George Bush: the Ace in the Hole!

John Kerry could be Disqualified frm running for President According to the United States Constitution, perhaps John should have kept his mouth shut about war crimes it sure offers comfort to the enemy in Viet Nam!

Amendment XIV section three:

"No person shall be a senator or Representative of congress,or elector of President and Vice-President,or hold any office,civil or Military,under the United States,or under any state,who having previously taken an oath as a member of congress, or as an officer of the United States,or as a member of any state legislature,or as an executive or judicial officer of any state,to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, OR GIVEN AID OR COMFORT TO THE ENEMIES THEREOF. But congress may by a vote of two thirds of each house,remove such disability"

What aid and/or comfort did he give to the enemies thereof??

George Bush is a major league AceHole!

Aid and comfort to the enemy? since when was saving the lives of your men and taking out the enemy giving aid and comfort?

Keep reaching.

Aid and Comfort is a phrase the Bush administration and its followers have magnanimously thrown around to describe opponents of Bush himself, as well as the war on Iraq. A superious charge of treason despite the softer term.

If Kerry had committed treason, he would have been charged long ago.

Even if he did commit war crimes (which is a huge leap based on the testimony of those not even in his unit, hehe...), it still wouldn't fly. The war in vietnam was never a declared war by Congress and technically it'd be hard to label them then legally as "the enemy"... Somehow, I think the Kerry camp won't be losing any sleep over this one...

Come on here. Protesting a war which was never officially declared by an act of congress is not giving aid or comfort to the enemy. Technically, there is no enemy in that situation.

If you consider protests to be treason, you've missed the point of the first amendment. On the other hand, if you corrall all protesters into a cage far, far away from a political event, you may be violating the first amendment and committing a small form of treason against your own countrymen. (Free Speech Areas at Bush/Rummy/Ashcroft public speeches anyone?)

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

If Kerry had committed treason, he would have been charged long ago.

Same goes with the accusations that Bush was AWOL.

What about knowing about a plot to kill Senators and not telling anyone. It was obviously serious enough for Kerry to break away from the VVAW.

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

If Kerry had committed treason, he would have been charged long ago.

Same goes with the accusations that Bush was AWOL.

Bush went AWOL. After 30 days, that turned into desertion. He should've been thrown into Leavenworth. I can't believe anyone can even worry about Kerry's Vietnam service in light of Bush's desertion. How the truth twists.

What about knowing about a plot to kill Senators and not telling anyone. It was obviously serious enough for Kerry to break away from the VVAW.

The FBI absolved Kerry of any wrong doing in that matter. Guess ya didn't get the memo.

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
He should've been thrown into Leavenworth.

But he wasn't, so i guess the accusations were not true. Bush is still a free man who was never been punished for "desertion".

I can't believe anyone can even worry about Kerry's Vietnam service in light of Bush's desertion. How the truth twists.

Can you answer this question about Kerry's service, ECK? Is he a "War Hero" or an "Anti-War Hero"?

It is not possible to be both. Kerry says in his speeches today he is a war hero who has defended his country (Servive in Vietnam, i agree) but yet according to his speech in 1971, that he stands by today, he said there was nothing to protect the US from. So who and what was he defending the US from if there was not a threat?

Something doesn't add up here.

The US Government decorates Kerry, effectively calling him a hero, by awarding him numerous medals for his service in Viet Nam.

The US Government, as far as we know, remains completely silent as to Bush's service. It could have called him a deserter, a traitor, a drunken playboy or a poor soldier. We'll never know, because Bush won't release his full records, some of which have been destroyed by his campaign advisors.

So... We have 1 hero, and 1 conspicuously "unknown," according to our government's records.

And yet now some would have us believe that Bush is the hero and Kerry the traitor?



All I can say is, in a field as murky as campaign politics, I'll take my facts straight from Uncle Sam, thank you very much. Shame Bush didn't feel like throwing his record into that particular arena.

-koji K.

John Kerry in his first trip to the Supply Depot in Viet Nam:

"....and gimme about 1000 of those Medal request forms." - John Kerry.

4.76 months of Combat = 1 Bronze Star, 1 Silver Star, 3 Purple Hearts. While no duty time lost.

3 Purple Hearts = A Trip Home. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Kerry's Vietnam Experience: 4.76 months of writing medal request forms.

He probably had 2 or 3 hundred denials before he got his 3rd Purple heart; qualifying him for early dismissal from duty.

some Denials:

"Hot shell casing hit my arm causing a burn, while I was gunning down children that were making noise."

"A sargent slapped me silly while I was crying uncontrollably in my boat, my nose bled."

"6 leeches attacked me when I fell in the river."

The list goes on and on...

can you give me a link to those quotes? My buddy who is on leave will have a field day with these!

Originally posted by American Mad Man
can you give me a link to those quotes? My buddy who is on leave will have a field day with these!

Dude, how dense can you be!!

