A Few Questions for Sen. Kerry from a Concerned Voter (watch Kerry crash & burn answering these)

May 14, 2004 | The Bandit

[The Bandit]

 

 

Dear Senator Kerry,

Could you please spare me a few moments of your time to clear up a few questions I have, questions that have so far caused me great confusion about you and your positions on the issues? This won't take long and the questions I have are rather straight forward and simple. With this said, let me begin with a few of the most pressing questions I would like answered:

Question: You once told reporters that "I fully intend to continue to practice my religion as separately from what I do with respect to my public life, and that's the way it ought to be in America." During Easter Sunday you attended both Protestant and Catholic communion services.

Just exactly what faith do you practice?

Question: In 1985, responding to questions about your participation in a April 24, 1971 vietnam war protest involving medal tossing, you told the, Washington Post, "They're my medals. I'll do what I want with them. And there shouldn't be any expectations about them. It shouldn't be a measurement of anything. People say, 'You didn't throw your medals away.' Who said I had to? And why should I? It's my business. I did not want to throw my medals away."

Couple of quick questions here for you:

1.) On October 6, 1996 the Boston Globe asked you why you didn't bring your own medals to throw since it was planned weeks in advance, for which you responded that you didn't have time to go home [to New York] and get them. Why if you were not interested in tossing your medals, then insinuate that you would have if you would have had the time to go home and return with them?

2.) If you did not want to toss your medals on April 24, 1971, why did you bother showing up to participate in a medal tossing event, only to leave a false impression afterwards that you had indeed tossed your medals over a fence?

3.) Wouldn't it have diminished the "expectations" of the other medal throwers - perhaps even the general public - to have learned you had no desire to throw your own medals over the fence that day?

Question: You once responded to, Wallace Carter, a constituent opposed to the Gulf War on January 22, 1991 by writing, "Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition... to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war."

Then a week later, you responded again to, Wallace Carter, by writing, "Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf."

What was your REAL position on the war and how can anyone believe your response?

Question: You made a televised comment last year during a Democratic debate suggesting that French and Russian officials at the United Nations were poised to compromise with the Bush administration on the eve of the Iraq war. The following day you followed up by saying, "I have it on the highest authority" that the French and Russians were prepared to make an offer at the UN, but were rebuffed by American officials intent on going to war,  and "I'm going to talk about it more publicly at a later time."

Do you still plan to publicly talk about this and reveal what evidence this so-called 'highest authority' may have given you?

Question: During a 1971 Senate hearing you were asked whether CBS could defend a documentary titled "The Selling of the Pentagon" that they had recently aired,  for which you responded:

"I think they have; yes, sir. I think the public opinion in this country believes that, 'The Selling of the Pentagon.' I was a public information officer before I went to Vietnam, and I know that those things were just the way they said because I conducted several of those tours on a ship, and I have seen my own men wait hours until people got away, and I have seen cooks put on special uniforms for them. I have seen good come out for the visitors and everything else. It really happens."

Were you really once a 'Public Information Officer,' and if so, when and where?

Question: Since becoming a candidate, you have come come out and strongly attacked the Patriot Act. At the time of the passage you said "With the passage of this legislation, terrorist organizations will not be able... to do the kinds of things they did on Sept. 11." Then went on to add that you were "pleased at the compromise we have reached on the anti-terrorism legislation"

You recently suggested that "it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft. That starts with replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time."

Has any U.S. citizens lost their liberties due to the Patriot Act? If the Patriot Act is such a terrible piece of law, why in the world did you even support it in the first place? Surely you read it before casting your 'yes' vote in favor of it?

(Please, don't try and pass the buck to the Bush Administration: I am addressing you - and you alone here - along with your own actions during the process of enacting this piece of legislation.)

Question:  In your own opinion, what important distinctions should be made between a civil union and a civil marriage?

Question: You once referred to 'No Child Left Behind' (NCLB) in July of 2003 as an `Unfunded Mandate.'

How is it you could describe NCLB as 'unfunded' when the states had not yet exhausted all currently available funds to them?

