Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 200
  1. #21
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Lusby, MD
    Posts
    1,033

    Default -

    When you are commander in chief, and you country is under attack, and you have no idea at all what's coming next, it is not prayer time- it's time to excuse yourself, make phone calls, and get down to business
    A lot of people, myself included, think that his is exactly the time to pray. The President was being a LEADER. He was alowing his team to gather information and letting them work, letting them do the size up. He was also showing strength and support to the nation by not panicing.

    We don't run into a fire without doing a size up and making a plan. We should allow the President to do the same thing.


  2. #22
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,118

    Default Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Any way you look at it, say no to Kerry

    Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI


    I understand. If someone posts something that goes against Kerry, it is a myth. Despite the fact that it is the truth.

    Kerry took a stand to stop the war, all right. Including subversive activity such as conspiracy to murder US Senators.

    Hey sc...you're fighting a losing battle here all alone. Why don't you get some reinforcements?
    You made an unsubstantiated claim about Kerry committing treason and perjury. Neither of which are true. Technically those would be myths. Better legal minds than you decided that wasn't the case but somehow you consider yourself the final arbiter of what happened during that time frame.

    And I don't need reinforcements.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  3. #23
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,118

    Default Re: -

    Originally posted by Eng34FF


    A lot of people, myself included, think that his is exactly the time to pray. The President was being a LEADER. He was alowing his team to gather information and letting them work, letting them do the size up. He was also showing strength and support to the nation by not panicing.

    We don't run into a fire without doing a size up and making a plan. We should allow the President to do the same thing.
    Personally I would rather have someone who politely excuses himself and starts gathering information immediately. Yes, firefighters do a size up. But the company officer is actively engaged in the process. He (or she) doesn't just sit there for seven minutes and wait for someone else to tell him what's happening.

    If 9/11 is to be considered the equivalent of Pearl Harbor I doubt FDR said, "you know what, even though thousands of Americans have been killed and the Pacific Fleet has been pulverized, I think I'll finish lunch before I start WW II."
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  4. #24
    Senior Member Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    And what, prey tell, was this information his people would have immediately at their finger tips? Or in the first seven minutes?

    It takes time to gather & analyze information, and to report it on up.

    Maybe it's giving him too much credit for understanding how government works...but spending a few more minutes with the kids meant zip to the decision making process at the President's level. He's not their to micro-manage -- he has aides whose job it is to find/make contact with the key advisors; he has security whose job it is to prepare to whisk him away.
    IACOJ Canine Officer
    20/50

  5. #25
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,118

    Default

    Originally posted by Dalmatian90
    And what, prey tell, was this information his people would have immediately at their finger tips? Or in the first seven minutes?

    It takes time to gather & analyze information, and to report it on up.

    Couldn't tell you since I wasn't there. But if I were at work and I found out a plane had hit my house I wouldn't sit there and wait for relief before I left to find out what was happening. I guess I'm just weird that way.

    With an attitude like that I guess I can forget about any presidential aspirations.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    108

    Default

    Originally posted by KingHippo
    "maybe our President was praying"

    When you are commander in chief, and you country is under attack, and you have no idea at all what's coming next, it is not prayer time- it's time to excuse yourself, make phone calls, and get down to business. A lot of things can happen in seven minutes.
    Being a fellow firefighter, you should recognize the error in this statement. Bush should have jumped up, left the room and done what?
    At that point, we still didn't know it was al quada/talliban. Maybe we should have sent an ICBM to an aspirin factory?

    When you arrive on scene, do you head right in?

    Or do you take the quick time to assess?

    IMO, Bush did the right thing

    In both business and at fire scenes, the folks that jump in without assessing end up causing more damage. And the folks that don't assess are the first to criticize those that take the assess. I know of a guy who promoted people who "took quick action" because he had no patience and a was impressed with "just do it". He's went under with two companies.

    Your criticism of "7 minutes" plays right into pfd's post about instant gratification. I think Desert Storm spoiled us, and gave some unrealistic expectations. GW said fromat the outset that a war on terrorist, who had no borders and no nations would be a long haul.

