Words from a veteran

Check all my sites and essays!

This was from the message board on aol...Where are your sources or do they just fall off the top of your head, Harry?
And why not answer some of these veteran's questions or are you too dogheaded to even go there for fear of knowing you voted for such a crook?

Message 1 of 1333 Subject 2 of 50
Subject: Serious Thoughts here only.
Date: 8/5/2004 6:33 PM Central Daylight Time
From: Inspmark
MsgId: <20040805193358.04408.00005595@mbs-r11.aol.com>



apparently somehow, the message was deleted ...I guess i have to change the password

Comments

  1. More words from a vet.


    MorThomas Wright was one of John F. Kerry's fellow Swift boat officers in Vietnam. Since Wright outranked Kerry, he was Kerry's sometime boat group Officer-in-Charge, so Wright had occasion to observe Kerry’s behavior and attitudes, and the circumstances surrounding his early departure from the war zone. The intervening years have not dimmed his memories.

    When the Swift boats of Coastal Division 11 sailed into harm’s way from their Phu Quoc Island base of An Thoi, for missions along the rivers of Vietnam’s southwesternmost Kien Giang and An Xuyen provinces, they communicated by radio. When they did, boat captains adopted distinctive, often humorous call signs for identification purposes. Eldon Thompson was “Mary Poppins,” William Schachte was “Baccardi Charlie,” James T. Grace was “Twiggy,” and Tom Wright was “Dudley Do-Right.” When John Kerry radioed another Swift boat, he used the call sign, “Boston Strangler.”

    Lieutenant Thomas W. Wright heard that call sign frequently. As OIC (Officer-in-Charge) of PCF-44, he operated with LT (j.g.) Kerry’s 94 Boat on a fairly regular basis. A 1966 graduate of the University of North Carolina’s NROTC program, Wright had served as communications officer aboard the destroyer USS Robert A. Owens before beginning Swift boat training in November 1967. He had already served for eight months with Qui Nhon’s Coastal Division 15 when the monsoon season forced its boats to be shifted to the more protected, and more challenging waters off An Thoi. He decided to extend his tour and follow his disciplined, veteran crew to the new base. As the relatively senior lieutenant there, he was the OTC, or Officer-in-Tactical Command for the majority of the 3-to-6-boat missions. On most of them he commanded 44 Boat.

    The rivers and canals of Kien Giang and An Xuyen provinces were the targets of Commander, U.S. Naval Forces, Vietnam, Rear Adm. Elmo Zumwalt’s aggressive SEALORDS operations. Looking back after all these years, Tom Wright, now a retired Commander, recalls: “We planned missions locally to try to dominate the area and disrupt the enemy’s movements. We faced significant challenges every day, every night. We would respond to intelligence reports as appropriate. It took great imagination and determination to work effectively in the rivers, and we remained deployed until material damage and casualties reduced our effectiveness. We would then rotate back to An Thoi for repair and re-arming.”

    For Tom Wright and most other Swift boat officers, there were two commandments: 1. Protect the crews. 2. Win. As for Tom Wright’s 44 Boat; “we won every engagement, start to finish. I got the crew home; a few nicks, but we made it.”

    Working with call sign “Boston Strangler” became problematical. “I had a lot of trouble getting him to follow orders,” recalls Wright. “He had a different view of leadership and operations. Those of us with direct experience working with Kerry found him difficult and oriented towards his personal, rather than unit goals and objectives. I believed that overall responsibility rested squarely on the shoulders of the OIC or OTC in a free-fire zone. You had to be right (before opening fire). Kerry seemed to believe there were no rules in a free-fire zone and you were supposed to kill anyone. I didn’t see it that way.”

    In Wright’s view, it was important that the enemy understood that Swift boats were a competent, effective force that could dominate his location. To do that, you also had to control the people and their actions; to have them accept Swift boat crews and their authority. You couldn’t achieve that by indiscriminate use of weapons in free fire zones.

    It got to a point where Wright told his divisional commander he no longer wanted Kerry in his boat group, so he was re-assigned to another one. “I had an idea of his actions but didn’t have to be responsible for him.” Then Wright and like-minded boat officers took matters into their own hands. “When he got his third Purple Heart, three of us told him to leave. We knew how the system worked and we didn’t want him in Coastal Division 11. Kerry didn’t manipulate the system, we did.”

