Note to StatesRights

[??????????]

Your last two posts have called people 'idiots' and 'morons'.  Please try to make your arguments in other ways.

Thanks

Please point out the lies of your side of the aisle before you call me on anything. Thanks.

[??????????]

I am not saying you lied, I just think name-calling outside of the fantasy board is counterproductive.

Name-calling is counter-productive, period, on or off the fantasy board.

You people name call all the time and get a free pass. Swift Cowards is on name among others I have seen. This board has been taken over by left liberals. I will no longer be wasting my my time on this board. I will probably stick to Fantasy or HIstory. The Democrats hate for America and support of outright lies make me want to puke. God Bless America.

[??????????]

Statesrights,

JNB is not a liberal, first of all, and second of all he did not call another posted a coward, he called the anti-Kerry veteran group a bunch of cowards.  I prefer a different choice of words than he used, but he did not call a fellow poster a coward.

The fact is he called veterans a coward. Sixty seven people are most likely not wrong. Kerry is getting what he deserves.

[??????????]

But of course you conveniently look over Moveon.org who has direct connections to Kerry. I love the Democrats double standards.

[??????????]

StatesRights and I have crossed swords in the past and despite I disagreed with what he said, at least I knew he had some reason behind it, well no longer. His posts have become more knee-jerk and undeniably irrational. Lets get some things straight

1. Bush supporting independents attack Kerry's military record. Bush stays silent. In retaliation, a Kerry supporting independent group attacks Bush's miltiary 'record'. Kerry condemns the ad. Who did the right thing? John Kerry, whether you support him or despise him did the right thing.

2. In 2000, again, independent Bush supporting groups ran ads against John McCain- firstly accusing him of the the same things that Kerry was accused of, and secondly, attacking the fact that John McCain had adopted a Vietnamese child.

3. American troops commited atrocities in Vietnam. End of story. Kerry, in the early 70's highlighted these atrocities. Unpatriotic? Backstabbing? No. Fast forward Iraq 2004, Lynsey England and the Iraqi torture photos show that American troops commited atrocities in Iraq. It happens, hell British troops did the same thing for years. That is not the point, NO-ONE should criticise anybody, whether a civilian or military personel, for highlighting lapses in sanity under pressure in war-zones.

4. Kerry does not deserve to be attacked over his military record, and neither should Bush. They both deserve to be attacked and attack each about their policies in relation to the race for the presidency.

You summed it up a lot better than I could, that's for sure. Moveon should quit attacking Bush's military record though, they should be able to find other stuff, like the "Switch" ads.

Money spent by Moveon and DNC to bash Bush : 62 Million

Money spent by SwiftVet.com : 500k

Word.

[??????????]

States Rights. Did you not read point 4? I'd have a look at it again if I were you.

Kerrys military "achievements" show how he woudl act as president. His record is fair game.

[??????????]

Money spent by Moveon and DNC to bash Bush : 62 Million

Money spent by SwiftVet.com : 500k

Word.

If you are going to count DNC money you should also count RNC money.

Plus Kerry condemned an anti-Bush ad recently.  Why no 'word' for him on that?

Kerry condemned ONE ad! Oh, wow, big step. Lets forget the other 50 or so their have already been! And Bush condemned all soft money ads. Anyway the whole McCain/Feingold thing was a joke and is unconstitutional. Obviously they didn't really want to to reform election campaigning.

[??????????]

No no, Read it again StatesRights.

So only current issues are fair game in a election? I don't agree with that at all. Every aspect of both candidate from the past all the way to the current time needs to be taken into account. If a candidate raped a woman in the past would that have no relevance?

[??????????]

Oh and I'm not a Democrat, i'm a Tony Blair supporting British New Labourite, who supported the war in Iraq. I just don't see why Americans get so hung up on military records.

Because it points to leadership abilities.

[??????????]

Bush was an alcoholic wasn't he. I don't think people hold that against him!

Being an alcoholic is a little different then throwing your fellow soldiers under the bus.

[??????????]

Kerry condemned ONE ad! Oh, wow, big step. Lets forget the other 50 or so their have already been! And Bush condemned all soft money ads. Anyway the whole McCain/Feingold thing was a joke and is unconstitutional. Obviously they didn't really want to to reform election campaigning.

Many of those ads came before Kerry was the nomineee.

And what soft money ads has Bush condemned?

He condemned all of them. He said so himself.

[??????????]

Margaret Thatcher never served in the military....

Neither did Roosevelt or Lincoln.

The point is what a person did while in the military is important.

[??????????]

States Right's hasn't really answered any questions that have been put to him.

Bull. I did answer them. And what I meant was what a person does as a leader in the military points to what they will do as president. But I'm not going around and around about this over and over.

[??????????]

States Rights keeps flip-flopping on whether he is going to quit commenting on this board or not.  

I am going to quit or I am going to keep posting.  

What is it SR?

I should stay on to bash you liberal "hate America" types. You guys have run off most of the good posters around here. The only reason I stay is because of the Fantasy Elections.

[??????????]

I should stay on to bash you liberal "hate America" types. You guys have run off most of the good posters around here. The only reason I stay is because of the Fantasy Elections.

That rhetoric is becoming very very very old

Cry me a river.

[??????????]

Cry me a river.

How would you like it if we posted that you hated america over and over again?  Not that much now would you?  

You would be wrong, but go ahead. We all know what moveon.org, Europe and the UN really think about about the US.

[??????????]

You would be wrong, but go ahead. We all know what moveon.org, Europe and the UN really think about about the US.

Europe serves European interests before they serve American interests, which makes sense.  It doesn't mean you run away from them but you always have to keep that in mind.

The un in a conglomeration of many different countries, so you can't really use it as a unit.

And the people at moveon.org wouldn't be spending countless hours upon week upon months doing what they do if they hated america.

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

Now I won't say you hate America because I know it is untrue.  But the untrue part doesn't seem to stop the right from slapping that tag on liberals.

If it understandable for Europe to think about Europe first then why do I hear so much crap lefties about America being for America first?

[??????????]

If it understandable for Europe to think about Europe first then why do I hear so much crap lefties about America being for America first?

I think you're missing a linking word in there so I can't exactly make out what it means

IF IT IS ACCEPTABLE FOR THE EUROPE TO THINK ABOUT EUROPE FIRST THEN WHY DO REPUBLICANS CATCH HELL FROM THE DEMONCRATS WHEN WE SAY "AMERICA FIRST"?

[??????????]

IF IT IS ACCEPTABLE FOR THE EUROPE TO THINK ABOUT EUROPE FIRST THEN WHY DO REPUBLICANS CATCH HELL FROM THE DEMONCRATS WHEN WE SAY "AMERICA FIRST"?

Nomo relies first of all does not count.

Second, America should think for America first, and it does.  And it always has in my opinion.

Then why do I keep hearing the attacks about supposedly "going it alone".

[??????????]

Then why do I keep hearing the attacks about supposedly "going it alone".

Because many people believe that the war was not necessary.

Some believed WW2 wasn't necessary either.

[??????????]

Some believed WW2 wasn't necessary either.

Yes a small minority did.  But how is that relevant?

Because that war was key to our future..just like this one will turn out to be.

[??????????]

Because that war was key to our future..just like this one will turn out to be.

Well if you equate WWII with Iraq that's your own business.

You deny the similarities.

[??????????]

the war on saddam was not truly a part of the war on terror.  however, the war on terror is a world war.

as sen. voinovich of ohio said, the cold war was WWIII and the war on terror is WWIV.

Saddam aided and abetted terrorists, so how can it not relate?