Listen to NPR's 'Here and Now' on Monday

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tonkin TwentyMil

Please don't insult me with your "militarily-ignorant news media, academics, and the LibDonkeyLeft" argument. It's not true, and all the name calling in the world can't change the fact that Kerry was in-country, wounded and decorated while Bush and other cowards took every opportunity to avoid combat. Bush was AWOL for a good period of his Natl. Guard duty, was given a pass due to his political and social connections, and he and his ilk are an INSULT to America's military.
 
Your arguments about Kerry/Bush are ridiculous. Either one would sell you out in a heartbeat. ACP, you stomped onto this thread in the first place, what did you expect? That a gun board would support your Kerry rant? Puhleeze. What was Kerry doing "in-country"? Filming his exploits (sic) to further his political career!

Me, I'm voting for a candidate that supports Second Amendment rights. I'm marking the square next to the "Libertarian" candidate.
 
will you guys try reading my post

I put the barf:barf: that should make it obvious what I was trying to say, that the dems allways sing the same old song ....to make it crystal clear for the sarcastic impaired. I am all for private ownership of both semi auto and class three AK's....

uh leanwolf...I am saying that Democrat harry reid and Democrat bill richardson are better then gulianni and mccain....I know how bad guilianni is...I am an ex new yorker!!!!

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
ACP, please put down the koolaid

http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200405041626.asp

Kerry Purple Heart Doc Speaks Out
The medical description of his first wound.

Some critics of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry have questioned the circumstances surrounding the first of three Purple Hearts Kerry won in Vietnam. Those critics, among them some of Kerry's fellow veterans, have suggested that a wound suffered by Kerry in December 1968 may have made him technically eligible for a Purple Heart but was not severe enough to warrant serious consideration, even for a decoration that was handed out by the thousands. Whatever the case, Kerry was awarded the Purple Heart, and, along with two others he won later, it allowed him to request to leave Vietnam before his tour of duty was finished.

Kerry was treated for the wound at a medical facility in Cam Ranh Bay. The doctor who treated Kerry, Louis Letson, is today a retired general practitioner in Alabama. Letson says he remembers his brief encounter with Kerry 35 years ago because "some of his crewmen related that Lt. Kerry had told them that he would be the next JFK from Massachusetts." Letson says that last year, as the Democratic campaign began to heat up, he told friends that he remembered treating one of the candidates many years ago. In response to their questions, Letson says, he wrote down his recollections of the time. (Letson says he has had no contacts with anyone from the Bush campaign or the Republican party.) What follows is Letson's memory, as he wrote it.

I have a very clear memory of an incident which occurred while I was the Medical Officer at Naval Support Facility, Cam Ranh Bay.

John Kerry was a (jg), the OinC or skipper of a Swift boat, newly arrived in Vietnam. On the night of December 2, he was on patrol north of Cam Ranh, up near Nha Trang area. The next day he came to sick bay, the medical facility, for treatment of a wound that had occurred that night.

The story he told was different from what his crewmen had to say about that night. According to Kerry, they had been engaged in a fire fight, receiving small arms fire from on shore. He said that his injury resulted from this enemy action.

Some of his crew confided that they did not receive any fire from shore, but that Kerry had fired a mortar round at close range to some rocks on shore. The crewman thought that the injury was caused by a fragment ricocheting from that mortar round when it struck the rocks.

That seemed to fit the injury which I treated.

What I saw was a small piece of metal sticking very superficially in the skin of Kerry's arm. The metal fragment measured about 1 cm. in length and was about 2 or 3 mm in diameter. It certainly did not look like a round from a rifle.

I simply removed the piece of metal by lifting it out of the skin with forceps. I doubt that it penetrated more than 3 or 4 mm. It did not require probing to find it, did not require any anesthesia to remove it, and did not require any sutures to close the wound.

The wound was covered with a bandaid.

Not [sic] other injuries were reported and I do not recall that there was any reported damage to the boat.
 
