Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Vote for Kerry is a Vote for the Terrorists
townhall.com ^ | 6.8.04 | Mia T, Jeff Jacoby

Posted on 06/08/2004 7:19:27 PM PDT by Mia T

A Vote for Kerry is a Vote for the Terrorists

by Mia T, 6.08.04

For the better part of 18 months, John Kerry has bitterly denounced the Bush administration's conduct of international relations, above all in Iraq.  Over and over he has pronounced his unsparing indictment: "George Bush has pursued the most arrogant, inept, reckless, and ideological foreign policy in the modern history of this country."
 
That is remarkably hostile language for a presidential challenger.  No major party candidate for the White House in modern times has so thoroughly abandoned the principle that politics stops at the water's edge.
 
On the other hand, voters clearly benefit when candidates articulate their differences, and make plain what is at stake on Election Day.  After 18 months of honing his anti-Bush message, Kerry should be able to outline his alternative foreign policy with crystal clarity.  He should have no trouble laying out a comprehensive vision for Iraq and the Middle East and explaining why it is superior to Bush's.
 
So why doesn't he do so?
 
...No matter how the question is put, Kerry's answers on Iraq always boil down to a single recipe: Shrink the US role in Iraq and defer to the United Nations instead.  That's it.  That is the sum and substance of his thinking about Iraq.  He doesn't relate it to the war on terrorism, to the future of liberty in the Middle East, to America's national interests.  He repeatedly declares Bush a failure for not kowtowing to the UN and vows that in a Kerry administration, the UN will be given the commanding role it deserves.
 
Kerry has been talking this way for months.  In his speech on Iraq at the Brookings Institution last fall, for example, he mentioned the UN no fewer than 25 times.  ("We need a new Security Council resolution to give the United Nations real authority in the rebuilding of Iraq. . . . This shift of authority from the United States to the United Nations is indispensable.") By contrast, he mentioned terrorism just seven times.  He mentioned freedom, democracy, and the Middle East not at all....

 
When Bush speaks about Iraq, by contrast, it is clear that he has thought the subject through and related it to his larger goals in the world... 

"The defeat of violence and terror in Iraq is vital to the defeat of violence and terror elsewhere, and vital, therefore, to the safety of the American people.  Now is the time, and Iraq is the place, in which the enemies of the civilized world are testing the will of the civilized world.  We must not waver. . . .
 
 

The cause of liberty and the defeat of terror vs. the cause of a more powerful UN: In this first presidential election of the post-9/11 world, that is what the choice comes down to.

Kerry's U.N. fetish
Jeff Jacoby

April 23, 2004
townhall.com

The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)


WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA

by Mia T, 6.04.04

 


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com

The Bush Doctine is built on two pillars, one -- that the United States must maintain its absolute military superiority in every part of the world, and second -- that the United States has the right for preemptive action.

Now, both these propositions, taken on their own, are quite valid propositions, but if you put them together, they establish two kinds of sovereignty in the world, the sovereignty of the United States, which is inviolate, not subject to any international constraints, and the rest of the world, which is subject to the Bush Doctrine.

To me, it is reminiscent to [sic] George Orwell's "Animal Farm," that "All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

George Soros

eorge Soros could not have more clearly enunciated the lethal danger that he and John Kerry and the clintons and the rest of his leftist cabal pose for America.

Yesterday, at the "progressive," i.e., ultra-extremist left-wing liberal, "Take Back America" confab, Mr. Soros confirmed the obvious: 9/11 was dispositive for the Dems; that is, 9/11 accelerated what eight years of the clintons had set into motion, namely, the demise of a Democratic party that is increasingly irrelevant, unflinchingly corrupt, unwaveringly self-serving, chronically moribund and above all, lethally, seditiously dangerous.

"All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Apparently missing the irony, George Soros chastised America with these words even as he was trying his $25,000,000, 527-end-run damnedest to render himself "more equal than others" in order to foist his radical, paranoic, deadly dementia on an entire nation.

"Animal Farm" is George Orwell's satirical allegory of the Russian Revolution; but it could just as easily be the story of the Democratic Party of today, with the

Kennedy-Pelosi-Gore-clinton (either--"one for the price of two," I say) -Sulzberger-Soros-Moore construct

its porcine manifestation.

GEORGE TSURIS

Soros' little speech reveals everything we need to know about the Left, to wit:

  • its naivete about the War on Terror,

  • its preference for demagoguery over rational argument, and ideology and reacquisition of power over national security,

  • its mindset, which is inextricably bound to its failed, tortuous, reckless schemes, relics of a different time, a different war and a different enemy.

Soros is correct when he states that each of the two pillars of the Bush Doctine--the United States maintenance of absolute military superiority and the United States right of preemptive action--are "valid propositions" [in a post-9/11 world].

But when he proceeds from there to argue that the validity of each of these two [essential] pillars is somehow nullified by the resultant unequalled power that these two pillars, when taken together, vest in the United States, rational thought and national-security primacy give way to dogmatic Leftist neo-neoliberal ideology.

 

What is, in fact, "inviolate" here is the neo-neoliberal doctrine of U.S. sovereignty, which states simply that there must be none, that we must yield our sovereignty to the United Nations. Because this Leftist tenet is inviolate, and because it is the antithesis of the concept of U.S. sovereignty enunciated by the Bush Doctrine and the concept of U.S. sovereignty required by the War on Terror, rabid Leftists like Soros conclude that we must trash the latter two inconvenient concepts--even if critical to the survival of our country.