    As for medals, Commander Wright holds strong views: “No one was recognized for completely overwhelming the enemy with skill, courage and bravery. No one wanted a Purple Heart because it meant we had made a mistake. We made sure our crews were recognized, but no one took pride in a Purple Heart. Everyone who served is equally important, regardless of rank or awards.

    ReplyDelete
  2. “He had a different view of leadership and operations. Those of us with direct experience working with Kerry found him difficult and oriented towards his personal, rather than unit goals and objectives. I believed that overall responsibility rested squarely on the shoulders of the OIC or OTC in a free-fire zone. You had to be right (before opening fire). Kerry seemed to believe there were no rules in a free-fire zone and you were supposed to kill anyone. I didn’t see it that way.”

    Where's Bush's immediate supervisors or cocaine sniffin and alcoholics buds to tell of his wonderful exploits awol on the national guard??


    Gaoive me a break the way hypocritical chicken hawks who never served time legitimately have the right to pass judgement..."people in glass houses" better yet passing judgement from their chicken hawk coop!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I guess it's easier for Bubbas to talk about what may or mayn't have happened 35 years ago in a war gone terribly wrong, than to face criticism about this war. A president can't cut taxes AND wage war at the same time. Our states need money. Last night at the Women for Kerry rally in KC, Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius said that the cost of implementing "No Child" in KS is estimated at over $200 million. The federal gov't only gave KS $17 million for the program. Our states are in a budgetary crisis they weren't in 4yrs ago. I thought this was supposed to be the old Federalist party, ever-championing the power of the state and smaller fed. gov't. War is a Federal Program.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Typiccal add to talk to myself...maybe I can start an ADD jokebook with other addds can tell their humorous fuck ups!

    By the way, at Hudstones, I met one of your friends hittin on the triathlete. he acted like he was God's gifts to cigarettes pretending that he never went to a private school!

    ReplyDelete
  5. More posting to yourself again dipshit? I don't even think the last one was in ENGLISH. Wasn't it you who made the comments about spelling and grammer. Talk about the sad state of teachers today. You need to get out more and stop talking to your imaginary friends. Here's a source for information sport, pay attention and you might learn something.

    PS- Now I know why your a liberal, you can sit around with know job, getting wasted, hoping someone will pay the bill for you. What a DICK!!!!!!!!!!!!