Question: You have spoken about wanting to repeal some of the Bush Administrations tax cuts to pay for some or all of the $87 billion Iraq/Afghanistan Reconstruction package that was requested to fund both the Iraq and Afghanistan military operations in '03. In fact, there was an amendment pending prior to congress voting to approve the $87 billion that would had done just that.

On 'Face the Nation' you were asked, "If that amendment does not pass, will you then vote against the $87 billion?" For which you replied, "I don't think any United States senator is going abandon our troops and recklessly leave Iraq to whatever follows as a result of simply cutting and running. That's irresponsible. ...I don't think anyone in Congress is
going to not give our troops ammunition, not give our troops the ability to be able to defend themselves."

The amendment to roll back some of Bush's tax cuts to pay for Iraq and Afghanistan failed. Yet you went on to vote against the $87 billion anyway. Under your own admission of the consequences of any senator (including yourself) in voting against the $87 billion funding request: Did you not 'abandon our troops?'

Did not your actions - as you personally characterized the result of any senator or congressman voting against the $87 billion funding request - rise to the level of irresponsible?

Question: On December 2, 1968 you claim you were wounded by enemy combat activity for which you received a tiny piece of shrapnel. You visited a medical tent at Cam Ranh Bay on Dec. 3, 1968 and was seen by a Dr. Louis Letson, who described your wound as a "splinter." You told Dr. Letson that you and your crew "had been engaged in a firefight, receiving small arms fire from on shore."

Soon afterwards, you visited your commanding officer, Lt. Cmdr. Grant Hibbard, in his office holding a piece of shrapnel. Hibbard has told the Globe, "People in the office were saying, 'I don't think we got any fire,' and there is a guy holding a little piece of shrapnel in his palm." You recently told, Douglas Brinkley, for his book Tour of Duty, that the Dec. 2, 1968 'splinter' wound you received was the result of "a half-assed action that hardly qualified as combat."

As you are well aware of, military requirements for issuance of a Purple Heart require that an injury must be received during "action against an enemy of the United States." Isn't it a fact your 'splinter' wound was directly the result of of your own actions the night of Dec. 2, 1968 when there had been a M-79 fired at the shore? Isn't it a fact there was no enemy engagement the night of Dec. 2, 1968, which explains why The Naval Historical Center has no "casualty card"  on file for your Purple Heart?

Do you not feel any dishonor to claim an award that you did not deserve to receive - lied about the circumstances in order to be awarded the medal - an award that required most others to receive stitches; massive blood loss or loss of life in order to qualify for the medal?

Question: During a conference call on April 22, you told reporters that you did not own a SUV. Responding to whether your wife might own a SUV, you said that your wife owns a Chevrolet SUV - "The family has it. I don't have it."

During an New Hampshire rally, you were asked what you have done to reduce the dependency on oil, which you responded, "I sold my gas guzzler and got a van and downgraded, that's what I did personally, in my own life. Also got an economical car in Washington and so forth so that I was trying to live up to that standard."

A month later in Michigan, you listed the auto's you own as follows: "I own a Dodge 600 that I've had for about 20 years; I own a Chrysler 300M; we have a Chrysler van, a minivan; a Chrysler PT Cruiser; a Suburban Chevy-big Suburban - and she has a Land Rover Defender."

What compelled you to so boldly lie about what you own and drive?

Question: The Congressional Record for 1/22/85 quotes you as follows: "The right to choose is the law of the United States. No person has the right to infringe on that freedom. Those of us who are in government have a special responsibility to see to it that the United States continues to protect this right, as it must protect all rights secured by the constitution."

Does the constitution not declare that the most fundamental natural right that exists for all people is the natural right to life? Additionally, does the constitution not declare that no one can be denied either their right to life or liberty without due process of the law?

Just how does your "right to choose" constitutionally trumps the fundamental sacred right to life embedded in the very fabric of the constitution itself?

Question: You were quoted by the New York Times as reacting to Massachusetts' highest court's decision legalizing same-sex marriages by saying, "I personally believe the court is dead wrong." But when you were asked twenty days later why you believed the decision was not correct,  you replied, "I didn't say it wasn't."