It is precisely here where Soros and the Left fail utterly to understand the War on Terror. They cannot see beyond their own ideology and lust for power. They have become a danger to this country no less lethal than the terrorists they aid and abet.

 

I think this administration has the right strategic vision and has taken many of the steps needed to get that long-term strategy rolling.

Where I give them the failing grade is in explaining that vision to the American public and the world. Key example: this White House enshrines preemptive war in the latest National Security Strategy and that scares the hell out of a lot of Americans, not to mention our allies. Why? This administration fails to distinguish sufficiently under what conditions that strategy makes reasonable sense.

My point is this: when you are explicit about the world being divided into globalization's Core and Gap, you can distinguish between the different security rule sets at work in each.

Nothing has changed about strategic deterrence or the concept of mutual-assured destruction (or MAD) within the Core, so fears about preemptive wars triggering World War III are misplaced.

When this administration talks about preemption, they're talking strictly about the Gap - not the Core. The strategic stability that defines the Core is not altered one whit by this new strategy, because preemption is all about striking first against actors or states you believe - quite reasonably - are undeterrable in the normal sense.

Thomas P.M. Barnett
The Pentagon's New Map
NB: Dr. Barnett is a lifelong DEMOCRAT

I'm a single-issue voter, as I guess must have become apparent.

I'm not a Republican. I'm not a conservative. I'm not a very great admirer of the president in many ways, but I think that my condition is... that this is an administration that wakes up every morning wondering how to make life hard for the forces of Jihad and how to make as hard as possible an unapologetic defense of civilization against this kind of barbarism... and though the Bush administration has been rife with disappointment on this and incompetent, I nonetheless feel that they have some sense of that spirit.

I don't get that... I don't get that feeling from anyone who even sought the Democratic nomination.

I would [therefore] have to vote for the reelection of President Bush.

Christopher Hitchens
Washington Journal, 6.01.04
C-SPAN


COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004

 



America's Real Two-Front War

 

 


by Mia T, 4.17.04

 

 


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)


johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com



merica's real two-front war: fundamentalist Islam on the right and a fundamentally seditious clintonoid neo-neoliberalism on the left, both anarchic, both messianically, lethally intolerant, both amorally perverse, both killing Americans, both placing America at grave risk, both quite insane.

If we are to prevail, the rules of engagement--on both fronts--must change.

Marquis of Queensberry niceties, multicultural hypersensitivity, unipolar-power guilt, hegemony aversion (which is self-sabotage in the extreme--we must capture what we conquer--oil is the terrorist's lifeblood)... and, most important, the mutual-protection racket in Washington--pre-9/11 anachronisms all--are luxuries we can no longer afford.

Notwithstanding, the underlying premise of our hyperfastidious polity, (that we must remain in the system to save the system) is fallacious at best and tantamount to Lady Liberty lifting herself up by her own bootstraps.

To borrow from the Bard, let's start metaphorically, or better yet, economically and politically, by killing all the seditious solicitors, which include the clintons and their left-wing agitprop-and-money-laundering machine: the Viacom-Simon & Schuster-60-Minutes vertical operation, the horizontal (as in "soporific") Cronkite-ite news readers, the (hardly upright) Ben-Veniste goons and Gorelick sleepers, and, of course, the clueless, cacophonic, disproportionately loud, left-coast Barbra-Streisand contingent.

America must not pull her punches.

To prevail, America must defeat--thoroughly destroy--her enemies. On both fronts.


MORE
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004

 

 

ne•o-ne•o•lib•er•al•ism n.

neocommunist political movement, a tipsy-topsy, infantile perversion of the Marxist-Leninist model, global in scope, beginning in the post-cold-war, unipolar 1990s, led by the '60s neoliberal baby-boomer "intelligentsia," that seeks power without responsibility, i.e., that seeks to dilute American power by concentrating power in said '60s neoliberals while yielding America's sovereignty to the United Nations, i.e., while surrendering to the terrorists, as it continues the traditional '60s neoliberal feint, namely: (1) concern for social justice, (2) distain for bureaucracy, and (3) the championing of entrepreneurship for the great unwashed.

Mia T, 2.24.04
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004

 

The Democratic Party's Problem Transcends Its Anti-War Contingent2

hyperlinked images of shame
copyright Mia T 2003
.

by Mia T, 4.6.03

 

If Act I was a thinly veiled allegory about naked clintonism, then Act II is a parable about the plan for world domination by the Establishment, aged hippies in pinstripes all, with their infantile, solipsistic world view amazingly untouched by time.

 

Mia T, June 9, 1999
THE ALIENS

 

l From is sounding the alarm. "Unless we convince Americans that Democrats are strong on national security," he warns his party, "Democrats will continue to lose elections."

Helloooo? That the Democrats have to be spoon-fed what should be axiomatic post-9/11 is, in and of itself, incontrovertible proof that From's advice is insufficient to solve their problem.

From's failure to fully lay out the nature of the Democrats' problem is not surprising: he is the guy who helped seal his party's fate. It was his Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) that institutionalized the proximate cause of the problem, clintonism, and legitimized its two eponymic provincial operators on the national stage. The "Third Way" and "triangulation" don't come from the same Latin root for no reason.

That "convince" is From's operative word underscores the Democrats' dilemma. Nine-eleven was transformative. It is no longer sufficient merely to convince. One must demonstrate, demonstrate convincingly, if you will… which means both in real time and historically.

When it comes to national security, Americans will no longer take any chances. Turning the turn of phrase back on itself, the era of the Placebo President is over. (Incidentally, the oft-quote out-of-context sentence fragment alluded to here transformed meaningless clinton triangulation into a meaningful if deceptive soundbite.)

