Does anybody have more than this?

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Yes John Kerry is so pro military, just look at his past statements about the military

JOHN KERRY'S TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE, APRIL 22, 1971 -- "They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

John Kerry on CBS Face the Nation, December 4, 2005 -- "There is no reason... that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children..."

John Kerry in a speech to students at Pasadena City College in California, October 30, 2006 -- "You know, education -- if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

And John Kerry again when asked to apologize to the troops buy the Bush Administration for the above "joke", October 31, 2006 -- "I will apologize to no one."

How are any of those statements antimilitary?

Well the first two basically attack the people who serve in the military.
He accused Vietnam vets of doing horrible things, and he did in a way that made it appear if every American, or nearly every American was engaged in these acts.

Then he accused our soldiers in Iraq of "terrorizing kids and children"

Not exactly the words of a man with a lot of respect for the military.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: palehorse74
actually, I spend most of my time here lawling at guys like you.... and feeling sorry for you too.

The only value you've given those lives that have been lost is the impact of their number in your political "debates." They are nothing more than a useful statistic to you.

And like your pissant Asshole In Chief, the best you can do is sit here laughing about their deaths and cheering those whose lies are responsible for them. Pathetic! :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown:

Personally, I did a little more. I wrote and recorded this song.

Who's Watching Over Who's Watching Over You?

Words and Music by Harvey Rubens
Copyright 2006

Verse 1:

I see men looking over their shoulder,
Running hard just trying to stay alive,
And they say that it's gonna get colder before it gets better.

At the time of the crime, who believed us?
We all took a fall on the ride,
When the powers that be had deceived us to leave us the debtor.

Chorus:

And who's watching over who's watching over you?
Tell me who's telling you what to do what to do?

Verse 2:

All the forces of war were compelling,
And blacker than Colin, the Knight,
And the lies they were telling, they sell in the name of their savior.

They silence the voices arising,
From those who would show us the light.
With their guys with their spies in the skies watching you and your neighbor.

Chorus:

Verse 3:

I see men who are trying to squeeze us,
And taking whatever they can,
While they buy those who try to appease us with scraps from their table.

It gets harder each day to break even.
This wasn't a part of my plan.
Time is right to be fighting or leaving this tower of Babel.

Chorus:

It may turn out to be no more effective than discussing it with mindless neocon sycophants like you, but at least, it's something more and different, and at least I'm trying.

Is advertising allowed on this forum? Move to ban

It might be if I were selling anything, but I'm not. It's a link to my tune. Listen to it, and you may learn something.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
It's no surprise to me that most people downgrade education and higher learning. This is the United States. Education is not very important here. It is to the point where people feel if you have an education you are not "street smart" or don't know how to handel yourself etc.... It kind of boils down to jelousy because those who are without it feel kind of bad anyway. When in actuality those having higher knowledge are the one's who triumph over those without.

Kerry spoke the truth. No one goes around saying the IQ of African Americans is statistically lower then the rest of the public. It is technically true based on how you do the statistics. But, you say that so blatentley people get angry. Unfortunatley what kerry said made people angry. Enlistments in the military and the general military force is the highest it's been since we are at war. Many of these military people (palehorse) are coming out of the woodwark and saying their mind about the situation. There are far few military people that I know who are actually considered educated. So the ones that are coming out misrepresent the actual education of the military. They are also biased because of course when in the military you are brainwashed to think this system is the best and no one can say otherwise.

Do you even recognize just how Elitist you sound? If I thought the way that your do, I'd have to kick my own arse.

Besides, you are wrong.

If you boil down this entire thread it is all about the statement Kerry made about the US army not being educated. In fact he is correct. Statistically the United States military and people who enlist in the military have lower educational background then the general public.

you just said that... ok, now, suck on THIS:

Heritage Foundation analysis of DOD enlistment data for 1999 and 2003 shows that, contrary to some claims, voluntary military recruits are better educated than the general population and were more likely to come from higher-income areas after 9/11.

how do you like Dem apples, eh?

