More on Kerry's medals

Affirmative Reaction,

I agree with websurfer, so I guess I am a disgrace too, a moroon and whatever you call him too, and my father is a veteran also so I guess I have disgraced him too. Right?

No, I think the swift boat do not talk for all veterans and they are just a few sour old men that has been paid to do just that.

Originally posted by marg6043
Affirmative Reaction,

I agree with websurfer, so I guess I am a disgrace too, a moroon and whatever you call him too, and my father is a veteran also so I guess I have disgraced him too. Right?

No, I think the swift boat do not talk for all veterans and they are just a few sour old men that has been paid to do just that.

So you agree that these men are "pedophiles"???

TextSo you agree that these men are "pedophiles"???

I am not here to do name calling so I leave that to personal interpretation.

Originally posted by marg6043

I am not here to do name calling so I leave that to personal interpretation.

That is my problem with the poster. To use such a despicable label for someone because he/she/it disagrees with them is disgusting, especially when he/she/it is not even a citizen of this country.

If by your non-committal reply you DO agree with this poster, then do yourself a favor and don't reply to me any longer, as I will not reply to you. I am thoroughly disgusted with the tactics and comments so many here have begun to use.

It's eazy to use profane names for people who you can't see or don't know. I do not know any of the swifties personally, but I'm willing to bet none are Pedophiles. This goes to my point that the Democratic party is a mean-spiritied hate filled party. They have used the hate-speak, demogogary and name calling for quite a while. Just ask Kenneth Starr, Clarence Thomas, Newt Gingrinch, or any Republican whom they choose as victims.

Like I said I leave it to personal interpretation and you do what you have to do and I will do what I fee to do.

ATS is not a dictatorship and everybody have their own opinions.

It is call freedom of speech.

Marg, I am more upset that some one who is not even a citizen of our great country would come in and trash Americans. as I have stated before, I would fight to the death for Kerry's right to speak. I know that you view the Swifties as chills for the Republicans, but from what I have found out, this is personal not partisan. If Kerry was a Republican, they would still do the same thing. Vietnam Vets have had to deal with a lot. My cousin returned from Vietnam after being a POW. He was Captured in Feb. 1968. When he came home, people would call him a baby killer and spit on his face. I remember when we walked down the street, people would turn thier backs on us and call us horrific names. I was young and did not understand what was going on, but I can tell you I felt the hate that was being displayed to Kenny. Many vets blame Kerry for this attitude. His speech before congress in 71 was akin to treason to them. Kenny is not a Kerry Supporter because of this. Kenny is a Democrat, but he can not vote for a "tratior," his words not mine.

Originally posted by jrsdls
websurfer, are you from Cananda? if so stay out of our politics.
...
...
I'm against Kerry but I don't like it when people who are not citizen bash him. conversely, I don't like it when non-citizens bash President Bush.

The US Election: Should Canada Care

[edit on 2-9-2004 by websurfer]

jrsdls,

It is ok to feel that way and occurs your choice, and I don't hold it against you but remember this forum is not an "all Americans born only site" so everybody has the right to post opinions.

I disagree with the name calling I think is immature but people does it anyway; some get away with it other does not.

I stand corrected. I did not mean to offend the Candanians. I did find it interesting that the link websurfer pointed out was pro bush.

-----
INDEPTH: US ELECTION 2004
The U.S. Election - should Canada care?
by Tom Velk | August 30, 2004

Why should Canada care who wins the American election? Because the first axiom of political economy is trade makes everybody better off, and the second axiom is that trade succeeds best in an integrated market.

Trade and integration win if George W. Bush wins. He is a believer in rational economics, and, during a second term, he will not fear the special American interests threatened by a free market.

John Kerry, who blithely ignores economic axioms in favour of buying special interest voters, says he will change the American tax code to prevent the rationalization of the North American Economy and thinks "outsourcing" - a necessary corollary of trade - is a bad thing. Kerry as president would damage Canada's short-term job market, and permanently impair continental growth.

The mystery of North America for an economist is "why is the market fragmented?" Why have the Kerrys and the Chr�tiens - guys who failed Euclidian Economics - been able to keep North American Markets as separated as they are?

Economists believe that the benefits of trade are so overwhelming that political, cultural and linguistic barriers to trade eventually fall, as their high costs, measured by both lost profit and forgone consumer satisfaction, are recognized. The move toward a United Europe is proof: if the Germans and the French can cohabit economically, how is it possible Canada and the United States do not? How can a Kerry get any votes at all, or have any support in Canada, when his policies imply less for all - the opposite of the payoff from trade, which is more for all?

[edit on 2/9/04 by jrsdls]