Did you not indicate on February 5, that you personally believed the court was "dead wrong" in legalizing same-sex marriages?

Question: I am confused as to why the United States Navy awarded you the Silver Star. I am confused because of the speed in which it was given to you (did you know you may have received the fastest awarded Silver Star in Navy history without even receiving a scratch?), the actions that earned you the medal - and I am confused to why you have three Silver Star citations all signed by three different people. If I understand correctly, you skippered a swift boat among two others that participated in a mission to insert some 70 Viennese troops to check out a hot area along a channel on February 28, 1969.

All the troops were inserted by all three swift boats and they quickly chased off 20 Viet Cong's that were along the shore of the insertion point. You then went up river to investigate some other activity when a Viet Cong fired a rocket at your boat and missed. You then ordered your swift boat to be beached within ten feet of the guy who had fired at your boat and missed. He attempts to run away and your forward gunner hits him in the leg with his M-60 machine gun and he falls - only to get up again to continue fleeing. The citation says you chased him behind a hooch and killed him.

But several of your crewmembers have different changing recollections of what happened that day. You don't help the confusion either by telling CNN in April of 2001 of the reason you beached your swift boat only ten feet from someone holding a B-40 rocket launcher.

Jonathan Karl: "...The Silver Star citation says an enemy soldier sprang up less than 10 feet from Kerry's boat and fled. The citation reads, quote: "Kerry pursued the man behind a hooch and killed him, capturing a B-40 rocket launcher with a round in the chamber."

Sen. Kerry: "On that particular day, I heard the ambush, I heard the firepower, and I made the judgment. Besides, we were very heavily weighted down. We had troops on board. We couldn't reach maximum speed. I knew that to whatever degree we were in the ambush, we were going to get hurt, so I turned the aspect of us toward it, minimizing our exposure, surprising them, and we did win. I mean, we ran right over the ambush, and it felt good to win.

One problem I have with your explanation: you only had four crewmembers and yourself aboard you're boat when you encountered the Viet Cong soldier with the B-40. The late, Tom Belodeau, whom was there that day and part of your crew, standing right beside you in October of 1996 when he stated that there was only five crew members aboard your swift boat during this incident. Where did all these troops come from to weigh you down and force you to have beached your boat near a Viet Cong with a B-40 rocket launcher?

Question: Touching further on your Silver Star award, why did you refuse to release the official 'after-action' reports for February 28, 1969, the date that earned you the Silver Star? Why did you not release the nomination for the award? Did your superior officers take two witness statements and investigate as required under Navy regulations?

Question: Will you sign a Standard Form 180? If not, why?

Question: On voting to invade Iraq to disarm Saddam Hussein, you have said, "I voted not specifically to go to war....I voted for a process.....The process that we got out of the president by standing up to him was that he was going to go to the U.N. and build an international coalition, a true international coalition. Going to war was a last resort.

During a Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate on May 4, 2003, you said, "George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him."

If you really voted for a process - and not specifically for war - why did you not make that clear in your May 4, 2003 debate comments? Did not President Bush go to the UN and build a international coalition? If you had some specific definition for a 'real international coalition' in mind,  why did you not insist that definition be part of the authorization for war you voted in favor of, or had entered into the public record during your senate floor comments in favor of the war authorization bill?

Question: March 2003 Headline: "Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts said he will cease his complaints once the shooting starts. `It's what you owe the troops,' said a statement from Kerry, a Navy veteran of the Vietnam War. `I remember being one of those guys and reading news reports from home. If America is at war, I won't speak a word without measuring how it'll sound to the guys doing the fighting when they're listening to their radios in the desert.'" (The Boston Globe, 3/11/03)

But when troops were within 25 miles of Baghdad, you said in a speech at the Peterborough Town Library, "What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States." (The Boston Globe, 4/3/03)

Why did you go back on your word and attack President Bush after the shooting had started? Why did you claim we needed a 'regime change' just before troops entered Baghdad, while later on May 4, you told a national audience that you supported the decision to disarm Saddam Hussein? 