Originally posted by looking4clues
John Kerry could be Disqualified frm running for President According to the United States Constitution,

I doubt if John Kerry is worried about these lies that are being told about him and his service record, he did two tours of duty and earned the medals the hard way. John will make a great president, he will turn our country around in the right direction, work hard to undo the mess that Mr. G W Bush & Co made with the UN and bring our people home.
Mr. George W Bush, on the other hand has caused nothing but problems for the United States and will keep on doing so as long as he remains in office. If anyone should be in trouble according to the Constitution of the United States it should be Bush & Co ., for lying to the citizens of the US and to congress, going back to when Bush first took office to present. Here's three (3) URL's to read from.

www.emperors-clothes.com...

www.emperors-clothes.com...

www.emperors-clothes.com...


I came across those when searching for; george w bush 1964-1998

fascinating reads, the person/people that wrote the stuff did a well-done research of GW Bush & Co., from the time they took office .

This little tidbit reminds me of Pres. Bush too - - - > Fascism: A system of Gov't in which the country is ruled by a dictator, and in which minority groups have NO Rights, WAR is GLORIFIED,etc.

It is not possible to be both.

Yes it is. Put yourself in his shoes back in the day. He drank the kool-aid and was gung-ho for the war. Then when he got over there he saw what was going on and wanted no part of it. Solution? Get out as fast as you can. Apply for the required 3 purple hearts. But you have to earn them.

So, you're there against your will and are ordered into battle and you need three purple hearts to get out. Are you a wimp? Or do you fight and fight hard looking out for your buddies in the same situation.

No doubt you would witness some atrocities and no doubt you would face situations where true heroics were needed. Thus people would call you a "War Hero" as those who served with you would attest.

You get back home and decide to oppose what is going on over there because you saw it first hand. In doing so, you become politically active in a Very Big Way and thus become an Anti-War Hero (for Vietnam at least).

So you can be both, but maybe not to those who still drink the kool-aid.

[edit on 8/25/2004 by Gools]

LOL LOL LOL

The biggest AceHOLE

Does it say anywhere in your precious article how Bush could be snapped up and encarcerated by other nations of the world for war crimes?
Stop grasping at straws. Republicans grow more and more desperate!!!!!

John Kerry came back from Viet Nam and spoke out against the War. That is his 1st Amendment RIGHT. John Kerry accused the US soldiers in Viet Nam of atrocities & War Crimes. This in itself lends Moral Support for the Enemy in Viet Nam. He did this While other soldiers were losing their life in Viet Nam. The US Constitution allows Kerry to speak his mind, But it doesnt allow him to help the enemy which his testimony did by demonizing the US Soldier. Meeting with the Enemy in Paris as a member of VVAW is treasonous and helped lead to not only an End of the conflict but a defeat of the US Policy. He had no authority to negociate with the enemy. John Kerry is UNFIT to even be a candidate.

The US Constitution is BIGGER than the President. The Constitution lays out clearly who can be President and John Kerry cannot be President.

John Kerry's speech is protected.... his candidacy is NOT.

Originally posted by Gools
No doubt you would witness some atrocities and no doubt you would face situations where true heroics were needed. Thus people would call you a "War Hero" as those who served with you would attest.

No doubt... lack of character keeps you from helping to stop the atrocities in progress. But tattle tailing to congress on April 22nd 1971 is called courage.

Originally posted by looking4clues
John [kerry] should have kept his mouth shut about war crimes it sure offers comfort to the enemy in Viet Nam!

Amendment XIV section three

Protesting a war is not the same as giving comfort to the enemy. YOu might as well exclude bush for this similar simplistic reasoning, the companies he's been a part of certainly have had dealings, at least in extenso with enemy contries.

Also, the intent of the ammendment would have to be brought into consideration, and protesting a war certainly wouldn't pass muster under that.

Besides, Congress would easily vote to 'clear' kerry if anyone was silly enough to try to disqualify him for this.

choasrain:
Protesting a war which was never officially declared by an act of congress is not giving aid or comfort to the enemy. Technically, there is no enemy in that situation.

Why wasn't the iraq war a declared war? Also, 'enemy', I think, is subjective enough to have multiple readings.

antipolitrix:
plot to kill Senators and not telling anyone. It was obviously serious enough for Kerry to break away from the VVAW

Never heard that one before. Irregardless, a person could hear of such a plot and say 'even if these people aren't serious, I don't want to even be assocaited with that'

dgtempe:
Bush could be snapped up and encarcerated by other nations of the world for war crimes?

Why? No country has found him guilty of war crimes, none that I know of anyway.

looking4clues:
John Kerry accused the US soldiers in Viet Nam of atrocities & War Crimes. This in itself lends Moral Support for the Enemy in Viet Nam.

I seriously doubt that this will hold up under any authority charged with executing this section of the ammendment. According to this reasoning, with comforting and aiding the enemy being an act of treason, everyone who protested the war (irregardless of how they did it) is guilty of treason and should be put to death. Are you making this arguement also?

The US Constitution is BIGGER than the President. The Constitution lays out clearly who can be President and John Kerry cannot be President.

Protesting a war is not what the ammemdment means by 'comfort'. It means literal comfort; supplies, shelter, medical services etc, to actual enemies.

Meeting with the Enemy in Paris as a member of VVAW is treasonous

If you follow this line for kerry then can you at least make a clear statement as to whether or not all members of the vvaw should be arrested and executed for treason or if not all then which members?

I am also unfamiliar with this meeting, do you have a specific link to it that you are thinking about?

[edit on 25-8-2004 by Nygdan]