Replies

"As true as this and many other articles may be, complacency and overcertainty of victory is a good way to lose an election."

I have noticed many here, that have this same kind of thought pattern.

Why would anyone, who has the slightest idea of what this election means to our nation, become complacent?

Why, in fact, if GWB is re-elected, would anyone stop working against the leftists in this country, just because we get another four years?

It would behoove all of us to hold GWB to a more conservative line, make sure the "right" judges are appointed, the "right" Senators, Congressmen, and local elected officials, are placed in power.

No, my Freeper friend, we will not get complacent.

This job has barely begun.

I couldnt agree more ERF, it's not over until it's over. My reason for posting the article was the well articulated presentation of the facts, not the imploding campaign itself. Some of if just bears repeating and repeating and repeating. Since most of the facts have never really been reported in the MSM (main street media) in the first place.

It never is over until it's over but such gems as follows bear not just repeating but some REPORTING. I probably should have just printed the exerpts, which I highlighted when sent to those who need to be spoon fed the facts but figured the freepers would see the reason for posting the article was for the news, not for the "we've won, it's over" headline. It is NEVER over until it is over. EVER.

Anne.

"...here's where Kerry's vulnerable today & why this AWOL stuff is so, so, so stupid for them to be using, considering, however, they didn't use their convention to put forth any agenda and now don't have anything left:

Kerry has effectively refused to release his military and medical records. Reviewing the records on his site reveal any number of disparities which the Navy has now officially noted indicate falsehoods and an official investigation is underway. The selected records Kerry has released show some rather damning facts or discrepancies which make the whole Bush / AWOL stuff look all the more stupid and silly in comparison.

1st - the whole spin proffered that Kerry "volunteered" for service and combat is absurd; Kerry - by his own admissions in his own biography and elsewhere - joined the Naval Reserve (like the National Guard) after his attempted deferment for school in France was rejected and he faced draft. He never had "two tours of duty" (first year was spent on the USS Gridley which guarded our California coast & didn't qualify) - and the second "tour" only involved 3 months in combat - a far cry from the 12 months which - for all other vets - characterize a tour"

Next are the lies that Kerry opted for combat in Swift Boats - to the contrary, at the time he volunteered for Swift Boats they were being used for non-combat related patrols and the reenacted videos he produced with his own super-8 camera (he then told his mini-"band of brothers" would be used) for his pre-planned presidential campaign with their silly depictions of Kerry posing as an Army infantrymen with hand grenades hanging from the vest he's wearing and carrying his gun pointed at his feet.

Finally is the real question about Kerry's term of service and the appearance that HE - KERRY - vs Bush - was the one who was, actually, indeed, AWOL. Note that Kerry signed up for 6 years of service in 1966 but wasn't discharged until 1978. Why? Because Kerry's records have been redone. On his campaign site he omits the periods from 1971-1972, presumably because that included the periods he was (now even admittedly - Michael Kranish and Patrick Healy article in Boston Globe "Kerry Spoke of Meeting Negotiators in Paris", March 25, 2004) actually negotiating with our enemy and representatives of Communist / North Vietnam while a Naval Officer and our troops were at war. It's also being questioned if Kerry was possibly court martialed during that period, something which was commonplace during that time and would explain why those periods are excluded from the records he chooses to release and would be explainable if he took advantage of the amnesty later offered to such folks by Jimmy Carter.

Many of Kerry's revised documents were purportedly signed by John Lehman, then Secretary of the Navy and recent member of 9/11 commission, who doesn't have any explanation for what or why Kerry had all these records changed and otherwise knows nothing further to explain it, leading to this official investigation which the Navy's Inspector General announced would be undertaken last week. Why Kerry refuses to release the records is certainly a quandary when all he has to do is sign Form 180"