    > The Washington Times
    > www.washingtontimes.com
    >
    > Letters to the Editor
    > Published February 11, 2004
    >
    > 'Bush and I were lieutenants'
    > George Bush and I were lieutenants and pilots in the 111th
    > Fighter Interceptor Squadron (FIS), Texas Air National Guard (ANG)
    > from 1970 to 1971. We had the same flight and squadron commanders
    > (Maj. William Harris and Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, both now deceased).
    > While we were not part of the same social circle outside the base, we
    > were in the same fraternity
    of
    > fighter pilots, and proudly wore the same squadron patch.
    > It is quite frustrating to hear the daily cacophony from the left
    > and Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, et al., about Lt. Bush
    > escaping his military responsibilities by hiding in the Texas ANG. In
    > the Air
    Guard
    > during the Vietnam War, you were always subject to call-up, as many
    > Air National Guardsmen are finding out today. If the 111th FIS and
    > Lt. Bush
    did
    > not go to Vietnam, blame President Johnson and Secretary of Defense
    Robert
    > S. McNamara, not lowly Lt. Bush. They deliberately avoided use of the
    Guard
    > and Reserves for domestic political calculations, knowing that a
    > draftee only stirred up the concerns of one family, while a call-up
    > got a whole community's attention.
    > The mission of the 147th Fighter Group and its subordinate 111th
    > FIS, Texas ANG, and the airplane it possessed, the F-102, was air
    > defense. It was focused on defending the continental United States
    > from Soviet
    nuclear
    > bombers. The F-102 could not drop bombs and would have been useless
    > in Vietnam. A pilot program using ANG volunteer pilots in F-102s
    > (called Palace Alert) was scrapped quickly after the airplane proved
    > to be unsuitable to the war effort. Ironically, Lt. Bush did inquire
    > about this program but was advised by an ANG supervisor (Maj. Maurice
    > Udell,
    retired)
    > that he did not have the desired experience (500 hours) at the time
    > and that the program was winding down and not accepting more volunteers.
    > If you check the 111th FIS records of 1970-72 and any other ANG
    > squadron, you will find other pilots excused for career obligations
    > and conflicts. The Bush excusal in 1972 was further facilitated by a
    > change
    in
    > the unit's mission, from an operational fighter squadron to a
    > training squadron with a new airplane, the F-101, which required that
    > more pilots
    be
    > available for full-time instructor duty rather than part-time
    > traditional reservists with outside employment.
    > The winding down of the Vietnam War in 1971 provided a flood of
    exiting
    > active-duty pilots for these instructor jobs, making part-timers like
    > Lt. Bush and me somewhat superfluous. There was a huge glut of pilots
    > in the Air Force in 1972, and with no cockpits available to put them
    > in, many
    were
    > shoved into nonflying desk jobs. Any pilot could have left the Air
    > Force
    or
    > the Air Guard with ease after 1972 before his commitment was up
    > because there just wasn't room for all of them anymore.
    > Sadly, few of today's partisan pundits know anything about the
    > environment of service in the Reserves in the 1970s. The image of a
    > reservist at that time is of one who joined, went off for six months'
    basic
    > training, then came back and drilled weekly or monthly at home, with
    > two weeks of "summer camp." With the knowledge that Mr. Johnson and
    > Mr. McNamara were not going to call out the Reserves, it did become a
    > place
    of
    > refuge for many wanting to avoid Vietnam.
    > There was one big exception to this abusive use of the Guard to
    > avoid the draft, and that was for those who wanted to fly, as pilots
    > or crew members. Because of the training required, signing up for
    > this duty meant up to 2½ years of active duty for training alone,
    > plus a high probability of mobilization. A fighter-pilot candidate
    > selected by the Guard (such as Lt. Bush and me) would be spending the
    > next two years on active duty
    going
    > through basic training (six weeks), flight training (one year),
    > survival training (two weeks) and combat crew training for his
    > aircraft (six to
    nine
    > months), followed by local checkout (up to three more months) before
    > he
    was
    > even deemed combat-ready. Because the draft was just two years, you
    > sure weren't getting out of duty being an Air Guard pilot. If the
    > unit to
    which
    > you were going back was an F-100, you were mobilized for Vietnam.
    Avoiding
    > service? Yeah, tell that to those guys.
    > The Bush critics do not comprehend the dangers of fighter
    > aviation at any time or place, in Vietnam or at home, when they say
    > other such pilots were risking their lives or even dying while Lt.
    > Bush was in Texas. Our Texas ANG unit lost several planes right there
    > in Houston during Lt.
    Bush's
    > tenure, with fatalities. Just strapping on one of those obsolescing
    F-102s
    > was risking one's life.
    > Critics such as Mr. Kerry (who served in Vietnam, you know),
    > Terry McAuliffe and Michael Moore (neither of whom served anywhere)
    > say Lt.
    Bush
    > abandoned his assignment as a jet fighter pilot without explanation
    > or authorization and was AWOL from the Alabama Air Guard.
    > Well, as for abandoning his assignment, this is untrue. Lt. Bush
