or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Everyone, it's going to be OK: George Knows.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Everyone, it's going to be OK: George Knows. - Page 12

post #441 of 654
Seems a little arrogant to be so anti-dems when you don't even know what their plans for change are. \ Shouldn't it be your responsibility to know this stuff if you plan on arguing against it

ah well, no harm, if everyone does some reading, I know there are a lot of policies(both democratic and republican) I don't know much about.
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #442 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Where I disagree with you is this, if islamic extremists take over the world, do you think they care about the environment? You would be beheaded for bringing up their disparities. So I would think that you would care about that.

The guy's talking about the environment, and you come up with the islamists taken over the world? Nah, you're not being extremist at all. I've been searching, but I can't find any signs of islamists invading other countries. Come on Naples.

So for the third time Naples...if as you claim, you're neither a Dem or a Rep. then what are you?
Quote:
Spin is twisting the truth so that it supports your view = lies.

Well, the first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem Naples. I praise you for doing just that.
post #443 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
The guy's talking about the environment, and you come up with the islamists taken over the world? Nah, you're not being extremist at all. I've been searching, but I can't find any signs of islamists invading other countries. Come on Naples.

yeah, that jump did confuse me a bit, too bad he didn't have anything else to say apparently. \
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #444 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
Seems a little arrogant to be so anti-dems when you don't even know what their plans for change are. \ Shouldn't it be your responsibility to know this stuff if you plan on arguing against it

ah well, no harm, if everyone does some reading, I know there are a lot of policies(both democratic and republican) I don't know much about.

Not really. All of my posts so far have been *defensive* against what I see as blatent Dem spin and finger pointing.
bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #445 of 654
Based on the morning I wasted arguing with all you AO monkeys I'm beginning to wonder how much AppleInsider contributes to the unemployment rate!! DAMN YOU APPLEINSIDER AND YOUR INSIDIOUS TIME WASTING IDEALS!

bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #446 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by dviant
Based on the morning I wasted arguing with all you AO monkeys I'm beginning to wonder how much AppleInsider contributes to the unemployment rate!! DAMN YOU APPLEINSIDER AND YOUR INSIDIOUS TIME WASTING IDEALS!


hehehe
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #447 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Maybe I'm being obtuse, but I still don't see where that number comes from. It is my understanding that the President has presided over the first net jobs loss since Hoover. Perhaps a certain number of jobs were created during the President's tenure, but enough to counteract the unemployment rate rise?

Well, the numbers I posted were from BLS's website. There are millions more employed today than in 2001. It's a fact.

http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/empsit_nr.htm

All the data is right there. I'm thinking that maybe this 2,000,000 lost jobs number is figured by adding up estimated job losses over the past three years while NOT taking new jobs into account. I'm not sure what else it could be. The numbers are black and white.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #448 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Well, the numbers I posted were from BLS's website. There are millions more employed today than in 2001. It's a fact.

http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/empsit_nr.htm

All the data is right there. I'm thinking that maybe this 2,000,000 lost jobs number is figured by adding up estimated job losses over the past three years while NOT taking new jobs into account. I'm not sure what else it could be. The numbers are black and white.

It could be that most of us aren't economists. I'm not. I don't know if you are. Shawn isn't. And if there's one thing I know, macroeconomics is really, really, realllllly complex.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #449 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
Here's a little something on this subject that SDW and the rest can chew on : http://money.cnn.com/2004/03/05/news...jobs/index.htm

It doesn't exactly sound like the economy is just fine to me. It looks kind of grim if you're one of those people looking for work.

Also CNN doesn't have conservative ads plastered all over it.

oh look, another jimmac CNNMoney link. Imagine that. The overall economy is very strong. Job growth could be better. It's one indicator.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #450 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by billybobsky
I wasn't kidding you. Did consumer spending increase? (did it? do you have data?) On the note of the president imbuing confidence, how is consumer confidence? Why would some one trying to increase confidence keep harping on what threats exist to the nation, FDR didn't do it?
I am not saying the Dems have taken us through dark economic times, I just think it is a patently false statement that Bush took got us through dark economic times.

Also, ShawnJ and SDW2001, I went to the bls.gov website and found some interesting things... Jobs have been created yes, at the same time about 3 M people lost their jobs and weren't rehired, meaning the people taking the new jobs are previously non-employed persons. Also of note is that I was right in saying the total number of the workforce has increased by about 5.4 M.