Although From is loath to admit it -- the terror in his eyes belies his facile solution -- the Democratic party's problem transcends its anti-war contingent.

With a philosophy that relinquishes our national sovereignty -- and relinquishes it reflexively… and to the UN no less -- the Democratic party is, by definition, the party of national insecurity.

With policy ruled by pathologic self-interest -- witness the "Lieberman Paradigm," Kerry's "regime change" bon mot (gone bad), Edwards' and the clintons' brazen echoes thereof (or, alternatively, Pelosi's less strident wartime non-putdown putdown)… and, of course, the clincher -- eight years of the clintons' infantilism, grotesquerie and utter failure -- the Democratic party is, historically and in real time, the party of national insecurity.

The Democrats used to be able to wallpaper their national insecurity with dollars and demogoguery. But that was before 9/11.



addendum 12.13.03:
Pathologic self-interest: Richard Miniter's C-SPAN interview, contained in hillary talks:ON TERROR, (below), is absolutely devastating for the clintons. Miniter presents the clintons' monumental failure to protect America in sickening detail.

Note in particular Madeleine Albright's shocking reason given at the time of the USS Cole attack why the clinton administration should not respond militarily. It tell us everything we need to know about the clintons. It tell us why clinton redux is an absolutely suicidal notion.

Notwithstanding their cowardice, corruption, perfidy, and to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, their essential cluelessness, the clintons, according to Albright, made their decision not to go after the terrorists primarily for reasons of their own legacy and power. The clintons reasoned that inaction would MAXIMIZE THEIR CHANCES TO RECEIVE THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE. No matter that that inaction would also maximize the terrorists' power, maximize America's danger.

For more than a half decade, the Clinton administration was shoveling atomic secrets out the door as fast as it could, literally by the ton. Millions of previously classified ideas and documents relating to nuclear arms were released to all comers, including China's bomb makers.

William J. Broad
Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes,
The New York Times, May 30, 1999


Broad would have us believe we are watching "Being There" and not "The Manchurian Candidate." His argument is superficially appealing as most reasonable people would conclude that it requires the simplemindedness of a Chauncy Gardener (in "Being There") to reason that instructing China and a motley assortment of terrorist nations on how to beef up their atom bombs and how not to omit the "key steps" when building hydrogen bombs would somehow blunt and not stimulate their appetites for bigger and better bombs and a higher position in the power food chain.

But it is Broad's failure to fully connect the dots -- clinton's wholesale release of atomic secrets, decades of Chinese money sluicing into clinton's campaigns, clinton's pushing of the test ban treaty, clinton's concomitant sale of supercomputers, and clinton's noxious legacy -- that blows his argument to smithereens and reduces his piece to just another clinton apologia by The New York Times.

But even a Times apologia cannot save clinton from the gallows. Clinton can be both an absolute (albeit postmodern) moron and a traitor. The strict liability Gump-ism, "Treason is as treason does" applies.

The idea that an individual can be convicted of the crime of treason only if there is treasonous intent or *mens rea* runs contrary to the concept of strict liability crimes. That doctrine (Park v United States, (1974) 421 US 658,668) established the principle of 'strict liability' or 'liability without fault' in certain criminal cases, usually involving crimes which endanger the public welfare.

Calling his position on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty "an historic milestone," (if he must say so himself) clinton believed that if he could get China to sign it, he would go down in history as the savior of mankind. This was 11 August 1995.

(There would be an analogous treasonous miscalculation in the Mideast: clinton failed to shut down Muslim terrorism, then in its incipient stage and stoppable, because he reasoned that doing so would have wrecked his chances for the Nobel Peace Prize. Indeed, according to Richard Miniter, Madeleine Albright offered precisely the Nobel-Muslim factor as a primary reason for not treating the bombing of the USS Cole as an act of war.)

Mia T, 2.11.04
BUSH, THE CLINTONS + WMD PROLIFERATION:
The
REAL "Imminent Threat"

 

 

It is precisely the clintons' bin-Laden-emboldening inaction to the attack on the USS Cole and the clintons' bin-Laden-emboldening token, ineffectual, August 1998 missile strikes of aspirin factories and empty tents that eliminate "bin-Laden-emboldenment avoidance" as the rationale for the latter decision and support "wag the dog," instead.

Taken together, feckless clinton inaction and feckless clinton action serve only to reinforce the almost universally held notion: the clinton calculus was, is, and always will be, solely self-serving.

In the case of the non-response to the attack on the Cole, an unambiguous act of war, the clinton rationale, according to no less than Madeleine Albright, was a clinton Nobel Peace Prize by Arab appeasement. i.e., a clinton Nobel Peace Prize by bin-Laden-emboldenment.

And in the case of the curiously-timed, ineffectual (and, therefore, bin-Laden-emboldening) token missile strikes, the clinton rationale was Lewinsky-recantation distraction -- clearly not bin-Laden-emboldenment avoidance.

(This is not to say there wasn't a Nobel factor here, too. Obsolete intelligence, bolstered by the redundancy of a clinton tipoff, ensured that both bin Laden and the Mideast Muslim ego would escape unscathed.)

Mia T, "WAG THE DOG" revisited

 

 

 

WASHINGTON -- Two Norwegian public-relations executives and one member of the Norwegian Parliament say they were contacted by the White House to help campaign for President Clinton to receive this year's Nobel Peace Prize for his work in trying to negotiate peace in the Middle East.