  7. #27
    MembersZone Subscriber mohican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    850

    Talking Scon, how are your wrong? let me count the ways

    Originally posted by scfire86


    This is so much bovine scatology I don't even know where to start. Aside from the usual wacko right wing rhetoric about his Purple Hearts the assertions of perjury and treason are just so much more BS. Bush spends the Vietnam years passed out in an alcoholic stupor and Kerry is criticized for not being heroic enough? I love the logic.

    What weapon did he receive as a 'gift'? And what features did it have that made it unavailable to the general populace? Was it capable of automatic fire? Is its barrel too short? What?

    And fortunately the conservative mindset today that claims disgust regarding any type of protest or dissent wasn't the prevalent mood during the latter part of the 18th Century. If that had been the case we'd still be subjects of the Crown.

    I guess free speech only applies to conservatives.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1. you interject kerry's vietnam record. My post skips past that and starts at his post vietnam period. It's based on things Kerry himself said he did. If he admitted to committing atrocities, why are you pointing the defficator at me? If you would like, I can recommend some courses available on basic reading comprehension.

    2. What is you're proof that Bush was drunk during the whole of Vietnam? Did you personally spend any time with him? If not, must be hearsay. Go back to the Demonrat Underground website, maybe the have some better "proof". Dan Rather doesn't

    3. On the gun thing, read my post. Carefully. Kerry attached his name to (thankfully failed) legislation that would have outlawed the shotgun presented to him because it had an eeeeevilll pistol grip, a semi-auto action, and could be retrofitted with an aftermarket magazine capable of holding too many cartridges. So yes, Matilda, he accepted the gift of a gun with features he tried to outlaw.

    Have you purchased a gun lately? Part of the BATF form you fill out asks whether or not the purchase is for yourself. If you purchase a gun to sell or give to another person, then it can be considered a "straw" purchase.

    What part of "he accepted a gun that he would make illegal" don't you understand?

    4. The "conservatives are against free speech" and "If it had been for conservatives we'd still be a colony" claim is just plain wrong.

    Lets examine the Revolution first.
    The revolutionaries:
    A. were against big government CONSERVATIVE
    B. were against high taxation, especially without representation CONSERVATIVE
    C
    . believed in individual ownership of arms CONSERVATIVE

    Now examine free speech.
    The last president to speak against dissenting views was Clinton. If you can't remember that far back, he was a liberal democrat. Not a conservative.

    The last president to jail dissidents during a war for discent(sp) alone would be FDR. Again, a liberal democrat.

    Arguably, because congress gave approval for the action in Iraq, people like the Dixie Chics, Alec Baldwin, et al could be charged with sedition in a tiem of war. GW has allowed the differing views.

    Rules/laws/regulations on "hate speech", and all the watch what you say PC nonsense are pushed by socialist/liberal democrats. No where does the axiom "if you want to know what the left is doing, listen to what they are accusing others of" is truer than in the arena of free speech.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you want to debate, fine. In the future, please read carefully, and comprehend prior to calling my post BS.

    In truth,you have done nothing to refute my charges.

    Based on what I presented in my post, you have not made a case for Kerry being fit for office, you just tried to smear my post as a "right wing whack job"

    You failed.
    Go out, get info other than New York Times and CBS. You'll find most of the nation is catching on.

  8. #28
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,118

    Default Re: Scon, how are your wrong? let me count the ways

    Originally posted by pfd3501

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1. you interject kerry's vietnam record. My post skips past that and starts at his post vietnam period. It's based on things Kerry himself said he did. If he admitted to committing atrocities, why are you pointing the defficator at me? If you would like, I can recommend some courses available on basic reading comprehension.

    More right wing wacko rhetoric. I already put this to rest with GWendt and his claims of perjury and treason.



    2. What is you're proof that Bush was drunk during the whole of Vietnam? Did you personally spend any time with him? If not, must be hearsay. Go back to the Demonrat Underground website, maybe the have some better "proof". Dan Rather doesn't

    His DUI's are public record. I could point you to a link, but it would be a much more significant educational experience if you found them on your own.