I don't care how you try and spin it. We have not lost jobs. It's completely false.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #451 of 654
hehehehehehehe

Don't let the simple math complicate things.

Even BUSH is saying he needs to create more jobs.
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #452 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by chu_bakka
hehehehehehehe

Don't let the simple math complicate things.

Even BUSH is saying he needs to create more jobs.

Well I agree. But, I'm just saying the old stump speech of "2,000,000 lost jobs" is a total lie.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #453 of 654
Bush was in Ohio today... where they've lost over 140,000 jobs...

Unemployment in Ohio is 6.2%

that's just one state.
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #454 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
I don't care how you try and spin it. We have not lost jobs. It's completely false.

Fine if you think it is "spin" that is your own bias against actual hard data. People have lost their jobs, about the same number were created, but over the same time period many more people entered the work force than were employed. My proof:

This is a graph of participation rate of the total workforce over the last ten years. You will note that it is not seasonally adjusted and these are the actual numbers from BLS. The participation rate is on a downward trend, meaning more and more people are without jobs.
post #455 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
The 'war on terror' is pointless to begin with. you cannot declare war on an abstract like that. Rather, you CAN, but you cannot fight at a physical war based on it. That's like declaring war on the male sex drive.*

additionally, how much terror do you think has been caused by our interference in iraq? if not from iraqi soldiers who have to go and get killed, then by civilians who have to endure bombs destroying buildings all around them. On top of that, how many people lost everything in this operation, and are now pissed at the US, who better to become a suicide bomber? who better to hate the US and want to do everything in his power to hurt us.

Violence begets violence, when will people get that? you can't fight terror with bombs.

also Islam extremists aren't going to take over the world, if you think so, you might want to consider not watching spy movies anymore. seriously, for that to be your justification for destroying the environment? that's absurd. "we got no time to worry about the planet that supports ALL OF US, there are islam terrorists that could take over the world any minute!" now if you excuse me, while I get my tincan hat



*edit: was "the internet" , changed it to make it even more of an abstract, for emphasis.

What an appropriate screen name you have, Wrong Robot. Why? Because the above thinking just plainly wrong-headed

We CAN and MUST fight a "war" on terrorism. We do so by using the military to hunt and kill terrorists, punish nations that support terror, and remove governments who may provide terrorists with WMD. The other parts of the war are non-military. We increase domestic security, better our intelligence capibilities at home and abroad, etc, etc. That's how we have a "war".

Terror: The notion that invading Iraq has CAUSED terrorism is flawed and unsupportable. It may have attracted groups such as Al-Qaeda TO Iraq, but I argue that's not really a bad thing. I'd rather have the US military fight the battle than the banker in Manhattan, wouldn't you?

One absolutely CAN fight terror with bombs. "Violence begets violence" is a statement that makes the intelligenisa feel warm and fuzzy inside, but it's not true in reality. One of the ways we win the WOT is to be a lot better at violence than "them". Had we not invaded Afghanistan, the Taliban would still be providing a haven for Al-Qaeda. We hit them with overwhelming force. It is said that Al-Qaeda was "shocked" that we came after them on the ground. It was a complete departure from previous US policy.

What would you do about terrorism? I'd like to know. John Kerry's approach....that of a law enforcement and a legal operation, simply doesn't work. We tried that after 1993 WTC bombing. Look where it got us. We must hunt and kill terrorists across the globe and punish states that support terror. End of story.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #456 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Bush was in Ohio today... where they've lost over 140,000 jobs...

Unemployment in Ohio is 6.2%

that's just one state.

I understand that, but now you're bringing up a different issue. This may very well impact Bush, but it doesn't refute my BLS numbers.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #457 of 654
Can we get an economist in here? Quickly?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #458 of 654
There is such a thing as NET loss.

Jobs created minus layoffs and new workers entering the work force.

2,000,000
-5,000,000

-3,000,000

It's simple.
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #459 of 654
It's not a different issue... where do you think those job losses are happening?
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #460 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by billybobsky
Fine if you think it is "spin" that is your own bias against actual hard data. People have lost their jobs, about the same number were created, but over the same time period many more people entered the work force than were employed. My proof:

This is a graph of participation rate of the total workforce over the last ten years. You will note that it is not seasonally adjusted and these are the actual numbers from BLS. The participation rate is on a downward trend, meaning more and more people are without jobs.

That proves absolutely nothing! What are you even arguing? You cannot change the fact that there are 2,000,000 MORE JOBS than in 2001, not 2,000,000 less.