Clinton Lobbies for Nobel Prize: What a Punk
White House Lobbied For Clinton Nobel Peace Prize Updated
Friday, October 13, 2000
By Rita Cosby

 

 

 

There's been speculation in the last few months that Clinton was pursuing a Mideast peace accord in an effort to win the prize and secure his legacy as president.

AIDES PUSH CLINTON FOR THE NOBEL

 

 

 

At the time, clinton observed: "I made more progress in the Middle East than I did between Socks and Buddy." Retrospectively, it is clear that clinton's characterization was not correct.

Mia T, Buddy Death Report Raises More Questions Than It Answers

 

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004


 

May 11, 3:18 PM EDT

Video Shows Beheading of American in Iraq


BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- A video posted Tuesday on an al-Qaida-linked Web site showed the beheading an American civilian in Iraq in what was said to be revenge for abuse of Iraqi prisoners.

The video showed five men wearing headscarves and black ski masks, standing over a bound man in an orange jumpsuit - similar to a prisoner's uniform. The man identified himself as Nick Berg, a U.S. civilian whose body was found Saturday near a highway overpass in Baghdad.

"My name is Nick Berg, my father's name is Michael, my mother's name is Suzanne," the man said on the video. "I have a brother and sister, David and Sarah. I live in ... Philadelphia."

After reading a statement, the men were seen pulling the man to his side and putting a large knife to his neck. A scream sounded as the men cut his head off, shouting "Allahu akbar!" - "God is great!" They then held the head up to the camera.

The slaying recalled the kidnapping and videotaped beheading of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002 in Pakistan. Four Islamic militants have been convicted of kidnapping Pearl, but seven other suspects - including those who allegedly slit his throat - remain at large.

NOTE: GRAPHIC CONTENT Video posted of beheading of American in Iraq

 

Copyright 2004 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

sanitizing evil
Kerry Cabal Censors Nick Berg Decapitation


pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic

The Cycle of Violence:
NOW WITH HYPERLINKED INSTRUCTION MANUAL


JOHN KERRY'S RECKLESS TET-OFFENSIVE-GAMBIT REPLAY:
the left's jihad against America is killing our troops, aiding + abetting the terrorists and imperiling all Americans


nepotism + tokenism = a nancy pelosi
(or a hillary clinton)

UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#3-sang-froid and the "nuclear" button

UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#2-understanding the job description

UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#1-making the tough choices in a post-9/11 world

Kerry's Belated Condemnation Focuses on Process
Kerry Lacks Moral Authority to Condemn Content

"CRY BUSH" + Iraqi-Prisoner "Abuse"
What are the Dems up to?


The Mary Jo White Memo:
Documentation of clintons' and Gorelick's willful, seditious malfeasance


What is the REAL Reason for Gorelick's Wall?



Q ERTY6 utter failureBUMP

Lib Author Regrets Voting (TWICE!) for clinton
"Sickened" by clinton's Failure to Protect America from Terrorism

MUST-READ BOOK FOR DEMOCRATS:
How clintons' Failures Unleashed Global Terror

(Who in his right mind would ever want the clintons back in the Oval Office?)

The Man Who Warned America
(Why a Rapist is Not a Fit President)

UDAY: "The end is near… this time I think the… Americans are serious, Bush is not like Clinton."

more

 


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; Israel; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arkansas; US: Illinois; US: Massachusetts; US: New York; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 60minutes; 911; 911attacks; 911commission; 911investigation; abuseofpower; agitpropmachine; alqaeda; alqaedairaq; alqaida; alqaidairaq; anachronism; animalfarm; arkansas; bill911; billclinton; blameamericafirst; bookdeal; bot; callmeirresponsible; cbs; cbsnews; cbsviacom; chappaquiddick; clarke; clinton; clinton911; clintonarrogance; clintonbigot; clintonbigots; clintoncontempt; clintoncorruption; clintoncowardice; clintondemagoguery; clintondysfunction; clintonfailure; clintonfelons; clintonineptitude; clintonintimidation; clintonism; clintonjunkets; clintonlegacy; clintonliars; clintonobstruction; clintonpredation; clintonpsychopathy; clintonracism; clintonrage; clintonrape; clintonrapes; clintonrevisionism; clintons; clintons911; clintonsedition; clintonsrrapists; clintonstupidity; clintontreason; clintonviolence; commissionedportrait; confess; congenitalliar; corapist; counterterrorismczar; coverup; coverupqueen; dangerous; denial; error; flipflop; genocide; georgesoros; georgetsuris; gorelick; gorelickswall; gorelickwall; hillary; hillary911; hillaryblog; hillarybot; hillaryclinton; hillaryconfesses; hillaryknew; hillaryliar; hillaryrape; hillaryraped2; hillaryrapedtoo; hillarysedition; hillaryspeaks; hillaryssedition; hillarystinear; hillarystreason; hillarytalks; hillarytalksorg; hillarytalksus; hillarytreason; hillaryveep; hillarywho; hoosegow4hillary; imaginaryleaders; indict; iraq; jamiegorelick; johnkerry; johnkerryveep; kennedy; kerredy; kerredyconstruct; kerry; kerryconfesses; kerryisnobodyschoice; kerryveep; kerrywarcrimes; launderingmachine; lauriemylroie; letatcestmoi; losingbinladen; maryjowhite; maryjowhitememo; mediabias; moneylaundering; napalminthemorning; nationalsecurity; payoff; portrait; postmodernploy; postmodernprez; predator; predators; quidproquo; rape; rapist; rapistclintons; rapists; recall; reddragonrising; revisionism; richardclarke; rwanda; sedition; selfaggrandizement; sheknewsheraped2; simonschuster; slushfund; snowboard; snowboarding; snowbored; sorosstandbyyourman; sudanoffer; tedkennedy; terrorism; terrorismczar; thefinger; theterrorismstupid; tinear; treason; utterfailure; viacom; viacommie; victimizer; vietnam; vietnamwall; virtualhillary; wearethepresident; wot; youknow; zeitgeist; zipper; zipperhoist; zipperhoist2; zipperhoisted
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-95 next last