    > was excused for a period to take employment in Florida for a
    > congressman and later in Alabama for a Senate campaign.
    > Excusals for employment were common then and are now in the Air
    Guard,
    > as pilots frequently are in career transitions, and most commanders
    > (as I later was) are flexible in letting their charges take care of
    > career affairs until they return or transfer to another unit near
    > their new employment. Sometimes they will transfer temporarily to
    > another unit to keep them on the active list until they can return
    > home. The receiving
    unit
    > often has little use for a transitory member, especially in a
    > high-skills category like a pilot, because those slots usually are
    > filled and, if not filled, would require extensive conversion
    > training of up to six months,
    an
    > unlikely option for a temporary hire.
    > As a commander, I would put such "visitors" in some minor
    > administrative post until they went back home. There even were a few
    > instances when I was unaware that they were on my roster because the
    > paperwork often lagged. Today, I can't even recall their names. If a
    > Lt. Bush came into my unit to "pull drills" for a couple of months, I
    wouldn't
    > be too involved with him because I would have a lot more important
    > things on my table keeping the unit combat ready.
    > Another frequent charge is that, as a member of the Texas ANG,
    > Lt.
    Bush
    > twice ignored or disobeyed lawful orders, first by refusing to report
    > for
    a
    > required physical in the year when drug testing first became part of
    > the exam, and second by failing to report for duty at the
    > disciplinary unit
    in
    > Colorado to which he had been ordered. Well, here are the facts:
    > First, there is no instance of Lt. Bush disobeying lawful orders
    > in reporting for a physical, as none would be given. Pilots are
    > scheduled
    for
    > their annual flight physicals in their birth month during that
    > month's weekend drill assembly -- the only time the clinic is open.
    > In the Reserves, it is not uncommon to miss this deadline by a month
    > or so for a variety of reasons: The clinic is closed that month for
    > special training; the individual is out of town on civilian business; etc.
    > If so, the pilot is grounded temporarily until he completes the
    > physical. Also, the formal drug testing program was not instituted by
    > the Air Force until the 1980s and is done randomly by lot, not as a
    > special part of a flight physical, when one easily could abstain from
    > drug use because of its date certain. Blood work is done, but to
    > ensure a healthy pilot, not confront a drug user.
    > Second, there was no such thing as a "disciplinary unit in
    > Colorado"
    to
    > which Lt. Bush had been ordered. The Air Reserve Personnel Center in
    Denver
    > is a repository of the paperwork for those no longer assigned to a
    specific
    > unit, such as retirees and transferees. Mine is there now, so I guess
    > I'm "being disciplined." These "disciplinary units" just don't exist.
    > Any discipline, if required, is handled within the local squadron,
    > group or wing, administratively or judicially. Had there been such an
    > infraction
    or
    > court-martial action, there would be a record and a reflection in Lt.
    > Bush's performance review and personnel folder. None exists, as was
    > confirmed in The Washington Post in 2000.
    > Finally, the Kerrys, Moores and McAuliffes are casting a terrible
    > slander on those who served in the Guard, then and now. My Guard
    > career parallels Lt. Bush's, except that I stayed on for 33 years. As
    > a
    guardsman,
    > I even got to serve in two campaigns. In the Cold War, the air
    > defense of the United States was borne primarily by the Air National
    > Guard, by such people as Lt. Bush and me and a lot of others. Six of
    > those with whom I served in those years never made their 30th
    > birthdays because they died
    in
    > crashes flying air-defense missions.
    > While most of America was sleeping and Mr. Kerry was playing
    > antiwar games with Hanoi Jane Fonda, we were answering 3 a.m.
    > scrambles for who knows what inbound threat over the Canadian
    > subarctic, the cold North Atlantic and the shark-filled Gulf of
    > Mexico. We were the pathfinders in showing that the Guard and
    > Reserves could become reliable members of the first team in the total
    > force, so proudly evidenced today in Afghanistan and Iraq.
    > It didn't happen by accident. It happened because back at the
    > nadir
    of
    > Guard fortunes in the early '70s, a lot of volunteer guardsman showed
    they
    > were ready and able to accept the responsibilities of soldier and
    > citizen
    > -- then and now. Lt. Bush was a kid whose congressman father encouraged
    him
    > to serve in the Air National Guard. We served proudly in the Guard.
    > Would that Mr. Kerry encourage his children and the children of his
    > colleague senators and congressmen to serve now in the Guard.
    > In the fighter-pilot world, we have a phrase we use when things
    > are starting to get out of hand and it's time to stop and reset
    > before
    disaster
    > strikes. We say, "Knock it off." So, Mr. Kerry and your friends who
    > want
    to
    > slander the Guard: Knock it off.
    >
    > COL. WILLIAM CAMPENNI (retired)
    > U.S. Air Force/Air National Guard
    > Herndon, Va.5
    >
    >