Let's put it this way: If we start with 10 jobs, layoff 4 people, then hire 6 more later....that's a net gain of 2 jobs, bringing to total to 12. We're not talking about the possibility of there being 5 more people looking for work at the moment (for example), because that's a separate issue.

There are more jobs today than there were in 2001...MANY more. Show me, someone, how that's untrue.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #461 of 654
According to you if that number was say just 1,000... Bush could say he created jobs.., and you would still be screaming we have not lost any jobs?
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #462 of 654
you are right, there are many more.

However, the 2.4 M is less than the needed 5.4 M to keep the percentage of people participating in the work force the same. This is why participation is going down (one reason perhaps)...
post #463 of 654
And SDW2001, I never said jobs were lost...
post #464 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
oh look, another jimmac CNNMoney link. Imagine that. The overall economy is very strong. Job growth could be better. It's one indicator.

No matter how much you gloss over the jobs situation the fact of the matter is no jobs = no recovery.

If this situation doesn't improve we will not be well off at all.

As far as CNN goes it just shows you don't have to go very far ( or to some conservative rag ) to find the truth.

As of Jan. this year :

Unemployment Rates for States

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unemployment Rates for States
Monthly Rankings
Seasonally Adjusted
Jan. 2004p

Rank State Rate
1 SOUTH DAKOTA 2.9
2 NORTH DAKOTA 3.0
3 DELAWARE 3.4
4 VIRGINIA 3.6
5 VERMONT 3.8
6 HAWAII 3.9
6 NEBRASKA 3.9
6 WYOMING 3.9
9 IOWA 4.1
9 NEW HAMPSHIRE 4.1
11 FLORIDA 4.3
11 GEORGIA 4.3
11 MARYLAND 4.3
14 NEVADA 4.5
15 MINNESOTA 4.6
15 MONTANA 4.6
17 CONNECTICUT 4.7
17 KANSAS 4.7
17 MISSOURI 4.7
20 IDAHO 4.8
21 MAINE 4.9
21 TENNESSEE 4.9
23 INDIANA 5.0
23 OKLAHOMA 5.0
23 UTAH 5.0
23 WISCONSIN 5.0
27 ARIZONA 5.2
27 ARKANSAS 5.2
27 KENTUCKY 5.2
27 RHODE ISLAND 5.2
27 WEST VIRGINIA 5.2
32 PENNSYLVANIA 5.3
33 NEW JERSEY 5.5
34 COLORADO 5.6
34 MASSACHUSETTS 5.6
36 NEW MEXICO 5.7
37 MISSISSIPPI 5.8
37 NORTH CAROLINA 5.8
39 ALABAMA 6.0
40 CALIFORNIA 6.1
40 LOUISIANA 6.1
42 ILLINOIS 6.2
42 OHIO 6.2
44 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 6.3
44 SOUTH CAROLINA 6.3
44 TEXAS 6.3
47 NEW YORK 6.5
47 WASHINGTON 6.5
49 MICHIGAN 6.6
50 ALASKA 7.3
51 OREGON 7.7




If you look at Oregon you can understand why I don't feel so good about this.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #465 of 654
Not to think fairly, but does not John Kerry have a role in the laws and goings on during this administration. Did any of his votes help or hurt this economy.

he has a track record we can look at and scrutinize. Let's dig into some of that....

That wouldn't be any fun, would it
post #466 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Not to think fairly, but does not John Kerry have a role in the laws and goings on during this administration. Did any of his votes help or hurt this economy.

he has a track record we can look at and scrutinize. Let's dig into some of that....

That wouldn't be any fun, would it

Go right ahead. let's see what you come up with.

What ever it is it can't be as damning as Bush's record.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #467 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
Go right ahead. let's see what you come up with.

What ever it is it can't be as damning as Bush's record.

Oh, I beg to differ. Kerry is THE most liberal senator is the nation. That's #1, jimmac. On top of this, he's been on both sides of nearly every single issue. Focusing on Kerry's record is the absolute smartest thing Bush can do.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #468 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by chu_bakka
According to you if that number was say just 1,000... Bush could say he created jobs.., and you would still be screaming we have not lost any jobs?

Yes.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #469 of 654
most liberal.
both sides.
something doesn't work out in the logic.
either he is the most liberal and votes randomly or he is a centrist and votes on both sides of complex issues...
post #470 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by billybobsky
most liberal.
both sides.
something doesn't work out in the logic.
either he is the most liberal and votes randomly or he is a centrist and votes on both sides of complex issues...