1 posted on 06/08/2004 7:19:30 PM PDT by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth; jla; Gail Wynand; Brian Allen; Wolverine; Lonesome in Massachussets; IVote2; ...

ping


2 posted on 06/08/2004 7:23:16 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

You said it sister!


3 posted on 06/08/2004 7:24:17 PM PDT by Registered
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T



check out

original images

4 posted on 06/08/2004 7:26:15 PM PDT by counterpunch (<-CLICK HERE for my CARTOONS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: Mia T
You go girl!

Love your stuff. I only have time to read about one-tenth of it, but it's always time well spent.

6 posted on 06/08/2004 7:36:19 PM PDT by browardchad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bump


7 posted on 06/08/2004 7:38:17 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
B^U^M^P
8 posted on 06/08/2004 8:12:31 PM PDT by AKA Elena (Catholic, through the Grace of God, Conservative to the bone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch

.

JOHN KERRY = Enemy of Vietnam Vets

http://www.TheAlamoFILM.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1320

.


9 posted on 06/08/2004 8:24:51 PM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE (Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 http://www.LZXRAY.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: Registered

Thank you. :)


11 posted on 06/09/2004 3:17:51 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tiger500

thx :)


12 posted on 06/09/2004 3:18:43 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: browardchad
thx/10 ;)
13 posted on 06/09/2004 3:29:23 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Buckhead

I am humbled by your comments. Thank you. :)


14 posted on 06/09/2004 3:33:03 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AKA Elena

thx :)


15 posted on 06/09/2004 3:43:33 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


16 posted on 06/09/2004 3:45:11 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Good morning Mia
thanks for the ping
& bttt
17 posted on 06/09/2004 4:13:52 AM PDT by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BeforeISleep

you're welcome... and good morning to you.


18 posted on 06/09/2004 4:19:52 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

bump


19 posted on 06/09/2004 7:09:36 AM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

bump


20 posted on 06/09/2004 10:14:02 AM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


21 posted on 06/09/2004 12:02:49 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

bump


22 posted on 06/09/2004 1:11:09 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


23 posted on 06/09/2004 2:08:05 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: jla

^


24 posted on 06/09/2004 2:36:48 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

bump


25 posted on 06/09/2004 3:44:01 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


26 posted on 06/09/2004 5:18:03 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: M. Thatcher; MLedeen

fyi


27 posted on 06/09/2004 6:10:28 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


28 posted on 06/09/2004 7:53:38 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: All

BUMP


29 posted on 06/10/2004 3:42:10 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


30 posted on 06/10/2004 3:49:07 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jla; All

bump


31 posted on 06/10/2004 4:22:54 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

Bump


32 posted on 06/10/2004 4:36:51 AM PDT by Wolverine (A Concerned Citizen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

^


33 posted on 06/10/2004 7:29:42 AM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Wolverine

thx bump


34 posted on 06/10/2004 7:48:38 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: jla

^


35 posted on 06/10/2004 7:49:58 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

36 posted on 06/10/2004 7:54:02 AM PDT by Lady Jag (Was sciencediet till I found the solution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

^


37 posted on 06/10/2004 11:04:20 AM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: jla

^


38 posted on 06/10/2004 12:16:48 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


39 posted on 06/10/2004 4:26:57 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

^


40 posted on 06/10/2004 5:18:59 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: jla; All

Kerry and Kennedy
Emmett Tyrrell

April 8, 2004

 

 If, as Sen. Teddy Kennedy rumbled recently, Iraq is President George W. Bush's Vietnam, surely the silver-haired senator is becoming Bush's Jane Fonda.

 Of course, Teddy is not as svelte as Fonda, for he has never been an adept of fad diets, and an aerobics regimen could impair his precarious health. Nonetheless, Teddy is becoming the Fonda of our time. Possibly he will fly off to Falluja to be photographed on a burned out Humvee or visit Najaf to confer with the scowling Muslim cleric, the Rev. Muqtada al-Sadr. Having become so historically minded, Teddy goes on to call President Bush our era's Richard Nixon.

 Actually, for this man to encourage Americans to reflect back on 1960s history is quite reckless given his blemished history. They might come across news reports of a senator leaving a girl to drown in his car while he slept off a drunk and later dialing up his high-powered advisers for urgent public relations counsel. They might also find stories of that same senator later boozing with his young nephews before their carousals ended in a rape charge. Other indelicacies have followed.

 Yet, as the senator has brought up the always-illuminating guidance of history, it might help us to understand the present war by considering the wartime leadership of a Democrat whom Kennedy might admire, Franklin D. Roosevelt laboring through World War II.

 On second thought, Kennedy might not admire FDR's leadership against the Axis all that much. His father, Ambassador Joe Kennedy, opposed Roosevelt's entry into the war. The ambassador was virtually an isolationist. From our embassy in London, he collaborated with some of Europe's most slavish appeasers. In his repulsive Oct. 19, 1938, speech commemorating the Battle of Trafalgar, Kennedy gave an appeasement stem-winder that even troubled British supporters of the doomed Munich agreement. FDR believed his ambassador was in truth a Fascist sympathizer.