Do you ever actually listen to yourself and take your own positions seriously?

Question: You have a habit of telling voters you supported bill's that you had in fact voted against in the senate. Isn't the very act of voting against a bill a sign that you don't support the bill, regardless of you're reasons or explanations? Should politicians be able to tell voters after voting 'no' on a bill that they really did support the bill?

If politicians can do that, do we then even need to bother with maintaining voting records for every congressmen since they will have little value because yes/no votes can be publicly withdrawn and revised afterwards?

Question: Were you asked to leave Vietnam by fellow officers or did you initiate leaving on your own?

Question: Back  in 1991, soon after Iraq had invaded and taken over the country of Kuwait, you indicated going to war to liberate Kuwait was wrong because doing so would abandon ``the theory of deterrence." 

How would 'deterrence' have removed Iraqi forces from Kuwait?

Question: You have often ridiculed the 'international coalition' that has assisted the United States in removing Saddam Hussein from power in 03. You have also attacked Bush's father's 'international coalition' that had liberated Kuwait as lacking "a true United Nations collective security effort." You also went on to say this about the 1991 international coalition, "I regret that I do not see a new world order in the United States going to war with shadow battlefield allies who barely carry a burden."

Yet today when you talk about what you would have done differently then George W. Bush, in removing Saddam,  you often speak of how you would have built a strong 'international coalition' to confront Saddam Hussein with. Do you seriously believe any of the dozens of countries who have participated in two Gulf Wars against Iraq - Russia; France; Germany; Britain, to name a few - would take you seriously after you accusing them of not being able to "barely carry a burden?"

How and why should anyone take you seriously when you speak of building strong international coalition's in the fight against terrorism when you so easily denounce and belittle one of the greatest international coalition's in history?

Question: Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, stated on  October 10, 2002 :

"Now, I believe the facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt...

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons....

"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security."

Did not you agree with Sen. Clinton that the facts she spelled out were not in doubt? Is this not the same evidence  President Bush was looking at, the same evidence that goes back before President Bush was even president?

Would you agree that this bandwagon you and your fellow democrats are riding that says 'Bush mislead' or 'Bush lied' has more then a few broken wheels?

Question: CNN's Jonathan Karl asked you in '01 if you still had the rocket launcher you had taken from the VC soldier you had killed, for which you replied, "I do have the rocket, yes, I do have the rocket. One of the SEALs disarmed it for me, and I brought it home."

Can you make it available to the media for inspection?

Question: Which is most important to you; personal convictions or political ambitions?

Question: Recently, Alan Colmes, asked you in an interview, "How do you define in such a nugget a John Kerry presidency? " You replied, "I'm going to bring truth and responsibility back to the White House, and I'm going to bring influence and respect in the world back to America."

You don't personally believe that; do you? I for one do not, senator.

 

[The Bandit]

Feel free to add to my questions and I'll include them in an update.

[no dems]

EXCELLENT. I'm just glad to see some political threads posted again. For the last couple of days my Freeper friends have been kinda quiet; perhaps a bit discouraged. It's still five months until the election. That's an eternity in politics and anything can happen. This Iraqi Prisoner Abuse Scandal is not going to last forever. This too will pass and the American public can get refocused on what a double-talking, flip flopping, hypocrital liar John Kerry is.

[MJY1288]

I tell ya bud, Those are some really great questions, You should consider forwarding them to somebody who might have chance of asking them.

My Question for John Kerry and the multible personalities that have surfaced during his public life would be.......

Would the real John Kerry... Please stand up!

[no dems]

I agree with post #3. This "Questions for Kerry Essay" needs to be published nationally; for real.

The question I'd like to ask ol' horse teeth right now is:
"How could you, in a clear conscience and having any thread of decency about you, dance on the grave of Nick Berg before his body was even cold by using his horrendous death as a reason to send out a fundraising letter; especially after condemning George W. Bush for having pictures of 9/11 in his ads?"

[GraniteStateConservative]

Good job.