You see that is the beauty of Kerry now isn't it. He can warp time and always come out on top.

Kerry, I like to call him Dr. Who, can just start up the phone booth and point it to some time period when he supported or detract from whatever issue that suits the moment.
post #471 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Oh, I beg to differ. Kerry is THE most liberal senator is the nation. That's #1, jimmac. On top of this, he's been on both sides of nearly every single issue. Focusing on Kerry's record is the absolute smartest thing Bush can do.

Hmm \

First, that's REALLY something you need to cite, SDW. It's not clear if just you think he's "most liberal," whether liberal groups rate his record the highest among current senators, or what. But even if he's the "most liberal" senator by any criteria, that's really not saying much for the state of progressives in the senate. In other words, if John Kerry is the "most liberal" senator we have, then the Senate is certainly conservative by my standards!

Second, I think we can come up with a lot more genuine Bush flip-flops.
post #472 of 654
ah, so he is a politician?
post #473 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by billybobsky
ah, so he is a politician?

Ok yeah politicians do this, but not to the extent that Dr. Who does. Every major issue.
post #474 of 654
Ah, read it and weep, you hypocritical Bush flip-flopping defenders:
kos
Quote:
Bush's flip flops

by kos
Sun Mar 7th, 2004 at 21:37:53 GMT

So Bush has a site somewhere that tracks Kerry's "flip-flops". Reader TK probably spent three seconds coming up with this list of Bush flip flops. It's not like they're hard to find:
Bush is against campaign finance reform; then he's for it.

Bush is against a Homeland Security Department; then he's for it.

Bush is against a 9/11 commission; then he's for it.

Bush is against an Iraq WMD investigation; then he's for it.

Bush is against nation building; then he's for it.

Bush is against deficits; then he's for them.

Bush is for free trade; then he's for tariffs on steel; then he's against them again.

Bush is against the U.S. taking a role in the Israeli Palestinian conflict; then he pushes for a "road map" and a Palestinian State.

Bush is for states right to decide on gay marriage, then he is for changing the constitution.

Bush first says he'll provide money for first responders (fire, police, emergency), then he doesn't.

Bush first says that 'help is on the way' to the military ... then he cuts benefits

Bush-"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. Bush-"I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care.

Bush claims to be in favor of the environment and then secretly starts drilling on Padre Island.

Bush talks about helping education and increases mandates while cutting funding.

Bush first says the U.S. won't negotiate with North Korea. Now he will

Bush goes to Bob Jones University. Then say's he shouldn't have.

Bush said he would demand a U.N. Security Council vote on whether to sanction military action against Iraq. Later Bush announced he would not call for a vote

Bush said the "mission accomplished" banner was put up by the sailors._ Bush later admits it was his advance team.

Bush was for fingerprinting and photographing Mexicans who enter the US. Bush after meeting with Pres. Fox, he's against it.

post #475 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Ah, read it and weep, you hypocritical Bush flip-flopping defenders:
kos



Um, to many misrepresentations,,, where to start?
post #476 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Um, to many misrepresentations,,, where to start?

Ahem. misrepre-what?
post #477 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Yes.

Wow. ok. If you're gonna set the bar that low there's no way Bush could fail you.

Well actually... anybody in office could pull that off,
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #478 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
Go right ahead. let's see what you come up with.

What ever it is it can't be as damning as Bush's record.

Ok lets start here:

April 23, 1971
Vietnam Veterans Against the War Statement by John Kerry to the Senate Committee of Foreign Relations


I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit - the emotions in the room and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.


They told stories that 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 Ghengis 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.


We call this investigation the Winter Soldier Investigation. The term Winter Soldier is a play on words of Thomas Paine's in 1776 when he spoke of the Sunshine Patriots and summertime soldiers who deserted at Valley Forge because the going was rough.


We who have come here to Washington have come here because we feel we have to be winter soldiers now. We could come back to this country, we could be quiet, we could hold our silence, we could not tell what went on in Vietnam, but we feel because of what threatens this country, not the reds, but the crimes which we are committing that threaten it, that we have to speak out....


In our opinion and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom, which those misfits supposedly abuse, is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy, and it is that kind of hypocrisy which we feel has torn this country apart.