 Kennedy was at least an isolationist, and so it seems his son is today. It might prove rewarding for members of the Bush administration to review Roosevelt's brilliant treatment of the isolationists of his day. By the time Roosevelt was finished depicting the futility and irresponsibility of their antiwar rants, he had defeated the isolationists completely. His tactic was to characterize them as Hitler's dupes. As Roosevelt understood, by the late 1930s there was no alternative to defeating the Axis -- and there is no alternative to defeating the Islamofascists today. This is a point the president cannot make too frequently. Nor should he and his surrogates shy away from characterizing their Democratic opponents as dupes.

 They may not be dupes of any bellicose mullah or Middle Eastern tyrant, but they are surely dupes of what we might call the United Nations mystique. Watching Kennedy and the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, Sen. John Francois Kerry, rhapsodize on the United Nations' capacity to resolve violence in the Middle East suggests images of Neville Chamberlain praising the Munich agreement after the Germans roared into Poland -- though even stubborn Chamberlain was not that besotted.

 The United Nations has already failed in Iraq. It does not want to be in Iraq. It is a corrupt collection of poseurs, many of whose functionaries have already been exposed as on the take from Saddam. While he was engaged in torture and aiding terrorists -- for instance, paying off suicide bombers in Israel -- these grafters and many Europeans were cashing in on the Iraq Oil for Food Program.

 There is only one course available in Iraq for civilized nations: resolve and rough treatment for any of the brutes who oppose pacification of the country. Kennedy's Vietnam parallel does not exist. The Iraqi resistance is supported at best only by the radical mullahs of Iran and the terrorists of Islamofascism. They cannot summon the communist protagonists of the Cold War from Moscow and Beijing. Moreover, they have no negotiators to go off to Paris and nothing to negotiate.

 President Bush's Jane Fonda is living in a fantasy, as is Kerry. The other day on National Public Radio, Kerry actually defended the Rev. Sadr, an outlaw accused of murdering another mullah, as a "legitimate voice" in Iraq. Then he backed off and said, "Well, let me ... change the term legitimate. It belongs to a voice -- because he has clearly taken on a far more radical tone in recent days and aligned himself with both Hamas and Hezbollah, which is a sort of terrorist alignment."

 Yes, it is, and his galoots have also killed a score of American soldiers. Kennedy and Kerry are not doing much to build the morale of our troops abroad, but then they played the same role 30 years ago during the Vietnam War. Now there is a historic parallel to meditate on.

 

 

©2004 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

Contact Emmett Tyrrell | Read Tyrrell's biography

townhall.com


41 posted on 06/10/2004 8:48:10 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Let's focus on President Ronald Wilson Reagan for the next 24. I love your stuff, but it is time for tears.

Pray for W and mourn for President Ronald Wilson Reagan

42 posted on 06/10/2004 8:51:41 PM PDT by bray (The war is going far better than PravdABCBS wants you to know!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

^


43 posted on 06/11/2004 2:44:44 AM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: bray; jla; All

Thank you. I understand where you're coming from.

But I respectfully disagree.

In my view, standing up to America's enemy--whether it is the Soviet Union, or islamofascist terrorists, or the Leftist jihadists in our midst--is another way to pay tribute to Ronald Reagan.

Even when it is seemingly not the politic thing to do.

Perhaps, especially when it's seemingly not the politic thing to do. President Reagan's advisors wanted him to strike the following--seemingly impolitic--words from one of his speeches:

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!

Imagine that.

 

Remarks at the Brandenburg Gate
West Berlin, Germany
June 12, 1987

This speech was delivered to the people of West Berlin, yet it was also audible on the East side of the Berlin wall.
2,703 words

Thank you very much.

Chancellor Kohl, Governing Mayor Diepgen, ladies and gentlemen: Twenty-four years ago, President John F. Kennedy visited Berlin, speaking to the people of this city and the world at the City Hall. Well, since then two other presidents have come, each in his turn, to Berlin. And today I, myself, make my second visit to your city.

We come to Berlin, we American presidents, because it's our duty to speak, in this place, of freedom. But I must confess, we're drawn here by other things as well: by the feeling of history in this city, more than 500 years older than our own nation; by the beauty of the Grunewald and the Tiergarten; most of all, by your courage and determination. Perhaps the composer Paul Lincke understood something about American presidents. You see, like so many presidents before me, I come here today because wherever I go, whatever I do: Ich hab noch einen Koffer in Berlin. [I still have a suitcase in Berlin.]

Our gathering today is being broadcast throughout Western Europe and North America. I understand that it is being seen and heard as well in the East. To those listening throughout Eastern Europe, a special word: Although I cannot be with you, I address my remarks to you just as surely as to those standing here before me. For I join you, as I join your fellow countrymen in the West, in this firm, this unalterable belief: Es gibt nur ein Berlin. [There is only one Berlin.]

Behind me stands a wall that encircles the free sectors of this city, part of a vast system of barriers that divides the entire continent of Europe. From the Baltic, south, those barriers cut across Germany in a gash of barbed wire, concrete, dog runs, and guard towers. Farther south, there may be no visible, no obvious wall. But there remain armed guards and checkpoints all the same--still a restriction on the right to travel, still an instrument to impose upon ordinary men and women the will of a totalitarian state. Yet it is here in Berlin where the wall emerges most clearly; here, cutting across your city, where the news photo and the television screen have imprinted this brutal division of a continent upon the mind of the world. Standing before the Brandenburg Gate, every man is a German, separated from his fellow men. Every man is a Berliner, forced to look upon a scar.