    ReplyDelete
  6. The women you refer to thinks your a fucking weirdo dumbass, so hitting on her will only increase your embarrasment. Maybe you should stick to your imaginary friends that you refer to in all your post, as I figure most people think your a fucking goof and avoid you at all cost.



    > The Washington Times
    > www.washingtontimes.com
    >
    > Letters to the Editor
    > Published February 11, 2004
    >
    > 'Bush and I were lieutenants'
    > George Bush and I were lieutenants and pilots in the 111th
    > Fighter Interceptor Squadron (FIS), Texas Air National Guard (ANG)
    > from 1970 to 1971. We had the same flight and squadron commanders
    > (Maj. William Harris and Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, both now deceased).
    > While we were not part of the same social circle outside the base, we
    > were in the same fraternity
    of
    > fighter pilots, and proudly wore the same squadron patch.
    > It is quite frustrating to hear the daily cacophony from the left
    > and Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, et al., about Lt. Bush
    > escaping his military responsibilities by hiding in the Texas ANG. In
    > the Air
    Guard
    > during the Vietnam War, you were always subject to call-up, as many
    > Air National Guardsmen are finding out today. If the 111th FIS and
    > Lt. Bush
    did
    > not go to Vietnam, blame President Johnson and Secretary of Defense
    Robert
    > S. McNamara, not lowly Lt. Bush. They deliberately avoided use of the
    Guard
    > and Reserves for domestic political calculations, knowing that a
    > draftee only stirred up the concerns of one family, while a call-up
    > got a whole community's attention.
    > The mission of the 147th Fighter Group and its subordinate 111th
    > FIS, Texas ANG, and the airplane it possessed, the F-102, was air
    > defense. It was focused on defending the continental United States
    > from Soviet
    nuclear
    > bombers. The F-102 could not drop bombs and would have been useless
    > in Vietnam. A pilot program using ANG volunteer pilots in F-102s
    > (called Palace Alert) was scrapped quickly after the airplane proved
    > to be unsuitable to the war effort. Ironically, Lt. Bush did inquire
    > about this program but was advised by an ANG supervisor (Maj. Maurice
    > Udell,
    retired)
    > that he did not have the desired experience (500 hours) at the time
    > and that the program was winding down and not accepting more volunteers.
    > If you check the 111th FIS records of 1970-72 and any other ANG
    > squadron, you will find other pilots excused for career obligations
    > and conflicts. The Bush excusal in 1972 was further facilitated by a
    > change
    in
    > the unit's mission, from an operational fighter squadron to a
    > training squadron with a new airplane, the F-101, which required that
    > more pilots
    be
    > available for full-time instructor duty rather than part-time
    > traditional reservists with outside employment.
    > The winding down of the Vietnam War in 1971 provided a flood of
    exiting
    > active-duty pilots for these instructor jobs, making part-timers like
    > Lt. Bush and me somewhat superfluous. There was a huge glut of pilots
    > in the Air Force in 1972, and with no cockpits available to put them
    > in, many
    were
    > shoved into nonflying desk jobs. Any pilot could have left the Air
    > Force
    or
    > the Air Guard with ease after 1972 before his commitment was up
    > because there just wasn't room for all of them anymore.
    > Sadly, few of today's partisan pundits know anything about the
    > environment of service in the Reserves in the 1970s. The image of a
    > reservist at that time is of one who joined, went off for six months'
    basic
    > training, then came back and drilled weekly or monthly at home, with
    > two weeks of "summer camp." With the knowledge that Mr. Johnson and
    > Mr. McNamara were not going to call out the Reserves, it did become a
    > place
    of
    > refuge for many wanting to avoid Vietnam.
    > There was one big exception to this abusive use of the Guard to
    > avoid the draft, and that was for those who wanted to fly, as pilots
    > or crew members. Because of the training required, signing up for
    > this duty meant up to 2½ years of active duty for training alone,
    > plus a high probability of mobilization. A fighter-pilot candidate
    > selected by the Guard (such as Lt. Bush and me) would be spending the
    > next two years on active duty
    going
    > through basic training (six weeks), flight training (one year),
    > survival training (two weeks) and combat crew training for his
    > aircraft (six to
    nine
    > months), followed by local checkout (up to three more months) before
    > he
    was
    > even deemed combat-ready. Because the draft was just two years, you
    > sure weren't getting out of duty being an Air Guard pilot. If the
    > unit to
    which
    > you were going back was an F-100, you were mobilized for Vietnam.
    Avoiding
    > service? Yeah, tell that to those guys.
    > The Bush critics do not comprehend the dangers of fighter
    > aviation at any time or place, in Vietnam or at home, when they say
    > other such pilots were risking their lives or even dying while Lt.
    > Bush was in Texas. Our Texas ANG unit lost several planes right there
    > in Houston during Lt.
    Bush's
    > tenure, with fatalities. Just strapping on one of those obsolescing
    F-102s
    > was risking one's life.
    > Critics such as Mr. Kerry (who served in Vietnam, you know),
    > Terry McAuliffe and Michael Moore (neither of whom served anywhere)
    > say Lt.
    Bush
