gain the presidency with the help of his military career I think was Eisenhower, and as I have said before that was in a totally different environment. Both parties and the media were riding high on WW2 and the early Cold War.

The 1st JFK, or rather the legend built around him, which I believe bears some truth, is that of a man who loved his country and its civil ideals. But he came to office wishing to follow in the footsteps of 'hawk' like democrats such as FDR, his cabinet reflected that. His administration's initial failure was the bay of pigs. He admitted his humble humanity in public and we all felt for him. His diplomacy with Kruschev was awful, but I think the Berlin airlifts were probably the greatest contribution of his presidency. Does John Kerry measure up to JFK? No.

 

[Psychoblues]

That clears it up, jimnyc. If you agree it's onward bound. If you disagree then it's all-stop and credible evidence, in your opinion, must be presented. I'll go along with the credible evidence concept. I'm still looking for a lot of that myself. It's too late for my brother, and thousands more like him, to require "credible" evidence. The VA admits most times posthumously. Even myself, my DU, depleted uranium, exposure may yet come claim me and even then not considering all that I was exposed to including Agent Orange in Viet Nam, whatever in Grenada and Panama, the DU in in the Gulf and who knows what in South Korea, is there a yet to be understood, by myself, agent that is killing me? The VA doc's sure knew about my brother's illness after it became so pronounced they could no longer deny it.

Anyway, just a commentary. I can't begin to tell you of my frustration with the VA, the US government or anything else in this venue, this thread. Democrats, in my minds eye, have done their best to protect the interests and needs of veterans. Republicans have done everything they can do to deny them. Use them up and throw them away, that is the Republican mantra. Again, thats my minds eye.

 

[Zhukov]

John Kerry didn’t vote for the original Iraqi war in 1991, voted for the most recent Iraqi war, voted against the funding of the war he voted for, and now doesn’t support his earlier vote supporting the war. What’s more, he’s basically admitted that his experience in Vietnam has created a reluctance to take hard stances in extreme situations, an indecisiveness he demonstrated by not supporting the first Iraqi war when more than half the country did. This is a serious character flaw in a time of war. I don’t have any faith that this man could effectively execute the war against terrorism.