We found that not only was it a civil war, an effort by a people who had for years been seeking their liberation from any colonial influence whatsoever, but also we found that the Vietnamese whom we had enthusiastically molded after our own image were hard put to take up the fight against the threat we were supposedly saving them from.


We found most people didn't even know the difference between communism and democracy. They only wanted to work in rice paddies without helicopters strafing them and bombs with napalm burning their villages and tearing their country apart. They wanted everything to do with the war, particularly with this foreign presence of the United States of America, to leave them alone in peace, and they practiced the art of survival by siding with whichever military force was present at a particular time, be it Viet Cong, North Vietnamese or American.


We found also that all too often American men were dying in those rice paddies for want of support from their allies. We saw first hand how monies from American taxes were used for a corrupt dictatorial regime. We saw that many people in this country had a one-sided idea of who was kept free by the flag, and blacks provided the highest percentage of casualties. We saw Vietnam ravaged equally by American bombs and search and destroy missions, as well as by Viet Cong terrorism - and yet we listened while this country tried to blame all of the havoc on the Viet Cong.


We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum.


We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of orientals.


We watched the United States falsification of body counts, in fact the glorification of body counts. We listened while month after month we were told the back of the enemy was about to break. We fought using weapons against "oriental human beings." We fought using weapons against those people which I do not believe this country would dream of using were we fighting in the European theater. We watched while men charged up hills because a general said that hill has to be taken, and after losing one platoon or two platoons they marched away to leave the hill for reoccupation by the North Vietnamese. We watched pride allow the most unimportant battles to be blown into extravaganzas, because we couldn't lose, and we couldn't retreat, and because it didn't matter how many American bodies were lost to prove that point, and so there were Hamburger Hills and Khe Sanhs and Hill 81s and Fire Base 6s, and so many others.


Now we are told that the men who fought there must watch quietly while American lives are lost so that we can exercise the incredible arrogance of Vietnamizing the Vietnamese.


Each day to facilitate the process by which the United States washes her hands of Vietnam someone has to give up his life so that the United States doesn't have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can't say that we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, "the first President to lose a war."


We are asking Americans to think about that because how do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?....We are here in Washington to say that the problem of this war is not just a question of war and diplomacy. It is part and parcel of everything that we are trying as human beings to communicate to people in this country - the question of racism which is rampant in the military, and so many other questions such as the use of weapons; the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage at the Geneva Conventions and using that as justification for a continuation of this war when we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions; in the use of free fire zones, harassment interdiction fire, search and destroy missions, the bombings, the torture of prisoners, all accepted policy by many units in South Vietnam. That is what we are trying to say. It is part and parcel of everything.


An American Indian friend of mine who lives in the Indian Nation of Alcatraz put it to me very succinctly. He told me how as a boy on an Indian reservation he had watched television and he used to cheer the cowboys when they came in and shot the Indians, and then suddenly one day he stopped in Vietnam and he said, "my God, I am doing to these people the very same thing that was done to my people," and he stopped. And that is what we are trying to say, that we think this thing has to end.


We are here to ask, and we are here to ask vehemently, where are the leaders of our country? Where is the leadership? We're here to ask where are McNamara, Rostow, Bundy, Gilpatrick, and so many others? Where are they now that we, the men they sent off to war, have returned? These are the commanders who have deserted their troops. And there is no more serious crime in the laws of war. The Army says they never leave their wounded. The marines say they never even leave their dead. These men have left all the casualties and retreated behind a pious shield of public rectitude. They've left the real stuff of their reputations bleaching behind them in the sun in this country....


We wish that a merciful God could wipe away our own memories of that service as easily as this administration has wiped away their memories of us. But all that they have done and all that they can do by this denial is to make more clear than ever our own determination to undertake one last mission - to search out and destroy the last vestige of this barbaric war, to pacify our own hearts, to conquer the hate and fear that have driven this country these last ten years and more. And more. And so when thirty years from now our brothers go down the street without a leg, without an arm, or a face, and small boys ask why, we will be able to say "Vietnam" and not mean a desert, not a filthy obscene memory, but mean instead where America finally turned and where soldiers like us helped it in the turning.
post #479 of 654
What's your point?

It was a terrible war... which he fought in... he testified before congress.

They wanted the war to end.
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #480 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by chu_bakka
What's your point?

It was a terrible war... which he fought in... he testified before congress.

They wanted the war to end.

You are right except that testimony was proven to be lies.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Everyone, it's going to be OK: George Knows.