I guess when you post things you should really read them. Also these statistics don't really prove much besides the fact that the majority have finished H.S or higher. If you consider finishing high school a measure of high education you have really low standards of what a higher education actually means. This could indicate that you yourself lack there of. Let me itereate what it says here.

98 percent of recruits have a high
school education or higher,
compared to 75 percent of general
population.

All this is saying is that 98 could have h.s./bs/ms/phd. This is not giving individual breakdowns of each degree respectivly. In a way it is misleading. ("There are lies then there are statistics") I also have strong suspect that probably 90% of these are just h.s. diplomat. It wasn't until recently that if you try to enlist in the U.S. military that a H.S. wasen't necessary. Nowadays it is. So that is why I suspect a large porportion of that 98 are due to the admission requirements. Secondly that 75% includes everybody in the United States. You are including everybody.

If I were to say that more then half of this country uses "product A" and that was how I promoted "product A". When in actuality 50.1% of the people use product A. This is how you use statistics to sell and lie.

This is also a GOP site.

Regarding the fact that palehorse74 said I'm wrong but explaining no to little reason why dosen't mean i'm wrong it just means you have no way of explaning such. Which equates to based on little defence from your part I'm correct....

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Well the first two basically attack the people who serve in the military.
He accused Vietnam vets of doing horrible things, and he did in a way that made it appear if every American, or nearly every American was engaged in these acts.

Then he accused our soldiers in Iraq of "terrorizing kids and children"

Not exactly the words of a man with a lot of respect for the military.

Then, there are mindless neocon sycophants like you and palehorse74 who think it's more important to point at Kerry's botched punchline than it is to remember the 3,000 dead and tens of thousands of wounded American troops the Bushwhackos tossed into their war of LIES.

You are one sick, perverted puppy! :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Yes John Kerry is so pro military, just look at his past statements about the military

JOHN KERRY'S TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE, APRIL 22, 1971 -- "They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

John Kerry on CBS Face the Nation, December 4, 2005 -- "There is no reason... that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children..."

John Kerry in a speech to students at Pasadena City College in California, October 30, 2006 -- "You know, education -- if you make the most of it, you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

And John Kerry again when asked to apologize to the troops buy the Bush Administration for the above "joke", October 31, 2006 -- "I will apologize to no one."

How are any of those statements antimilitary?

Well the first two basically attack the people who serve in the military.
He accused Vietnam vets of doing horrible things, and he did in a way that made it appear if every American, or nearly every American was engaged in these acts.

Then he accused our soldiers in Iraq of "terrorizing kids and children"

Not exactly the words of a man with a lot of respect for the military.

What he said was the Truth in both cases.

 

[steppinthrax]

Also I have to say that so far there is a vote going on at


http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/

on the left pane of the page it ask...

Do you believe John Kerry owes our troops in Iraq an apology?

Statistics so far.....32% YES and 68% NO
This is out of 25902 votes

So I guess a lot of people (more then double) feel kerry shouldn't say sorry about anything. I wouldn't go this far but most likely a vast majority of that 68% feel he was right. But for whatever reason if they didn't like kerry they would not have voted no.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Well the first two basically attack the people who serve in the military.
He accused Vietnam vets of doing horrible things, and he did in a way that made it appear if every American, or nearly every American was engaged in these acts.

Then he accused our soldiers in Iraq of "terrorizing kids and children"

Not exactly the words of a man with a lot of respect for the military.

Then, there are mindless neocon sycophants like you and palehorse74 who think it's more important to point at Kerry's botched punchline than it is to remember the 3,000 dead and tens of thousands of wounded American troops the Bushwhackos tossed into their war of LIES.

You are one sick, perverted puppy! :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

palehorse74 is an ovbious brainwash. When he entered the military they told him how to think and one of those things is the government is always right. He is probably a republican as well. It is no point arguing with him. Arguing with him is kind of like trying to reason with a fellow taliban about not hitting or abusing their wives. It is etched in his brain there is no way to reason. He is always going to think the United States military is correct and nothing is ever wrong with them. That is called not thinking out of the box and thinking for yourself.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Also I have to say that so far there is a vote going on at


http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/

on the left pane of the page it ask...