President von Weizsacker has said, "The German question is open as long as the Brandenburg Gate is closed." Today I say: As long as the gate is closed, as long as this scar of a wall is permitted to stand, it is not the German question alone that remains open, but the question of freedom for all mankind. Yet I do not come here to lament. For I find in Berlin a message of hope, even in the shadow of this wall, a message of triumph.

In this season of spring in 1945, the people of Berlin emerged from their air-raid shelters to find devastation. Thousands of miles away, the people of the United States reached out to help. And in 1947 Secretary of State--as you've been told--George Marshall announced the creation of what would become known as the Marshall Plan. Speaking precisely 40 years ago this month, he said: "Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine, but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos."

In the Reichstag a few moments ago, I saw a display commemorating this 40th anniversary of the Marshall Plan. I was struck by the sign on a burnt-out, gutted structure that was being rebuilt. I understand that Berliners of my own generation can remember seeing signs like it dotted throughout the western sectors of the city. The sign read simply: "The Marshall Plan is helping here to strengthen the free world." A strong, free world in the West, that dream became real. Japan rose from ruin to become an economic giant. Italy, France, Belgium--virtually every nation in Western Europe saw political and economic rebirth; the European Community was founded.

In West Germany and here in Berlin, there took place an economic miracle, the Wirtschaftswunder. Adenauer, Erhard, Reuter, and other leaders understood the practical importance of liberty--that just as truth can flourish only when the journalist is given freedom of speech, so prosperity can come about only when the farmer and businessman enjoy economic freedom. The German leaders reduced tariffs, expanded free trade, lowered taxes. From 1950 to 1960 alone, the standard of living in West Germany and Berlin doubled.

Where four decades ago there was rubble, today in West Berlin there is the greatest industrial output of any city in Germany--busy office blocks, fine homes and apartments, proud avenues, and the spreading lawns of parkland. Where a city's culture seemed to have been destroyed, today there are two great universities, orchestras and an opera, countless theaters, and museums. Where there was want, today there's abundance--food, clothing, automobiles--the wonderful goods of the Ku'damm. From devastation, from utter ruin, you Berliners have, in freedom, rebuilt a city that once again ranks as one of the greatest on earth. The Soviets may have had other plans. But my friends, there were a few things the Soviets didn't count on--Berliner Herz, Berliner Humor, ja, und Berliner Schnauze. [Berliner heart, Berliner humor, yes, and a Berliner Schnauze.]

In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: "We will bury you." But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor.

And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control.

Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace.

General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!

I understand the fear of war and the pain of division that afflict this continent-- and I pledge to you my country's efforts to help overcome these burdens. To be sure, we in the West must resist Soviet expansion. So we must maintain defenses of unassailable strength. Yet we seek peace; so we must strive to reduce arms on both sides.

Beginning 10 years ago, the Soviets challenged the Western alliance with a grave new threat, hundreds of new and more deadly SS-20 nuclear missiles, capable of striking every capital in Europe. The Western alliance responded by committing itself to a counter-deployment unless the Soviets agreed to negotiate a better solution; namely, the elimination of such weapons on both sides. For many months, the Soviets refused to bargain in earnestness. As the alliance, in turn, prepared to go forward with its counter-deployment, there were difficult days--days of protests like those during my 1982 visit to this city--and the Soviets later walked away from the table.

But through it all, the alliance held firm. And I invite those who protested then-- I invite those who protest today--to mark this fact: Because we remained strong, the Soviets came back to the table. And because we remained strong, today we have within reach the possibility, not merely of limiting the growth of arms, but of eliminating, for the first time, an entire class of nuclear weapons from the face of the earth.

As I speak, NATO ministers are meeting in Iceland to review the progress of our proposals for eliminating these weapons. At the talks in Geneva, we have also proposed deep cuts in strategic offensive weapons. And the Western allies have likewise made far-reaching proposals to reduce the danger of conventional war and to place a total ban on chemical weapons.

While we pursue these arms reductions, I pledge to you that we will maintain the capacity to deter Soviet aggression at any level at which it might occur. And in cooperation with many of our allies, the United States is pursuing the Strategic Defense Initiative--research to base deterrence not on the threat of offensive retaliation, but on defenses that truly defend; on systems, in short, that will not target populations, but shield them. By these means we seek to increase the safety of Europe and all the world. But we must remember a crucial fact: East and West do not mistrust each other because we are armed; we are armed because we mistrust each other. And our differences are not about weapons but about liberty. When President Kennedy spoke at the City Hall those 24 years ago, freedom was encircled, Berlin was under siege. And today, despite all the pressures upon this city, Berlin stands secure in its liberty. And freedom itself is transforming the globe.

In the Philippines, in South and Central America, democracy has been given a rebirth. Throughout the Pacific, free markets are working miracle after miracle of economic growth. In the industrialized nations, a technological revolution is taking place--a revolution marked by rapid, dramatic advances in computers and telecommunications.

In Europe, only one nation and those it controls refuse to join the community of freedom. Yet in this age of redoubled economic growth, of information and innovation, the Soviet Union faces a choice: It must make fundamental changes, or it will become obsolete.