    > abandoned his assignment as a jet fighter pilot without explanation
    > or authorization and was AWOL from the Alabama Air Guard.
    > Well, as for abandoning his assignment, this is untrue. Lt. Bush
    > was excused for a period to take employment in Florida for a
    > congressman and later in Alabama for a Senate campaign.
    > Excusals for employment were common then and are now in the Air
    Guard,
    > as pilots frequently are in career transitions, and most commanders
    > (as I later was) are flexible in letting their charges take care of
    > career affairs until they return or transfer to another unit near
    > their new employment. Sometimes they will transfer temporarily to
    > another unit to keep them on the active list until they can return
    > home. The receiving
    unit
    > often has little use for a transitory member, especially in a
    > high-skills category like a pilot, because those slots usually are
    > filled and, if not filled, would require extensive conversion
    > training of up to six months,
    an
    > unlikely option for a temporary hire.
    > As a commander, I would put such "visitors" in some minor
    > administrative post until they went back home. There even were a few
    > instances when I was unaware that they were on my roster because the
    > paperwork often lagged. Today, I can't even recall their names. If a
    > Lt. Bush came into my unit to "pull drills" for a couple of months, I
    wouldn't
    > be too involved with him because I would have a lot more important
    > things on my table keeping the unit combat ready.
    > Another frequent charge is that, as a member of the Texas ANG,
    > Lt.
    Bush
    > twice ignored or disobeyed lawful orders, first by refusing to report
    > for
    a
    > required physical in the year when drug testing first became part of
    > the exam, and second by failing to report for duty at the
    > disciplinary unit
    in
    > Colorado to which he had been ordered. Well, here are the facts:
    > First, there is no instance of Lt. Bush disobeying lawful orders
    > in reporting for a physical, as none would be given. Pilots are
    > scheduled
    for
    > their annual flight physicals in their birth month during that
    > month's weekend drill assembly -- the only time the clinic is open.
    > In the Reserves, it is not uncommon to miss this deadline by a month
    > or so for a variety of reasons: The clinic is closed that month for
    > special training; the individual is out of town on civilian business; etc.
    > If so, the pilot is grounded temporarily until he completes the
    > physical. Also, the formal drug testing program was not instituted by
    > the Air Force until the 1980s and is done randomly by lot, not as a
    > special part of a flight physical, when one easily could abstain from
    > drug use because of its date certain. Blood work is done, but to
    > ensure a healthy pilot, not confront a drug user.
    > Second, there was no such thing as a "disciplinary unit in
    > Colorado"
    to
    > which Lt. Bush had been ordered. The Air Reserve Personnel Center in
    Denver
    > is a repository of the paperwork for those no longer assigned to a
    specific
    > unit, such as retirees and transferees. Mine is there now, so I guess
    > I'm "being disciplined." These "disciplinary units" just don't exist.
    > Any discipline, if required, is handled within the local squadron,
    > group or wing, administratively or judicially. Had there been such an
    > infraction
    or
    > court-martial action, there would be a record and a reflection in Lt.
    > Bush's performance review and personnel folder. None exists, as was
    > confirmed in The Washington Post in 2000.
    > Finally, the Kerrys, Moores and McAuliffes are casting a terrible
    > slander on those who served in the Guard, then and now. My Guard
    > career parallels Lt. Bush's, except that I stayed on for 33 years. As
    > a
    guardsman,
    > I even got to serve in two campaigns. In the Cold War, the air
    > defense of the United States was borne primarily by the Air National
    > Guard, by such people as Lt. Bush and me and a lot of others. Six of
    > those with whom I served in those years never made their 30th
    > birthdays because they died
    in
    > crashes flying air-defense missions.
    > While most of America was sleeping and Mr. Kerry was playing
    > antiwar games with Hanoi Jane Fonda, we were answering 3 a.m.
    > scrambles for who knows what inbound threat over the Canadian
    > subarctic, the cold North Atlantic and the shark-filled Gulf of
    > Mexico. We were the pathfinders in showing that the Guard and
    > Reserves could become reliable members of the first team in the total
    > force, so proudly evidenced today in Afghanistan and Iraq.
    > It didn't happen by accident. It happened because back at the
    > nadir
    of
    > Guard fortunes in the early '70s, a lot of volunteer guardsman showed
    they
    > were ready and able to accept the responsibilities of soldier and
    > citizen
    > -- then and now. Lt. Bush was a kid whose congressman father encouraged
    him
    > to serve in the Air National Guard. We served proudly in the Guard.
    > Would that Mr. Kerry encourage his children and the children of his
    > colleague senators and congressmen to serve now in the Guard.
    > In the fighter-pilot world, we have a phrase we use when things
    > are starting to get out of hand and it's time to stop and reset
    > before
    disaster
    > strikes. We say, "Knock it off." So, Mr. Kerry and your friends who
    > want
    to
    > slander the Guard: Knock it off.
    >
    > COL. WILLIAM CAMPENNI (retired)
    > U.S. Air Force/Air National Guard
    > Herndon, Va.5
    >
    >