Do you believe John Kerry owes our troops in Iraq an apology?

Statistics so far.....32% YES and 68% NO
This is out of 25902 votes

So I guess a lot of people (more then double) feel kerry shouldn't say sorry about anything. I wouldn't go this far but most likely a vast majority of that 68% feel he was right. But for whatever reason if they didn't like kerry they would not have voted no.

Stuffed big time. I remember before the 04 election CNN or another online news site had a vote question and Bush lost 95-4%.

Yeah that turned out exactly as planned

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
It's no surprise to me that most people downgrade education and higher learning. This is the United States. Education is not very important here. It is to the point where people feel if you have an education you are not "street smart" or don't know how to handel yourself etc.... It kind of boils down to jelousy because those who are without it feel kind of bad anyway. When in actuality those having higher knowledge are the one's who triumph over those without.

Kerry spoke the truth. No one goes around saying the IQ of African Americans is statistically lower then the rest of the public. It is technically true based on how you do the statistics. But, you say that so blatentley people get angry. Unfortunatley what kerry said made people angry. Enlistments in the military and the general military force is the highest it's been since we are at war. Many of these military people (palehorse) are coming out of the woodwark and saying their mind about the situation. There are far few military people that I know who are actually considered educated. So the ones that are coming out misrepresent the actual education of the military. They are also biased because of course when in the military you are brainwashed to think this system is the best and no one can say otherwise.

Do you even recognize just how Elitist you sound? If I thought the way that your do, I'd have to kick my own arse.

Besides, you are wrong.

If you boil down this entire thread it is all about the statement Kerry made about the US army not being educated. In fact he is correct. Statistically the United States military and people who enlist in the military have lower educational background then the general public.

you just said that... ok, now, suck on THIS:

Heritage Foundation analysis of DOD enlistment data for 1999 and 2003 shows that, contrary to some claims, voluntary military recruits are better educated than the general population and were more likely to come from higher-income areas after 9/11.

how do you like Dem apples, eh?

I guess when you post things you should really read them. Also these statistics don't really prove much besides the fact that the majority have finished H.S or higher. If you consider finishing high school a measure of high education you have really low standards of what a higher education actually means. This could indicate that you yourself lack there of. Let me itereate what it says here.

98 percent of recruits have a high
school education or higher,
compared to 75 percent of general
population.

All this is saying is that 98 could have h.s./bs/ms/phd. This is not giving individual breakdowns of each degree respectivly. In a way it is misleading. ("There are lies then there are statistics") I also have strong suspect that probably 90% of these are just h.s. diplomat. It wasn't until recently that if you try to enlist in the U.S. military that a H.S. wasen't necessary. Nowadays it is. So that is why I suspect a large porportion of that 98 are due to the admission requirements. Secondly that 75% includes everybody in the United States. You are including everybody.

If I were to say that more then half of this country uses "product A" and that was how I promoted "product A". When in actuality 50.1% of the people use product A. This is how you use statistics to sell and lie.

This is also a GOP site.

Regarding the fact that palehorse74 said I'm wrong but explaining no to little reason why dosen't mean i'm wrong it just means you have no way of explaning such. Which equates to based on little defence from your part I'm correct....

First, aren't you the same guy who bashed my grammer yesterday? I highly suggest you go back through your own posts from now on before criticizing others. i mean, wow. your post made my eyes bleed.

Second, you need to get your facts straight. The army has required a HS diploma for more than 15 years. I'm not sure the exact date but I know that it is at least 15 yrs because I joined in 1991 when a HS Diploma was required for me to attend AIT. So no, the Heritage study between 1999 and 2003 was not effected by "new recruiting requirements."

Third, does the fact that I have more degrees still intimidate you, or something? Why do you keep throwing out little quips attacking my integrity, instead of the issue at hand? Odd that.

Last, please quit making sh*t up and get off of your Elitist pedastool.