[genghis]

my questions
1- were you proud of your service in vietnam?
if yes, why did you throw your medals away?
2- were you proud of the atrocities you committed?
3-you were in favor of the 91 gulf war, but voted against it.
you were against the 03 iraqi war,but voted in favor of it.Do you find this clear speaking?
4-Examined historically, what lessons do were learn about regulations from looking at the behavior of the icc.
5- Under what conditions should taxes be raised?
6- why did democrats lose 52 seats in the house and 8 in the senate in 84?
7- what should be done about washington dc public schools?

[packing heat]

If I could ask Sen. Kerry one question...
"Sen., why?"
I bet he'd have paragraphs of response and not even know what I'm asking about.

[highlander_UW]

Sen. Kerry, Exactly when and why did you resigned as spokesman from the VVAW?

At first you denied being at a VVAW meeting in November 1971 in which a plot to assassinate several senators was debated and put to a vote in Kansas City.

Later, when it was shown that you were indeed at that meeting you said you won't dispute it but still don't remember it.

Q: So if you were at a meeting where a plot to assassinate US senators took place (during war time), and you were present for a debate and vote on the issue, then why did you not resign for that reason?

If you claim the reason you resigned was because of this meeting and vote then why is it that you can not recall the reason you resigned from the VVAW in which you were a prominent figure?

Are we to believe that the vote on the plot to assassinate senators was not enough to encourage you to leave or that you simply have no recollection of why you left?

And if that meeting was the reason for your resignation from VVAW and you simply forgot why you resigned from this organization, then why is there an AP Photo from January 11, 1972 that describes you as the leader of the VVAW as well as a NYT story dated January 26, 1972 also describing you as the leader and another story from the AP dated April 22, 1972 also describing you as the leader? Did you not ever attempt to set the record straight, or were you still the leader at that time?

One more question...

Senator Kerry, you called for the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld because you said the responsibility for the abuse of the POW's passes to the leader.

Q: Under oath you testified that you'd done far worse. Your words were "war atrocities" and you went on to describe some of them. By your own admission under oath your actions were far worse than being the Secretary of Defense at a time when people many levels of command under him. So why should Donald Rumsfeld be held accountable for actions he didn't personally commit when you have not been held accountable for the actions you state under oath you did commit?

Why have you not been tried as a war criminal?
Do you believe that a war criminal is appropriate military experience for the commander in chief?

[Lawgvr1955]

Kerry won't take any questions from anyone in a venue that he can't control. He would avoid the question similarly to the one he did by asking "Are you a Republican?", etc. Any time a question listed on this thread was asked, he would frame his response that you were 1) questioning his patriotism, 2) being mean spirited, 3) failing to make GB account for his missing National Guard time, etc.

As hard as it is to believe, Kerry seems lower on the moral chart than Clinton. But he is above Ted Kennedy.

[garylmoore]

I would ask, For the atrocities that you have admitted to, shouldn't you be in jail?

[Jaxter]

Question: Your citations for the Silver and Bronze Stars that you have posted on your website are signed by John Lehman. Mr. Lehman was not Secretary of the Navy until more than 10 years after you left the navy. Why were your citations not signed by John Chafee, who was SecNav at the time you were given the awards?

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

I sit here in awe. This is a fantastic post and I am bookmarking it for reference. Thank you for an intelligent and well researched diatribe.

[Condor51]

Well Bandit, I think you've got him on this one,
"Were you really once a 'Public Information Officer,' and if so, when and where?"

According to NA Form 13164 - which I'm holding in my hot little hands, John Forbes Kerry served in the following assignments and geographical locations:

Naval Officer candidate School, US Naval Base, Newport RI - STUDENT
Naval Schools Command, Treasure Island, SF, CA - STUDENT
Fleet Anti-Air Warfare Training Center, san Diego, CA - STUDENT
USS Gridley (DLG 21), Commander, First Division - Electrical Department¹
Naval Amphibious Base, Coronado, CA - STUDENT
Commander Coastal Squadron ONE, Patrol Craft Fast, RVN - War Hero²
Military Sea Transportation Services, Atlantic - Personal Aid

His Military education was;
US Naval Officer Candidate School, Nuclear Weapons Orientation³.

