McCain in '08

gatt wrote:

"Owen Hiller" wrote in message
...

You brought up John Kerry. And if you are such a stickler for accuracy
regarding John Kerry, let's take a look at his political record. Please
tell us
all of the bills

I don't work for Kerry, don't endorse Kerry, don't care about Kerry, don't
have any interest in arguing for or against Kerry and further removing the
discussion from the newsgroup topic.

If you're trying to corner my into defending John Kerry's politics or
something, you're barking up the wrong tree.

I am not. You wrote that the vietnam veterans who were criticizing Kerry's
story just happened to come out at the election time, therefore they only had
political motivations. I just pointed out that it was Kerry who brought up
Vietnam and started making his claims. Others merely wanted to rebut the claims
he was making in the national forum.



Please tell us his attendance record

What am I, his press secretary? Do your own homework. I'm not interested
in doing it for you, nor am I interested in Kerry's politics enough sk you
to explain your point.

A moment ago you were claiming that 'someone' was attempting to diminish
Congressman Murtha's past service and sacrifices, but your only example of this
was an anonymous post on somebody's bulletin board. Or maybe not even that
because your link does not work.



Settle down, Beavis.

If you need to resort to name calling, go right ahead.

"Owen Hiller" wrote in message
...

If you're trying to corner my into defending John Kerry's politics or
something, you're barking up the wrong tree.

I am not. You wrote that the vietnam veterans who were criticizing
Kerry's story just happened to come out at the election time, therefore
they only had political motivations. I just pointed out that it was
Kerry who brought up Vietnam

Ah. And what was SWIFT BOAT VETERANS FOR TRUTH doing before Kerry brought
up his Swift Boat story? Were they out dutifully purging society of swift
boat frauds?

A moment ago you were claiming that 'someone' was attempting to diminish
Congressman Murtha's past service and sacrifices,

A W F E R P E T E S A K E ! ! !
http://www.cnsnews.com/SpecialReport...20060113a.html

"Murtha's War Hero Status Called Into Question"


Not good enough? ANN COULTER! http://mediamatters.org/items/200512020002

And unlike Murtha, who refuses to release his medical records showing he
was entitled to his two Purple Hearts, we know what North did. (These
Democrat military veterans are hardly shrinking violets when it comes to
citing their medals, but they get awfully squeamish when pressed for
details.)

A May 12, 2002, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article





http://www.themoderatevoice.com/posts/1132727456.shtml Congresswoman Who
Called John Murtha Coward Apologizes On TV

but your only example of this was an anonymous post on somebody's bulletin
board. Or maybe not even that because your link does not work.


Need more?
"[Murtha] is putting himself forward as some combat veteran with serious
wounds and he's using that and it's dishonest and it's wrong," Bailey told
Cybercast News Service on Jan. 9. Murtha served in the Marines on active
duty and in the reserves from 1952 until his retirement as a colonel in
1990. He volunteered for service in Vietnam and was a First Marine Regiment
intelligence officer in 1966 and 1967.

Murtha and Bailey, once allies, were forced to run against each other in a
Democratic congressional primary in 1982 following redistricting. Murtha won
the election.

Murtha has, in the past, publicly dismissed any questions about whether he
deserved his two Purple Hearts, noting during his 1994 congressional
campaign that "I am proud of my service in Vietnam."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor...-_b_24751.html



If you need to resort to name calling, go right ahead.

It might come down to that if you can't accept facts. If you would like,
I'll find several posts demonstrating that there's a war on in the middle
east and other current events covered all over the mainstream media.

-c

gatt wrote:

"Owen Hiller" wrote in message
...

If you're trying to corner my into defending John Kerry's politics or
something, you're barking up the wrong tree.

I am not. You wrote that the vietnam veterans who were criticizing
Kerry's story just happened to come out at the election time, therefore
they only had political motivations. I just pointed out that it was
Kerry who brought up Vietnam

Ah. And what was SWIFT BOAT VETERANS FOR TRUTH doing before Kerry brought
up his Swift Boat story? Were they out dutifully purging society of swift
boat frauds?

What "frauds" are you referring to? Please describe. And who was using said frauds
you allege to obtain higher office?




A moment ago you were claiming that 'someone' was attempting to diminish
Congressman Murtha's past service and sacrifices,

A W F E R P E T E S A K E ! ! !
http://www.cnsnews.com/SpecialReport...20060113a.html

"Murtha's War Hero Status Called Into Question"

Not good enough? ANN COULTER! http://mediamatters.org/items/200512020002

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor...-_b_24751.html

If you need to resort to name calling, go right ahead.

It might come down to that if you can't accept facts. If you would like,
I'll find several posts demonstrating that there's a war on in the middle
east and other current events covered all over the mainstream media.

Hey, I wasn't the one who couldn't figure out why the swift boat veterans would want
to rebut claims AFTER they were made Ann Coulter makes a living by making
outrageous statements, so what? Huffington is a liberal axe-grinder, hardly an
unbiased source either. And as for your moderate voice article, you did note the
word "apoligize," right?

:-)

Owen Hiller wrote:
gatt wrote:

"Owen Hiller" wrote in message
...

If you're trying to corner my into defending John Kerry's politics or
something, you're barking up the wrong tree.

I am not. You wrote that the vietnam veterans who were criticizing
Kerry's story just happened to come out at the election time, therefore
they only had political motivations. I just pointed out that it was
Kerry who brought up Vietnam

Ah. And what was SWIFT BOAT VETERANS FOR TRUTH doing before Kerry brought
up his Swift Boat story? Were they out dutifully purging society of swift
boat frauds?

What "frauds" are you referring to? Please describe. And who was using said frauds
you allege to obtain higher office?




A moment ago you were claiming that 'someone' was attempting to diminish
Congressman Murtha's past service and sacrifices,

A W F E R P E T E S A K E ! ! !
http://www.cnsnews.com/SpecialReport...20060113a.html

"Murtha's War Hero Status Called Into Question"

Not good enough? ANN COULTER! http://mediamatters.org/items/200512020002

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor...-_b_24751.html

If you need to resort to name calling, go right ahead.

It might come down to that if you can't accept facts. If you would like,
I'll find several posts demonstrating that there's a war on in the middle
east and other current events covered all over the mainstream media.

Hey, I wasn't the one who couldn't figure out why the swift boat veterans would want
to rebut claims AFTER they were made Ann Coulter makes a living by making
outrageous statements, so what? Huffington is a liberal axe-grinder, hardly an
unbiased source either. And as for your moderate voice article, you did note the
word "apoligize," right?

The bottom line is that the SBV"t" attacked Kerry's service in Vietnam
in a manner that could be described as dishonest. The fact is that the
overwhelming majority of guys who were with Kerry (on his boat) or near
Kerry (on other boats) in combat, have no problem with Kerry's medals
and/or service in Vietnam.

The SBV"t" misrepresented the facts. They omitted facts when it suited
then, and they spun wildly.

Actually, describing it as dishonest would be an understatement.

Doug Reese

:-)

wrote:
Owen Hiller wrote:

gatt wrote:


"Owen Hiller" wrote in message
...


If you're trying to corner my into defending John Kerry's politics or
something, you're barking up the wrong tree.

I am not. You wrote that the vietnam veterans who were criticizing
Kerry's story just happened to come out at the election time, therefore
they only had political motivations. I just pointed out that it was
Kerry who brought up Vietnam

Ah. And what was SWIFT BOAT VETERANS FOR TRUTH doing before Kerry brought
up his Swift Boat story? Were they out dutifully purging society of swift
boat frauds?

What "frauds" are you referring to? Please describe. And who was using said frauds
you allege to obtain higher office?




A moment ago you were claiming that 'someone' was attempting to diminish
Congressman Murtha's past service and sacrifices,

A W F E R P E T E S A K E ! ! !
http://www.cnsnews.com/SpecialReport...20060113a.html

"Murtha's War Hero Status Called Into Question"

Not good enough? ANN COULTER! http://mediamatters.org/items/200512020002

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor...-_b_24751.html


If you need to resort to name calling, go right ahead.

It might come down to that if you can't accept facts. If you would like,
I'll find several posts demonstrating that there's a war on in the middle
east and other current events covered all over the mainstream media.

Hey, I wasn't the one who couldn't figure out why the swift boat veterans would want
to rebut claims AFTER they were made Ann Coulter makes a living by making
outrageous statements, so what? Huffington is a liberal axe-grinder, hardly an
unbiased source either. And as for your moderate voice article, you did note the
word "apoligize," right?


The bottom line is that the SBV"t" attacked Kerry's service in Vietnam
in a manner that could be described as dishonest. The fact is that the
overwhelming majority of guys who were with Kerry (on his boat) or near
Kerry (on other boats) in combat, have no problem with Kerry's medals
and/or service in Vietnam.

The SBV"t" misrepresented the facts. They omitted facts when it suited
then, and they spun wildly.

Actually, describing it as dishonest would be an understatement.

Agreed. Describing Kerry as dishonest would be a huge understatement.

Matt