G'day.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Krakn3Dfx

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: glenn beck
This 10 second clip, curious the whole context of his message.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLuMWiQ6r2o

There should be hell to pay for that comment.

I'm curious, so you're placing an off joke by a democrat who isn't even running for office above a republican who solicited 15 year old boys?

How do you sleep at night?

What are you talking about? I never defended Foley, I said MANY times that it is good he resigned.
The only thing I have ever done is questioned the motives and the time of the release of the Foley story.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: hellokeith

Originally posted by: senseamp
The big winner in all of this is Hillary Clinton. Her potential opponent in in the primary, Kerry, is self destructing.

That is an interesting point. But do you think people will remember this 2 years from now?

The question is not whether the "people" will remember this, it is whether the Democrats who may nominate Kerry will remember that, and the answer is almost certainly no.

This is a non-issue to Democrats, as evidenced in our own forum. Some dismiss this as a bad joke. While others say that Kerry is right, our military is full of idiots without an education.

Where this will come back to haunt Kerry is if he gets the nomination in 08, I doubt he will, but if he does we will see this replayed in some ad.
It will be Swift Boat part 2.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Well the first two basically attack the people who serve in the military.
He accused Vietnam vets of doing horrible things, and he did in a way that made it appear if every American, or nearly every American was engaged in these acts.

Then he accused our soldiers in Iraq of "terrorizing kids and children"

Not exactly the words of a man with a lot of respect for the military.

Then, there are mindless neocon sycophants like you and palehorse74 who think it's more important to point at Kerry's botched punchline than it is to remember the 3,000 dead and tens of thousands of wounded American troops the Bushwhackos tossed into their war of LIES.

You are one sick, perverted puppy! :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

palehorse74 is an ovbious brainwash. When he entered the military they told him how to think and one of those things is the government is always right. He is probably a republican as well. It is no point arguing with him. Arguing with him is kind of like trying to reason with a fellow taliban about not hitting or abusing their wives. It is etched in his brain there is no way to reason. He is always going to think the United States military is correct and nothing is ever wrong with them. That is called not thinking out of the box and thinking for yourself.

There are plenty of things wrong with the military but none of them seem to end up on CNN for you to know about. There are also plenty of mistakes being made by the Bush Admin, and I've said as much on a regular basis.

All you seem to have in your arsenal is a flamethrower that you keep aiming at my own character and integrity, rather than the subject at hand. that shows me that you are a) at a loss for words with regards to the subject at hand, or b) you lack the moral courage to rise above personal attacks.

which is it?

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Well the first two basically attack the people who serve in the military.
He accused Vietnam vets of doing horrible things, and he did in a way that made it appear if every American, or nearly every American was engaged in these acts.

Then he accused our soldiers in Iraq of "terrorizing kids and children"

Not exactly the words of a man with a lot of respect for the military.

Then, there are mindless neocon sycophants like you and palehorse74 who think it's more important to point at Kerry's botched punchline than it is to remember the 3,000 dead and tens of thousands of wounded American troops the Bushwhackos tossed into their war of LIES.

You are one sick, perverted puppy! :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

I understand why the Repuglicans are avoiding their own record but is this the best they can do for a campaign? Don't they have anything important they can talk about? They should call themselves the Lame Old Party.

 

[InlineFive]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: glenn beck
This 10 second clip, curious the whole context of his message.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLuMWiQ6r2o

There should be hell to pay for that comment.

Typical chickenhawk outrage. I don't think most veterans or service members would be offended by this at all, though it would be helpful to know more about the context of that remark.

Absolutely, I wish he wouldn't quit because of this.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Also I have to say that so far there is a vote going on at


http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/

on the left pane of the page it ask...

Do you believe John Kerry owes our troops in Iraq an apology?

Statistics so far.....32% YES and 68% NO
This is out of 25902 votes

So I guess a lot of people (more then double) feel kerry shouldn't say sorry about anything. I wouldn't go this far but most likely a vast majority of that 68% feel he was right. But for whatever reason if they didn't like kerry they would not have voted no.