It was not my intention to hijack this thread, so I will conclude my comments by saying you are all free to Google the military records of Kerry, Bush, Cheney and Hastert. Please be honest and consult various sources, both partisan and neutral. Then draw your own conclusions. I believe my assertions will win the day.
 
All I need to know is which one of them hung out with Jane fonda after the war. FYI, it wasn't Bush, Cheney or Hastert.

It's not Military service alone that dictates who is a better politician. ALL of these men have prior held positions in Gov't and/or Business, and I'll tell you that Massachusetts is absolutely NOT the model I would choose for my nation, or state, for many, many reasons.
 
Please don't insult me with your "militarily-ignorant news media, academics, and the LibDonkeyLeft" argument. It's not true, and all the name calling in the world can't change the fact that Kerry was in-country, wounded and decorated

FACT: Many military records are not verified and few are actually cross-checked.

Hey, I was in the military (US Army.) I can only reason that since I used some clerical legerdemain for three of my very own promotions, JFKerry could have easily typed up one or more his own medal commendations/recomendations. Or, he could have paid some clerk to type it up for him. All one needed was a typewriter, a stencil sheet or two, a mimeograph machine and some knowledge of how paperwork moves through personnel files.
 
I guess this is the show:

http://www.here-now.org/shows/2006/04/20060410_2.asp

A Democrat's Strategy for Republican Success
Story aired: Monday, April 10, 2006

A new AP-Isos survey shows almost 70 percent of Americans (an all-time low for the Bush presidency) think the nation is headed in the wrong direction. The poll also gives Democrats a 49-33 percent edge over Republicans on which party should control Congress.

A new book, "Foxes in the Henhouse: How the Republicans Stole the South and the Heartland and What the Democrats Must Do to Run 'Em," written by democratic strategists Dave Saunders and Steve Jarding doesn't quite go that far, but it does sketch out a blueprint for democratic success in areas now dominated by the GOP.

Guests:

Steve Jarding, co-author of "Foxes in the Henhouse: How the Republicans Stole the South and the Heartland and What the Democrats Must Do to Run 'Em"

It seems to be 38 minutes long, so I will have to listen when I get home . . .
 
I would have a little more respect for Kerry if he would publicize his original discharge papers instead of the document he has on his website that was done after Jimmy Carter's pardon. He has never been up front about that. It taints whatever service he might have done.
 
oh and the Yale transcrpts

show that GW got better grades, they were released after the election (natch)
with zero fanfare from MSM
 
Let's return to the thread...

I listened to that show. It is available at www.nro.org.

The guys thesis was: No hunting gun has ever been banned. But the NRA has all these hunters convinced that the government is out to get their bird gun. So the Democrats have to support the hunters, especially in the south and west. One way he suggested was to open National Park Land to hunters. This would only cost the other park users a couple of weeks and would cut the hunters out of the NRA.

If NYC wants to ban assault weapons that is perfectly alright.

Just a heads up for when you see that line coming.
 
I emailed the author and pointed out that only 1 in 5 gun owners is a hunter. The Democratic party leadership have been under the misconception that "gun owner = hunter" for more than a decade now...

I don't CARE if I'm "allowed" to own a skeet gun or a bolt-action deer rifle; I don't OWN any, and neither do most of the gun owners I work with. We mostly own handguns and intermediate-caliber nonhunting rifles, though there are a few shotguns in the mix.
 
I own guns, I don't hunt. My weapons/guns are used for target pratice and protection. Democrats need to read the 2A it dose not mention hunting.
 
ANG

Wow. Many of my fellow brothers-in-arms would be surprised to learn that that their guard service is cowardly. I wonder what comprises ACP's military experience/service.

*Yawn*

I also don't know many "idiots" who completed USAF fighter training, graduated from Yale and Harvard, or rose to the office of POTUS. Like 'em or hate 'em, you don't get to be President by being stupid, no matter who your father is.
 