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ten Reasons To Vote Against Kerry
    By James Bowden (bio)

    Other Articles by James Bowden
    Back to News / Home Page

    Every election has pros and cons to vote. Here is the con. Just the top ten con against Sen. John Kerry (D-MA). Kerry is wrong for our Country. Bush is not all right, but right enough, and most of all, more trustworthy, to earn your vote. We are a Nation at war, abroad and at home, fighting our fourth World War (WWIV) and engaged in our second American Civil War (ACW II). We must win both struggles.

    WW IV defines American Civilization’s Imperial era with a victory or defeat in a long, long, long global war against Islamist Terrorism. ACW II determines if the Great Experiment, democracy in America, continues in the context of historic Judeo-Christian culture or descends in the totalitarianism of Liberal, Pagan Puritanism. Kerry is too weak and confused to lead us in WW IV. He is on the wrong side of ACW II.

    Kerry is a self-admitted war criminal and an Establishment elitist expecting to rule as a right of privilege. On April 22, 1971, Kerry said war crimes were "not isolated incidents, but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command." He should apologize. Pretend Prince John, who would be king, was a super war hero for four months in Vietnam. Vote on the how Kerry spent the next 30 years building a super, Massachusetts-style Liberal record. Vote against Kerry because…

    1. Too weak on WW IV. Kerry will allow the Islamists sanctuaries and time because he can’t commit a ‘pre-emptive’ attack. Kerry will cut and run in Iraq. When Iraq crumbles and becomes an Islamist threat, Kerry will blame Bush – and, maybe the Swift Boat Veterans.

    2. Partial-birth abortion. Kerry says life begins at conception. So, he thinks stem cells are live humans. Yet, Kerry wants to create and kill stem cells for research. Worse, Kerry voted against stopping the barbaric infanticide, partial-birth abortion. Kerry won’t lift a finger, or speak a word, to protect the sanctity of life.

    3. U.S. Supreme Court. Kerry will put more black-robed priest-kings in the judiciary. Kerry may get to nominate four justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. Judicial tyranny will get worse with Kerry. The Constitution will be shredded, perhaps, fatally.