That is CNN we are talking about, in case you don't know it, about the only people watching CNN are members of the Democratic Party and maybe a few people who don't know better.
Over on Foxnews.com check out this poll
"Will Senator Kerry's controversial "stuck in Iraq" comments hurt Democratic fundraising:
76% yes
21% no
A complete flip of the CNN poll, proves me point. People go to the web site that fits their view. The left runs to CNN, the right runs to Fox.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Also I have to say that so far there is a vote going on at


http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/

on the left pane of the page it ask...

Do you believe John Kerry owes our troops in Iraq an apology?

Statistics so far.....32% YES and 68% NO
This is out of 25902 votes

So I guess a lot of people (more then double) feel kerry shouldn't say sorry about anything. I wouldn't go this far but most likely a vast majority of that 68% feel he was right. But for whatever reason if they didn't like kerry they would not have voted no.

That is CNN we are talking about, in case you don't know it, about the only people watching CNN are members of the Democratic Party and maybe a few people who don't know better.
Over on Foxnews.com check out this poll
"Will Senator Kerry's controversial "stuck in Iraq" comments hurt Democratic fundraising:
76% yes
21% no
A complete flip of the CNN poll, proves me point. People go to the web site that fits their view. The left runs to CNN, the right runs to Fox.

Umm, you do realize that those polls are asking two completely different questions, don't you? Not that it matters either way because those aren't scientifically valid polls.

As to my point of view, I don't think it'll hurt democratic fundraising and it appears Kerry has already apologized. This issue will only hurt Kerry, and probably hurt him bad.

Edit: Also, this issue won't hurt Democrats, but it won't help them, as it would've helped to have continued discussing Iraq for these two days. Well, actually, that's only on the national level. I don't think it has an effect on the individual races.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Also I have to say that so far there is a vote going on at


http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/

on the left pane of the page it ask...

Do you believe John Kerry owes our troops in Iraq an apology?

Statistics so far.....32% YES and 68% NO
This is out of 25902 votes

So I guess a lot of people (more then double) feel kerry shouldn't say sorry about anything. I wouldn't go this far but most likely a vast majority of that 68% feel he was right. But for whatever reason if they didn't like kerry they would not have voted no.

That is CNN we are talking about, in case you don't know it, about the only people watching CNN are members of the Democratic Party and maybe a few people who don't know better.
Over on Foxnews.com check out this poll
"Will Senator Kerry's controversial "stuck in Iraq" comments hurt Democratic fundraising:
76% yes
21% no
A complete flip of the CNN poll, proves me point. People go to the web site that fits their view. The left runs to CNN, the right runs to Fox.

That means little to nothing. Of course his comments will hurt people. We are in a wartime environment and everybody believes we need to support our troops. For every troop member we have in Iraq we have about 4 to 5 people who feel the same (family, wife, children, and relatives). People feel if you don't support our troops you are un-American or siding with the Iraqis now. So yes if you say anything in a wartime environment against the troops I'm sure a large % of people will feel it will hurt his fundraising because they are the one's fundraising to him.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
It's no surprise to me that most people downgrade education and higher learning. This is the United States. Education is not very important here. It is to the point where people feel if you have an education you are not "street smart" or don't know how to handel yourself etc.... It kind of boils down to jelousy because those who are without it feel kind of bad anyway. When in actuality those having higher knowledge are the one's who triumph over those without.

Kerry spoke the truth. No one goes around saying the IQ of African Americans is statistically lower then the rest of the public. It is technically true based on how you do the statistics. But, you say that so blatentley people get angry. Unfortunatley what kerry said made people angry. Enlistments in the military and the general military force is the highest it's been since we are at war. Many of these military people (palehorse) are coming out of the woodwark and saying their mind about the situation. There are far few military people that I know who are actually considered educated. So the ones that are coming out misrepresent the actual education of the military. They are also biased because of course when in the military you are brainwashed to think this system is the best and no one can say otherwise.

Do you even recognize just how Elitist you sound? If I thought the way that your do, I'd have to kick my own arse.