Today thus represents a moment of hope. We in the West stand ready to cooperate with the East to promote true openness, to break down barriers that separate people, to create a safe, freer world. And surely there is no better place than Berlin, the meeting place of East and West, to make a start. Free people of Berlin: Today, as in the past, the United States stands for the strict observance and full implementation of all parts of the Four Power Agreement of 1971. Let us use this occasion, the 750th anniversary of this city, to usher in a new era, to seek a still fuller, richer life for the Berlin of the future. Together, let us maintain and develop the ties between the Federal Republic and the Western sectors of Berlin, which is permitted by the 1971 agreement.

And I invite Mr. Gorbachev: Let us work to bring the Eastern and Western parts of the city closer together, so that all the inhabitants of all Berlin can enjoy the benefits that come with life in one of the great cities of the world.

To open Berlin still further to all Europe, East and West, let us expand the vital air access to this city, finding ways of making commercial air service to Berlin more convenient, more comfortable, and more economical. We look to the day when West Berlin can become one of the chief aviation hubs in all central Europe.

With our French and British partners, the United States is prepared to help bring international meetings to Berlin. It would be only fitting for Berlin to serve as the site of United Nations meetings, or world conferences on human rights and arms control or other issues that call for international cooperation.

There is no better way to establish hope for the future than to enlighten young minds, and we would be honored to sponsor summer youth exchanges, cultural events, and other programs for young Berliners from the East. Our French and British friends, I'm certain, will do the same. And it's my hope that an authority can be found in East Berlin to sponsor visits from young people of the Western sectors.

One final proposal, one close to my heart: Sport represents a source of enjoyment and ennoblement, and you may have noted that the Republic of Korea--South Korea--has offered to permit certain events of the 1988 Olympics to take place in the North. International sports competitions of all kinds could take place in both parts of this city. And what better way to demonstrate to the world the openness of this city than to offer in some future year to hold the Olympic games here in Berlin, East and West? In these four decades, as I have said, you Berliners have built a great city. You've done so in spite of threats--the Soviet attempts to impose the East-mark, the blockade. Today the city thrives in spite of the challenges implicit in the very presence of this wall. What keeps you here? Certainly there's a great deal to be said for your fortitude, for your defiant courage. But I believe there's something deeper, something that involves Berlin's whole look and feel and way of life--not mere sentiment. No one could live long in Berlin without being completely disabused of illusions. Something instead, that has seen the difficulties of life in Berlin but chose to accept them, that continues to build this good and proud city in contrast to a surrounding totalitarian presence that refuses to release human energies or aspirations. Something that speaks with a powerful voice of affirmation, that says yes to this city, yes to the future, yes to freedom. In a word, I would submit that what keeps you in Berlin is love--love both profound and abiding.

Perhaps this gets to the root of the matter, to the most fundamental distinction of all between East and West. The totalitarian world produces backwardness because it does such violence to the spirit, thwarting the human impulse to create, to enjoy, to worship. The totalitarian world finds even symbols of love and of worship an affront. Years ago, before the East Germans began rebuilding their churches, they erected a secular structure: the television tower at Alexander Platz. Virtually ever since, the authorities have been working to correct what they view as the tower's one major flaw, treating the glass sphere at the top with paints and chemicals of every kind. Yet even today when the sun strikes that sphere--that sphere that towers over all Berlin--the light makes the sign of the cross. There in Berlin, like the city itself, symbols of love, symbols of worship, cannot be suppressed.

As I looked out a moment ago from the Reichstag, that embodiment of German unity, I noticed words crudely spray-painted upon the wall, perhaps by a young Berliner: "This wall will fall. Beliefs become reality." Yes, across Europe, this wall will fall. For it cannot withstand faith; it cannot withstand truth. The wall cannot withstand freedom.

And I would like, before I close, to say one word. I have read, and I have been questioned since I've been here about certain demonstrations against my coming. And I would like to say just one thing, and to those who demonstrate so. I wonder if they have ever asked themselves that if they should have the kind of government they apparently seek, no one would ever be able to do what they're doing again.

Thank you and God bless you all.

 

Note: The President spoke at 2:20 p.m. at the Brandenburg Gate. In his opening remarks, he referred to West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl. Prior to his remarks, President Reagan met with West German President Richard von Weizsacker and the Governing Mayor of West Berlin Eberhard Diepgen at Schloss Bellevue, President Weizsacker's official residence in West Berlin. Following the meeting, President Reagan went to the Reichstag, where he viewed the Berlin Wall from the East Balcony.

BACK TO SPEECHES

 


44 posted on 06/11/2004 5:06:34 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

John Kerry hates America.

He loves the European Utopia where people don't work, everything is free and no one is responsible for anything.

For the time being, in America, there is still some small measure of personal responsibility including the responsibility for individuals to defend agains foreign enemies. Kerry hates America for having such an attiude. He always has and always will.

He must not prevail.


45 posted on 06/11/2004 5:23:25 AM PDT by bert (Don't Panic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

^


46 posted on 06/11/2004 6:29:05 AM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
What a wonderful speech from a wonderful leader. Is there anything we can say or do that can touch what he has said and done?? Tomorrow we can take up the fight. Today is a day for joy, and prayer and tears for our Greatest of Leaders. He is touching the Face of God.

Pray for W and The Shining City on a Hill

47 posted on 06/11/2004 6:29:58 AM PDT by bray (The war is going far better than PravdABCBS wants you to know!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

^


48 posted on 06/11/2004 1:35:58 PM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: jla

bump


49 posted on 06/11/2004 5:35:02 PM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

^


50 posted on 06/12/2004 3:19:10 AM PDT by jla (http://www.ronaldreaganmemorial.com/memorial_fund.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-95 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson