I need help on debating my Repug Friends.

I always supported Kerry because he VOLUNTEERED to fight for our country, but then I read this. Someone please explain this so my stupid republican friends will stop making up bullshit lies about Mr. Kerry. I am really tired of the animosity these people have over Kerry because he is a War Hero and Bush was AWOL. I am not very good at debating on the spot.



http://www.townhall.com/columnists/larryelder/le20040826.shtml



"During the Vietnam War," said former President Bill Clinton at the Democratic National Convention, "many young men -- including the current president, the vice president and me -- could have gone to Vietnam but didn't. John Kerry came from a privileged background and could have avoided it too. Instead he said, 'Send me.' When they sent those swift-boats up the river in Vietnam, and told them their job was to draw hostile fire -- to show the American flag and bait the enemy to come out and fight -- John Kerry said, 'Send me.'"

John O'Neill, who took over Kerry's swift-boat after Kerry left Vietnam, and co-author of the new book, "Unfit for Command," questions whether Kerry's attitude toward Vietnam was, indeed, "Send me":

John Kerry has often implied that he volunteered for the military right after college. But Kerry petitioned his draft board for a student deferment. At Yale, Kerry's antiwar political views were well known. He . . . used his commencement address in 1966 to criticize the foreign policy of President Lyndon Johnson, especially with regard to Vietnam. When he approached his draft board for permission to study for a year in Paris, the draft board refused and Kerry decided to enlist in the Navy. . . . The top choice was the Navy Reserves where the duty commitment was shorter and a larger proportion of the period could be served stateside on inactive duty.

John Kerry's service record indicates that on February 18, 1966, he enlisted in the United States Naval Reserves, status 'inactive,' not in the U.S. Navy. These details are conveniently left out of all pro-Kerry biographies. Douglas Brinkley records that Kerry entered Officer Candidate School in Newport, Rhode Island; however, again he fails to note that Kerry was seeking to be an officer of the U.S. Naval Reserves.

I just need advice. They shove this kind of crap in my face all the time. They even said this was written by a Black man which I really do not get. Is the source even credible..

I am asking for advice.

Kerry went to Vietnam and was wounded and was awarded medals.
Bush went AWOL in AMERICA and is photographed wearing a medal he did not earn.
Tell the Republicans to put that in their collective pipe and smoke it.

I forget who came up with Bush Swerved, but I love it!

well...don't hold your breath.

That is the important detail in my mind.

Your "friend" will just absorb all the lies in your post.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The insurance company I work for is full of Bush worshipers. I am a minority. I assure you.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I personally don't care if he applied for a student deferment and didn't get it. The fact is is that he went, for TWO tours of duty. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you were only obligated to serve one tour. Discussing little details that were left out in some books doesn't change the facts. Stick to the facts, and you can never go wrong.

I am just not that good at debating on the spot. I appreciate your help.

Hey I wouldntve wanted to go to Nam either. Unfortunately, he didn't want to go out of cowardice and faced no repercussions.

It is adobe and I can not cut and past.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Request_For_Swiftboat_Duty.pdf

question. It's an old technique...find a new one.

I asked for help and you come across like an asshole. If you can't offer advice then don't bother posting on my thread.

But don't alot of users post outragious articles for the purpose of saying what complete crap they are? If I read some new garbage from Ann Coulter that I hadn't seen discussed yet, i'd post it as EVEN more proof of what a psychotic bitch she is.

At least he went. PERIOD. The idiot-in-chief DIDN'T go. PERIOD. That's all they need. THEY need to defend the chimp and his missing for a damn year. YOU do NOT have to defend someone who actually served in Vietnam. It matters not how Kerry got there. He was there and THAT is the important issue. MAKE THEM DEFEND THEIR GUY.

WASHINGTON - Documents that should have been written to explain gaps in President Bush's Texas Air National Guard service are missing from the military records released about his service in 1972 and 1973, according to regulations and outside experts.



For example, Air National Guard regulations at the time required commanders to write an investigative report for the Air Force when Bush missed his annual medical exam in 1972. The regulations also required commanders to confirm in writing that Bush received counseling after missing five months of drills.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040906/ap_on_el_pr/bush_national_guard&cid=694&ncid=716

That looks like something I could use. I am not that good with the research which is why I came here.

I do not want to run away. I want to fight back. I am not a coward. I just need an arsenal.

hanging out with the wrong crowd. They are Cheap Labor Conservatives. I don't hang out with people are negative. And they are.

and able to defend myself as well as my canidate....I am not going to sit back and listen to a load of crap if I can help it. Kerry served in Vietnam. Bush did not. Bottom line. I just need some talking points.

and known for falsity at this point, O'Neill having been long-established as a Nixon dirty-trickster, and Dole recently having hawked erection-enhancers and having put forth completely false assertions in public forums, including cable television.

Legitimate sources would be appreciated. The documents show that Kerry volunteered for Viet Nam and Bush asked not to be sent.

<http://blog.johnkerry.com/rapidresponse>

read the d-bunker about the swiftys

Oh, and the site is about as credible as a heavily biased information source can be. They think more about saying things that their audience wants to hear rather than saying things that are true. I'd tell them that any article from such a biased source is worthless. Like faux news saying that only a few thousand showed up in NYC to protest bush. My ass.

Throw this back in their face, it's an economist analysis about bush's acceptance speech. It's very, very good. It is non-biased while being frank about what bush did or did not say. Now THAT is highly credible information.

http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3168816

I have stored it in my files. Thank you.

I forget the author but it's a great political read, very helpful.

You friends seem willing to go to extraordinary lengths to investigate Kerry, who actually went to Vietnam. How do they know all this incredible detail? Perhaps they will make the same effort to find out what no show Bush was doing at the same time? Why is there so much documentation of Kerry and so little of Bush? Of course Cheney had "other priorities". As did most prominent Republicans. Kerry went. Therefore he was "sent". Bush didn't go anywhere except AWOL. I see no comparison at all. Kerry went. Bush didn't. The rest is B/S.

It would be important to me what the person I was putting in power was doing. Rather than the person I wasn't voting for. If I am not voting for him what he did and didn't do is irrelevant. If I was trying to convert someone else I would be forced to compare.

Tell your "friends" if they can't look at Bush and Kerry and figure out who has the intelligence, character, and leadership skills to lead this country, then they deserve the government they get.

before today. Sure walks like a duck and talks like a duck. "townhall.com" certainly does NOT have a rep as an unbiased news source. It's RW crap. What about the article challenges the fact that Kerry volunteered for service or for Nam?

Why do we have to focus on the past...lets talk about what they stand for.

represents is hard. Especially, like you say there is many of them and only one of you. There all kinds of republicans and all kinds of democrats, but I can tell you from my experience in Virginia.
We have Republicans that agree with Bush's economic ideals.
We have Republicans that have now ideal they really disagree with their own party.
We have Republicans that are pro choice but hate gay marriage.
We have republicans that hate everyone that isn't white collar.
We have republicans that are pro life that are against the death penalty.
But the biggest thing I see here, is The Redneck Republican ( I'm sorry to say it that way- but there is just not a better term coming
to my mind at the moment.)- They have no clue about anything political...they believe in packing guns, wild times, booze, war and spounting god loves Repubs. Where getting drunk is a past-time and Sunday is for sleeping it off. But JESUS loves Repugs- It makes my blood curdle at the hypocrisy.
ALL THE WHILE, they are waiting for that fuel assistance, Workers Compensation check, SSDI, SS, or any Social program they could be a receiptant for. They don't care what party fought for it. They simply take it for granted it's there. Most of the time they act like it is due them. I live in the poorest county in Virginia. We have some of the highest unemployment rates nation wide. This not something I made up...I see this EVERY single day.
The point of this post is...One on one you might could help the cause - but as a group they fuel each other and you will just end up their target. Educate with as much statistics as you can gradually, even covertly. Good luck!!

problem solved LOL

Isn't there anything worth discussing from the past year or two that could be more relevant ?

It's such a dead horse issue.

that only someone with a pus filled brain encrusted with shit would believe them. I then point out that every factual assertion Bush makes through his Swift Boat group that can be checked has been checked and found to be either false or otherwise inaccurate. Finally, I point out that using a newly created group funded by one of his drinking and doping buddies to spread foul lying filth about his opponent is Bush's trademark signature in a campaign. To illustrate this final point I always use the example of Bush spreading the rumor that McCain had what Bush so charmingly referred to as an illegitimate "nigger" daughter.

Ask your buddies why at least two the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have praised Kerry in the past. You could point out that Lt. Cmdr. George Elliott praised Kerry as recently as 1996 (http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/david_sarasohn/index.ssf?/base/editorial/1093434977273600.xml ) and Rear Adm. Roy Hoffmann called Kerry "a good man."

If you are looking for a list of easy talking points that might help you debate your friends, you might want to refer to the following links: http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/04/168.html and http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh082704.shtml and http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh083004.shtml for more information. Although I would not recommend quoting Democratic Underground "Top Ten Conservative Idiots" to your friends but the list does provide some useful links.

in Bush's application to transfer to Ala. he lied about the type of plane he was qualified to fly. It was not good enough that the plane he had been flying was about to be obsolete, he lied and said he was only qualified to fly a plane that was already obsolete. They had just started random drug testing and he knew he had to get out of flying. He knew he wouldn't be taking his physical due in a couple of months.

Kerry was on active duty from Aug 1966 to Jan 1970 and in inactive reserve until l978. He could have stayed on the Gridley for his second tour but requested in country service on a swift boat.

And Bush could not even fulfill his contract to fly 4 full years after what the Air Force had spent training him. He is the lowest of the low for what he and Rove are doing.

Here you go. http://www.glcq.com/

That seems like a weak argument. I don't think petty name calling is going to go over well. Plus I am told that the Townhall link is not credible. If I say that and come back with some of the links posted here they may say the same thing. So what link is credible? If I produce something damning against against Bush they can say not a credible source. If they produce something damning against Kerry then I am supposed to say not credible. So I guess a debate is impossible. Neither is credible.

They are telling me that Kerry is harping on being a war hero and the fact that he served but at the same time liberals are supposed to be against war. They also say that Kerry tried very hard to get out of going to war and with that said why is he harping on his war history. Not to mention he was only there 4 months and earned some controversial medals then denounced them as soon as he got back. So why is he harping on the war. They say he just uses whatever he can to win and that he has no convictions.

This is the crap I hear at the watercooler everyday. So forget about the source. That is weak. I need talking points. Thank you.

Liberals should be against unjust wars, just as conservatives should be. Someone can be proud of serving in a war and then realize, as most of the country did, that we were lied to and the war was causing great harm to our country and to Vietnam.

Kerry was in country for 4 1/2 months performing the most dangerous job available, with a 75% casuality rate. He had also served an earlier tour off the coast of Vietnam and other Southeast Asian countries.

Kerry asked for l deferment to study in Paris for a year and was turned down so he joined the Navy and later volunteered for overseas duty.

All these things are verifiable so you make your argument as you wish.

It is also verifiable that Bush lied on his application to get out of flying for the last two years of a contract he made with the Texas National Guard. You may not like the term War Weenie but after what I heard from the Republicans last week, it doesn't bother me a bit.

Townhall.com.

You need to INSIST that if they're going to debate you, they use credible news sources, not right-wing propaganda like Townhall.com.

His heroism is well documented. Make THEM defend * policies. Ask them about the deficit. Ask them about Iraq. Ask them about the 17% increase in Social Security. Every minute we are "forced" to defend his military service, we can't get the word out about how * policies have destroyed the country.

From now on, when I get these emails, I will just reply all with "That's all you've got?" Even the wingnuts know that Kerry served more honorably than the Chimp, that's why they have to parse and lie about every bowel movement Kerry took in the Viet Nam years.

Democratic Party = Corporate Responsibilty & Individual Freedom

It's really that simple!

get my head up their asses.

Have your acquaintances read this and weep:

DESERTER
THE STORY OF GEORGE W. BUSH AFTER HE QUIT THE TEXAS AIR NATIONAL GUARD

http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm

www.centerforamericanprogress.org

for some good ammo and tips. Also, listen to AAR regularly. They're there to teach us or guide us I should say. You pick up a lot listening to them.

oh, debate...

nevermind.

Chickenhawk Hall of Shame!

Also visit The New Hamsphire Gazette's Chickenhawk database.


You might also find this useful:
George W. Bush Wore A Ribbon He Did Not Earn

And speaking of chickenhawks:


You need to do is what Kerry has finally started doing--counterattack instead of defend. Ask your friends where they get off critcizing Kerry's deferement when Cheney got FIVE of them, and Bush not only REFUSED to serve overseas, he didn't complete the duty he ended up with!

:headbang:
rocknation

how can he trust a man who flew a cock rocket in the gaurd over a man who almost got his cock shot off? That ought to shut him down.