Besides, you are wrong.

If you boil down this entire thread it is all about the statement Kerry made about the US army not being educated. In fact he is correct. Statistically the United States military and people who enlist in the military have lower educational background then the general public.

you just said that... ok, now, suck on THIS:

Heritage Foundation analysis of DOD enlistment data for 1999 and 2003 shows that, contrary to some claims, voluntary military recruits are better educated than the general population and were more likely to come from higher-income areas after 9/11.

how do you like Dem apples, eh?

I guess when you post things you should really read them. Also these statistics don't really prove much besides the fact that the majority have finished H.S or higher. If you consider finishing high school a measure of high education you have really low standards of what a higher education actually means. This could indicate that you yourself lack there of. Let me itereate what it says here.

98 percent of recruits have a high
school education or higher,
compared to 75 percent of general
population.

All this is saying is that 98 could have h.s./bs/ms/phd. This is not giving individual breakdowns of each degree respectivly. In a way it is misleading. ("There are lies then there are statistics") I also have strong suspect that probably 90% of these are just h.s. diplomat. It wasn't until recently that if you try to enlist in the U.S. military that a H.S. wasen't necessary. Nowadays it is. So that is why I suspect a large porportion of that 98 are due to the admission requirements. Secondly that 75% includes everybody in the United States. You are including everybody.

If I were to say that more then half of this country uses "product A" and that was how I promoted "product A". When in actuality 50.1% of the people use product A. This is how you use statistics to sell and lie.

This is also a GOP site.

Regarding the fact that palehorse74 said I'm wrong but explaining no to little reason why dosen't mean i'm wrong it just means you have no way of explaning such. Which equates to based on little defence from your part I'm correct....

First, aren't you the same guy who bashed my grammer yesterday? I highly suggest you go back through your own posts from now on before criticizing others. i mean, wow. your post made my eyes bleed.

Second, you need to get your facts straight. The army has required a HS diploma for more than 15 years. I'm not sure the exact date but I know that it is at least 15 yrs because I joined in 1991 when a HS Diploma was required for me to attend AIT. So no, the Heritage study between 1999 and 2003 was not effected by "new recruiting requirements."

Third, does the fact that I have more degrees still intimidate you, or something? Why do you keep throwing out little quips attacking my integrity, instead of the issue at hand? Odd that.

Last, please quit making sh*t up and get off of your Elitist pedastool.

G'day.

I guess you don't want to face the facts. I mean the fact that someone says that 98% have a H.S. diplomat and higher my no means indicate higher education. I mean to you it may. Considering that your arguments doesn?t reflect the high education you claim that you have. However, the fact that you stated for the last 15 years they have needed a H.S. diplomat tells me those statistics mean absolutely nothing. They give no breakdown which is misleading.

Lastly, I?m pretty sure you don't have any degrees. Actually I would go out on a limb and say you have no more then the BA and AA you said you had and when I explained my afterwards you just added some BS degrees (no pun attended) to beef it up a little bit. The point is since it is done online nothing can be proved. It is proved based on how you conduct yourself. And yes you have conducted yourself like a BA and AA (it would make sense). The education issue didn't get into context until you made a comment in the first post

The major universities that I attended always had recruiters around. Where did you go to school?

As a general rule no one questions someone's educational credentials in a debate but you had. This further shows me your lack of.....

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: CellarDoor
Umm, you do realize that those polls are asking two completely different questions, don't you? Not that it matters either way because those aren't scientifically valid polls.

My point is that you go to CNN and you get the left view of things and therefore a poll taken on CNN is of a majority left crowd and therefore totally meaningless.

The true measure of the impact of this statement is the people who are running away from Kerry and canceled appearances with him and the Democratic Senator candidates who are calling for him to apologize. If this was much ado about nothing neither of those two things would have happened.

No mater what Kerry MEANT to say, he screwed up big time and handed the Republicans a gift. This is two days now we have been talking about John Kerry and what he said. And if the news coverage tonight is about what other Democrats are doing in response to his remarks that cannot be good for Democrats overall.