BTW, here's some more tidbits on Mr. Kerry;
Enlisted in the US Naval Reserves 19 Aug, 1966. Enlisted Service #B10 78 84.
Served as such until 15 Dec, 1966 when he graduated from OCS an an Ensign and appointed as a Reserve Officer in the US Navy.
16 Dec, 1966 -- 3 Jan, 1970 Officer Service #713525
Discharged as a LTJG

#1 - The form does not list his service in the electrical department on the USS Gridley, that info though IS common knowledge and is from another source - The Boston Globe.
#2 - You know I'm mocking him here, right?
#3 - Kerry & Nukes (shudder)? Scary thought.

As such, you can see that LTJG Kerry NEVER served as a 'Public Information Officer'. Go get 'em Bandit!

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

bump

[Brett66]

I would like to ask him this- did Pat Tillman die for a just cause?

[OPS4]

Why Did Kerry take campaign funds from the Big Dig along with Teddy Kennedy when he knew organized crime figures were syphoning off billions of dollars.

The cost overrun to date is 13.5 Billion of Federal tax dollars for a tunnel in Boston. This is one of the biggest scams in the history of the United States, and was featured in O'reilly's book.

Kerry even helped pass the bill for this project and interferred when the insurance companies, no longer wanted to underwrite this debacle and forced them to cover it.

The BOston Globe had allready implicated 3 former governors on this deal and yet they dropped it short of Kerry and Kennedy. And still they are asking for more money for it in the current transportation bills!

The Big Dig Dig Scam!

Ops4 God BLess America!

[OPS4]

Kerry's Credibility Hole
Special Interest groupie John Kerry, who claims he's fighting the lobbyist, may have been caught with his pants down over a big one.

A Senate colleague was trying to close a loophole that allowed a major insurer to divert millions of federal dollars from the nation's most expensive construction project. John Kerry stepped in and blocked the legislation.
Over the next two years, the insurer, American International Group, paid Kerry's way on a trip to Vermont and donated at least $30,000 to a tax-exempt group Kerry used to set up his presidential campaign. Company executives donated $18,000 to his Senate and presidential campaigns.


Were the two connected? Kerry says not.


But to some government watchdogs, the tale of the Massachusetts senator's 2000 intervention, detailed in documents obtained by The Associated Press, is a textbook case of the special interest politicking that Kerry rails against on the presidential trail.


"The idea that Kerry has not helped or benefited from a specific special interest, which he has said, is utterly absurd," said Charles Lewis, head of the Center for Public Integrity that just published a book on political donations to the presidential candidates.


"Anyone who gets millions of dollars over time, and thousands of dollars from specific donors, knows there's a symbiotic relationship. He needs the donors' money. The donors need favors. Welcome to Washington. That is how it works."


The documents obtained by AP provide a window into Kerry's involvement in a two-decade-old highway and tunnel construction project in his home state of Massachusetts. Known as the "Big Dig," it had become infamous for its multibillion dollar cost overruns.


Kerry's office confirmed Wednesday that as member of the Senate Commerce Committee he persuaded committee chairman John McCain, R-Ariz., to drop a provision that would have stripped $150 million from the project and ended the insurance funding loophole.



The Big Dig is one of the worst boondoggles ever created. It's a Kerry, Kennedy concoction and stands as a classic example of corrupt politics and labor getting together to bilk taxpayers. That Kerry actively helped the continuance of this mess shows what a horrible president he'd be. And is perhaps an indicator what corrput pol he is.

The story continues... Stay Tuned!
Ops4 God Bless America!

[The Bandit]

I have updated my post here. Unfortuantly, FreeRepublic Admin. doesn't want me attacking Sen. Kerry since they have pulled it and even removed this from frontPage. Sad we have to be silenced in exposing Kerry by FreeRepublic Admin.

You can continue to see what FreeRepublic don't want you to see at:

http://idexer.com/articles/kerry_questions.htm

[GraniteStateConservative]

What do you mean? It's still here. I've added it to "vanity" so it's in a category.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Oh, they just moved it to "Bloggers & Personal." It's no big deal.