 |
|  |
 |
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999 time: 21:33
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
quote: If you disagree with me, then what part about that you disagree? |
1. The Bush team isn't sponsoring the SwiftVets, so I fail to see how you can criticize the Bushies for a strategy they aren't actually using.
|
Of course they're not "sponsoring" them - that would create financial accountability, donation restrictions, etc. They're just "coordinating" the same way the RNC and Reagan and Bush I campaigns "coordinated" with the Christian Coalition and other groups. Soft money groups always have less constraints than candidate campaign organizations, and they also fall under "soft money" contribution rules.
quote:
2. I fail to see how the SwiftVets charges are mudslinging. They're all veterans of the same unit as Kerry. They've brought up charges they aren't outlandish, one of which has already proven true. If questions about Kerry's service record in Vietnam (the centerpiece of his campaign) can't be raised by his former comrades (used by Kerry himself in his political ads), then who exactly can question Kerry without it being considered "mudslinging"? |
Of course, they're all just apolitical, scrupulously honest guys who've been saying the same thing consistently since the events took place. They're not partisan, helped and financially promoted by partisan operatives, and nothing they say now contradicts what they said or conspicuously failed to bother saying at the time.
I guess allegations about Bush and those Mexican houseboys wouldn't be mudslinging either. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001 time: 23:33
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ned
To be honest with you, MtG, I cringe when I think of turning a hot war over to a Democrat, especially an Vietnam anti-war type like Kerry. I think back to the way Johnson handled Vietnam: More and more troops and no strategy for victory. |
And what would such a strategy have been? We were trying to keep the corrupt south vietnamese regime in power without starting world war three with a full scale invasion of North Vietnam and so forth.
Vietnam was an unwinnable war from day 1.
Of course, if you look at this century and last, Republicans have not gotten involved in any wars with anyone but small powers (Grenada, Panama, Iraq) while it was dems, over republicans opposition, who got involved in 2 world wars. After the cold war, with republican backing, into two ground wars in Asia. Both which were then left to Republicans- one was left a cease-fire, the other we left and eventually our ally was swallowed.
So yes, republicans have such a sterling military record for you to be proud off... OH, WAIT, NO.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33. Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|