    4. Taxes. Candidate Clinton promised a tax cut and raised taxes. Here it comes again. Kerry has voted at least 98 times in the Senate to raise taxes. Kerry’s class warfare against the ‘rich’ (excepting his personal billionaire’s tax shelters) will attack most Americans with new taxes.

    5. Family and Marriage. Kerry will roll over, smiling, when the courts declare homosexual marriage the ‘law of the land’. Kerry is so extreme he voted against the Defense of Marriage Act (President Clinton signed the bill).

    6. Social Security. Kerry will not privatize the current Ponzi scheme. The younger generation will pay the bill or break the government promises to the People.

    7. Illegal Immigration. It’s hard to imagine Kerry being weaker than President Bush on immigration. Yet, he is likely to shove more government programs to support illegal aliens.

    8. Too Liberal. Kerry is rated THE MOST LIBERAL senator by liberal, issue and conservative policy organizations. More liberal than Hillary Clinton. More liberal than Teddy Kennedy. Name your big government nightmare – socialized health care, PC education, quotas, anti-property, anti-individual rights, regulations, etc, - Kerry is for it.

    9. Flip-Flopping. Kerry supported pulling U.S. troops from Europe and Asia on August 1st. Kerry opposed the same on August 19th. The list goes on and on.

    10. Untrustworthy. Kerry spoke often about being in Cambodia on Christmas 1968 when Nixon was President. Nixon wasn’t President until January 1969. Kerry said the memory of being in Cambodia on Christmas was “seared, seared, in memory”. Now, the same people who lied for President Clinton about Monica are out shouting in public for Kerry.

    Shakespeare said beware of “Yon Cassius, he has a lean and hungry look.” Verily, be cautious of billionaires seeking to do good with your money. Look hard at veterans who betray their comrades with false accusations and actually take up the cause for the enemy. Measure a man who marries his money – twice - and never earns his own wealth. Ask why Kerry thinks he is entitled to be King, or President, since he did nothing but vote – and vote wrongly – in 20 years in the Senate. Kerry can’t hide himself even if he wears camouflage fatigues every day in his eight homes.

    James A. Bowden has worked as a Defense Department consultant specializing in inter-disciplinary long range ‘futures’ studies for over a decade. He retired from the United States Army after 20 years of service as an Infantry Officer. Mr. Bowden is a 1972 graduate of the United States Military Academy and earned graduate degrees from Harvard University and Columbia University. He resides in Poquoson, VA.

    08.30.04 06:33 AM

    ReplyDelete
  8. I know ur the nicotine addict that doesnt have a life and has a permanent spot at Hudtones...getting really loud and thinkin ur the life of the party...
    Do you think that impresses intelligent women?
    I have the courage to talk about ADD and ignorant rednecks that didnt learn to spell grammar have no life but to hang out at dives and cuss to impress others..

    Be original if u still insist on cuss words..you seem to only say dipshit and douche bag like you do at the club and blow your anonymous cover
    Are those your only word in your limited private school vocabulary?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Wood, think of all the money the Bush family has...they are not exactly poor! ...Their family will be rich from the saudis for billions of years!
    Why are you against rich people? Who went to a private school just as most rich republicans?
    Dont you understand that Oklahoma is one of the poorest states??
    Think, wood!

    ReplyDelete
  10. For Bubba Woods lack of knowledge of ADD:
    CHADD Works for You!

    CHADD is hard at work throughout the country. With thousands of members and hundreds of affiliates throughout the United States, CHADD is never far away. Membership with CHADD connects you with others who share your concerns. CHADD supports, educates, informs and advocates on your behalf.




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



    AD/HD is a Lifespan Disorder

    AD/HD is a disorder that affects individuals across the life span. There are a series of key issues that individuals with AD/HD typically face at different phases of life. CHADD will be there throughout your life so that you will stay connected and have all of the information available through each stage of your life.

    Click here to see the series of key issues that you may face.

    Local Support Network

    As a CHADD member you will belong to a network of people like yourself. You will connect with other parents, caregivers, teens, adults and professionals who understand the daily challenges you may face, and who are successfully meeting those challenges

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Please Lord, get my ass in gear so that I can focus on the future for our family!