    3. On the gun thing, read my post. Carefully. Kerry attached his name to (thankfully failed) legislation that would have outlawed the shotgun presented to him because it had an eeeeevilll pistol grip, a semi-auto action, and could be retrofitted with an aftermarket magazine capable of holding too many cartridges. So yes, Matilda, he accepted the gift of a gun with features he tried to outlaw.

    Have you purchased a gun lately? Part of the BATF form you fill out asks whether or not the purchase is for yourself. If you purchase a gun to sell or give to another person, then it can be considered a "straw" purchase.

    What part of "he accepted a gun that he would make illegal" don't you understand?

    Who cares? I don't need anymore guns.


    4. The "conservatives are against free speech" and "If it had been for conservatives we'd still be a colony" claim is just plain wrong.

    Lets examine the Revolution first.
    The revolutionaries:
    A. were against big government CONSERVATIVE
    B. were against high taxation, especially without representation CONSERVATIVE
    C
    . believed in individual ownership of arms CONSERVATIVE

    Standing with blind obedience for the status quo and vehemently against change...you're right CONSERVATIVE



    Now examine free speech.
    The last president to speak against dissenting views was Clinton. If you can't remember that far back, he was a liberal democrat. Not a conservative.

    Huh? When did Clinton advocate that?


    The last president to jail dissidents during a war for discent(sp) alone would be FDR. Again, a liberal democrat.

    There are those jailed during the Nixon administration who might argue that point.


    Arguably, because congress gave approval for the action in Iraq, people like the Dixie Chics, Alec Baldwin, et al could be charged with sedition in a tiem of war. GW has allowed the differing views.

    Rules/laws/regulations on "hate speech", and all the watch what you say PC nonsense are pushed by socialist/liberal democrats. No where does the axiom "if you want to know what the left is doing, listen to what they are accusing others of" is truer than in the arena of free speech.

    Just ask Ann Coulter or Michael Savage. Very open minded and tolerant conservatives.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you want to debate, fine. In the future, please read carefully, and comprehend prior to calling my post BS.

    In truth,you have done nothing to refute my charges.

    Based on what I presented in my post, you have not made a case for Kerry being fit for office, you just tried to smear my post as a "right wing whack job"

    If the shoe fits.....


    You failed.
    Go out, get info other than New York Times and CBS. You'll find most of the nation is catching on. [/B]
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  9. #29
    MembersZone Subscriber mohican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    850

    Default

    SC
    1. you didn't prove George wrong. And again, you haven't addressed that Kerry admitted to committing atrocities. It's a matter of congressional record, not right wing conspiracy

    2. DUIs? Plural? I've only heard of one, and it was in the 70s or 80s. Not in the Vietnam. Have you evidence of a GW DUI during vietnam? I didn't think so. Are all liberals chronilogically challenged? Or just you and John "Christmas in Cambodia" Kerry

    3. When shown the error of your ways "I don't care" is good enough for you? Or do you believe that Kerry would exempt his fellow liberals from firearms restrictions?

    4. Standing with blind obedience for the status quo and vehemently against change...you're right CONSERVATIVE

    Change? How about the change that gives us relief from oppressive tax rates - Conservative

    Change? How about recognizing that affirmative action is a form of racism - Conservative

    I could go on, but I don't think you'd get it.

    A quote from Clinton "You can't love your country and hate your government". And that is obviously far from the truth.

    5. "Just ask Ann Coulter or Michael Savage. Very open minded and tolerant conservatives"

    Several points - for every Ann Coulter there are two or three Louis Farrakans. I've never read or heard any statements from Ann Coulter wanting to cut off free speech. Tolerance is not always a virtue, and conservatives certainly don't have a monopoly on intolerance. Have you listened to any of AlGores impressions of a Pentecostal on Crack? Oop, those are political speeches of his. By you're initial reaction to this thread, I would say that you are very intolerant.

    Over the years I've observed that the catch phrases liberals/socialist/democrats like to throw at others apply to themselves the most. And when called on it, they become apoplectic.