I just heard the show...

gunsmith-- you get the official "Carnac the Magnificent" award as you saw the future 100% +1

Vermont--
Yeah, his argument is really bizarre. He states that guns aren't evil per se they just become evil geographically so Democrats should ban them in New York (and by extension San Francisco/LA/etc), but not in Iowa/Virginia/South Dakota etc. I suppose that means we should be able to suspend freedom of speech in Kentuky, or the 4th amendment in Harlem just 'cause some local places "don't need it"

And people are supposed to believe that they won't take guns away later?!

Also I love his usage of "hunting gun," especially for me a non-hunter, who isn't terribly interested in shooting furry things, pulling their legs off and eating them. Isn't every gun a "hunting gun." I suppose he means that we shouldn't ban single-round break-action shotguns or goofyly big .44mag revolvers, but everything else is for terrorists.

So what are Democrats going to today? The same thing they do everyday, Pinky. Try to take over your guns.
 
I'm a Democrat. I'm a gun owner. I have hunting rifles, an "assault rifle", shotguns and hand guns. I don't agree with all things said by all Democrats. My goal is to get my party to support the right to bear arms in the constitution. Let's move on to some other important issues like getting the super rich to pay taxes. Lots of taxes.
 
They already do.
Yeah, there's a few accounts at Cayman Islands Bank and Trust that would disagree with you on that.

robctwo-- as a liberal I agree about taxing the uber rich. As a parent, I also agree with preserving the environment for my kids. But damn Democrats always try to take the guns. This guy on NPR said we should give up going after guns was still selling the same giant horse-pill to swallow, leave "hunting guns" alone but ban everything else, everywhere else. :banghead: IT'S SO FRUSTRATING.
 
Let's move on to some other important issues like getting the super rich to pay taxes. Lots of taxes.

They do.

indiv3-big.gif


http://www.cato.org/research/fiscal_policy/2003/factsfigs.html

In fact, people who make less than 50k only pay 15.7% of the total tax burden.

That means that 84.3% of the tax burden is paid by those who make > 50k.

In fact, 55% of the tax burden is paid by people who make > 100k, which isn't that hard a hurdle for two professionals filing jointly to cross.

So, put redristributionist "the rich are getting richer and squeezing the middle class" mantra back where it came from.

The reality is that the few pay the most to the many.
 
"changing their position" = lying more

Honestly, I doubt dems will ever believe in the 2nd amendment but if they can get more votes by telling people that they do...
-mr dove


bingo. here's what perplexes me.....if a politician openly admits that he is going to change his position on ANY issue simply to get into, or stay in office, shouldn't the buzzers in everybody's head start going off, warning people that maybe this person doesn't have the integrity to represent other people, since he simply stands for whatever will keep him in power. the republican party sucks too, but at least they have enough sense to lie without telling you they're doing it. with that said, i'll be voting for neither.
 
image.jpg


So, put your "the rich are impoverished by the welfare socialist programs" mantra back where it came from.

The reality is that the few make a lot of money off of the many.
 
What in the hell does yacht ownership have to do with the percentage of taxes that people pay?

Would it be your socialist dreamworld to have everyone make $20k a year no matter what job they did?
 
When it comes to the four listed above, I'd as soon eat a plate of barbed wire as to vote for any one of them!

Actually, any of the four would just as soon PUT every independent thinking person behind the barbed wire. D's for your own good (social re-education) and R's because you broke some new stupid law (punish the criminal). That's why I love gridlock. Let 'em accomplish nothing at all.
 
And no I don't think I'll listen to NPR.

Aw, man, and right in Fort Worth too.

I don't know about what's coming up but Glenn Mitchell did interviews with both John Lott and Abigail Kohn in the same year. I'm going to miss that guy. :(

'Course, it's a Texas public radio station - guess I shouldn't have been that surprised they had a couple of overtly "pro" interviews.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top