When Joe six pack turns on CBS for his nightly news and hears all the Democrats calling for an apology he will automatically assume Kerry did something wrong. Why else would they ask for him to apologize?

 

[theeedude]

Menendez pulling away from Kean. I guess Kean would rather we talk about "corruption" allegations than Kerry. Oh well.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: senseamp
Menendez pulling away from Kean. I guess Kean would rather we talk about "corruption" allegations than Kerry. Oh well.

The fact that Kean is even close in New Jersey shows a huge weakness on the part of Menendez. Jersey is about as blue of a state as they come.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: CellarDoor
Umm, you do realize that those polls are asking two completely different questions, don't you? Not that it matters either way because those aren't scientifically valid polls.

My point is that you go to CNN and you get the left view of things and therefore a poll taken on CNN is of a majority left crowd and therefore totally meaningless.

The true measure of the impact of this statement is the people who are running away from Kerry and canceled appearances with him and the Democratic Senator candidates who are calling for him to apologize. If this was much ado about nothing neither of those two things would have happened.

No mater what Kerry MEANT to say, he screwed up big time and handed the Republicans a gift. This is two days now we have been talking about John Kerry and what he said. And if the news coverage tonight is about what other Democrats are doing in response to his remarks that cannot be good for Democrats overall.

When Joe six pack turns on CBS for his nightly news and hears all the Democrats calling for an apology he will automatically assume Kerry did something wrong. Why else would they ask for him to apologize?

I don't think this will translate in any way to the Democrats and the elections. Kerry canceled his appearances because he's a distraction. Right or wrong, he is a distraction and people should be focused on the issues in their campaigns. I don't think individual campaigns are concerned about what Kerry said, and this is more or less just really bad for Kerry.

I agree with you that it helps the Republicans, but I don't think it'll help them gain in the polls. It will however, stop some potential gain from the Democrats by continuing to talk about Iraq for these two days.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: senseamp
Menendez pulling away from Kean. I guess Kean would rather we talk about "corruption" allegations than Kerry. Oh well.

The fact that Kean is even close in New Jersey shows a huge weakness on the part of Menendez. Jersey is about as blue of a state as they come.

He does have weaknesses for sure. However, it appears as though New Jersey is often this way, with a bunch of people voting democrat at the very last moment. I remember reading in 2004 about how some people were thinking Bush would be close. Then everyone remembered we were talking about New Jersey, and it ended up as everyone thought it would. Kean has a very good name in New Jersey though, so that helps him a bunch. The problem for him is the cost of advertising which is ridiculous for a race run in New Jersey.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Are people really so chronically stupid that they really believe that Kerry, in a speech to college students - and
in the middle of a series of remarks directed at Bush and company, with no change of reference to redirect the point
of attack away from Bush, would even imagine that suddenly out of the blue, another remark still directed
at the incompentancy of the Bush Administration would believe that it is even remotely directed at the Troops ?

Maybe the blind partisan hacks like FlufferJohn, and the spin-doctors beleeve that the really ignorant
conservative shills might be dumb enough to belive it, but then they have never been known for
their ability to perform any critical thinking anyway - stupid is as stupid does.

This does accomplish one thing and one thing only - it certifies that 32% of the American Public is too
Goddamn dumb to come in out of the rain.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Are people really so chronically stupid that they rweally beleive that Kerry in a speech to college students
and in a series of remarks directed at Bush and company, with no change of reference to redirect the point
of reference away from Bush would even imagine that suddenly out of the blue another remark still directed
at the inco,pentency of the Bush Administration would believe that it is even remotely directed at the Troops ?

Maybe the blind partisan hacks like FlufferJohn, and the spin-doctors beleive that the really ignorant
conservative shills might be dumb enough to belive it, but then they have never been known for
their ability to perform any critical thinking anyway - stupid is as stupid does.

This does accomplish one thing and one thing only - it certifies that 32% of the American Public is too
Goddamn dumb to come in out of the rain.

Yes.