  10. #30
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,118

    Default

    Originally posted by pfd3501
    Have you listened to any of AlGores impressions of a Pentecostal on Crack?
    Nope. Haven't done that. But I bet I heard Rush Limbaugh on Oxycontnin more than once. It sure explains a lot.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  11. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    108

    Default sad for them, good for us

    The only defense a lib has for kerry is an attack on Rush Limbaugh

  12. #32
    Forum Member FireCapt1951retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Between here and there
    Posts
    790

    Default

    scfire86,

    I suggest you rethink your attitude on the issue of Hanoi Johnny's return. If you weren't there, you'll never understand the damage this so-called man caused just because he was looking forward to a political future. Millions of Viet Nam veterans may have put this in the back of their minds but they certainly didn't forget. Hanoi Johnny made BLATANT accusations with NO PROOF and as we know no KNOWLEDGE. I was still in country when this traitor was spouting off his false accusations, thus putting my life in even more danger (yeah I have my medals and $1.25 and those medals will get me a cup of coffee). Now that is dispicable to say the least. He met with the ENEMY while STILL a member of the Armed Forces (Naval Reserve) and without the consent of the U.S. Government. That is TREASON in case you don't comprehend that. I could care less what Kerry did in the Nam but his spouting off of atrocities was WAY BEYOND reason. This would be like an Officer in your department accusing the members of robbing a house while fighting the fire or not doing your job and costing someones life and in essence killing them. Think about that! Maybe you would sit back and take it but I know I sure as he!! wouldn't.
    Last edited by FireLt1951; 09-15-2004 at 04:43 PM.

  13. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    108

    Default

    FireLT

    according to SC, the testimony of sKerry to the Senate is a myth, and unproveable. It's a hoax perpetrated by the Rebublicans.

  14. #34
    Forum Member FireCapt1951retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Between here and there
    Posts
    790

    Default

    Yeah I know, he probably still believes in the Easter Bunny too.

  15. #35
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,118

    Default

    Originally posted by Farley
    FireLT

    according to SC, the testimony of sKerry to the Senate is a myth, and unproveable. It's a hoax perpetrated by the Rebublicans.
    Never said any such thing. I said the accusations of perjury and treason are unfounded.

    You too should try reading, it's FUNdamental.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  16. #36
    Forum Member FireCapt1951retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Between here and there
    Posts
    790

    Default

    Originally posted by scfire86


    Never said any such thing. I said the accusations of perjury and treason are unfounded.

    You too should try reading, it's FUNdamental.
    Understand one thing that is FACT. For a member of the Armed Forces to meet and negotiate with the enemy is an act of treason under the UCMJ and to state false accusations under oath while a member of the Armed Forces or otherwise is perjury. Knowingly making false accuastions is simply lying. To tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to do otherwise is perjuring yourself. It's pretty simple actually

  17. #37
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    And I don't need reinforcements.
    Oh yeah. You're doing a great job.

    And you haven't put anything to rest. I just haven't finished the post.

  18. #38
    Forum Member FireCapt1951retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Between here and there
    Posts
    790
    Last edited by FireLt1951; 09-15-2004 at 07:35 PM.

  19. #39
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,118

    Default

    Originally posted by FireLt1951


    Understand one thing that is FACT. For a member of the Armed Forces to meet and negotiate with the enemy is an act of treason under the UCMJ and to state false accusations under oath while a member of the Armed Forces or otherwise is perjury. Knowingly making false accuastions is simply lying. To tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to do otherwise is perjuring yourself. It's pretty simple actually
    And like I asked Norm earlier. This 28 y/o just waltzed on in to the Senate and no thought about bringing him up on charges. They just let him go. And if a violation of the UCMJ had occurred why no charges from the military justice side? One big reason. There is no perjury, and there is no treason. That too is pretty simple actually.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  20. #40
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    So tell us, liberal Kool-Aid drinker, how did he get in there, then? Was it a security breach? Was it a gate-crashing? Was it like the guy in the Batman suit at Buckingham Palace? OR was it that he was invited, as the self-proclaimed leader of the VVAW by an anti-war Senator for bogus hearings that were aimed solely at embarrasing Nixon? Which one?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts