So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

Dave LaCourse wrote in
:

Comprendre? Comprendee?

Got it. You chose between a liar and a deserter, and opted for the liar.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

Scott Seidman wrote in
.4:

Dave LaCourse wrote in
:

Comprendre? Comprendee?

Got it. You chose between a liar and a deserter, and opted for the liar.


oops, I mean deserter, of course. Or maybe it's liar AND deserter.


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Bob Weinberger wrote:

He in fact did. He testified before Congress that he had first hand
knowledge of atrocities committed by US troops. While while some or all of
those atrocities may have occured.

We all know those atrocities did occur. The following McCain quote
is floating around on the internet. Is this something McCain did
actually say, or is this a Democratic swift boating? You tell me.

"I am a war criminal," McCain said on "60 Minutes" in 1997. "I bombed
innocent women and children."

I (unlike you) was not in Viet Nam. I got lucky. But I knew plenty
who were there. I had a roommate in college who had been a Navy
Sea-bee, or something like that. His stories were sickening.
I met a guy in 1968 who'd been a Green Beret medic at Khe Sahn and Lang
Vei (now a semi-famous writer). I heard first hand accounts of
executions and torture from him too.

I did a 4 year carpenter's apprenticeship in California at the
height of the war. I heard lots of stories from shell-shocked guys
just back from the war. Much of what I heard sounded a lot like what I'd
call atrocities. So I'd say your complaints about Kerry are word-parsing
errors. "First hand knowledge?" I had that too. I talked with
people who were there, who told me what they saw.

If the 1960's right had the courage to live up to their own convictions,
they'd have known communism would soon fail by itself anyway,
which of course it did. 50,000 Americans lost their lives there for
nothing. We did lose that useless war, outright.
And we still pay the price today. And now we're doing it all over again.

We had a good excuse for a fight in Afghanistan, and a good opportunity
to make something out of it too. Instead we ignored Afghanistan, and,
well, you know the rest. The same right wing c*&%k suckers have us
f$#Sked all over again.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Bob Weinberger wrote:
"Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
Yeah, there's that but perhaps he wasn't lying in the first place.
One thing we do know for a fact is that the Swiftboating of Kerry
was a pack of despicable lies so you'll have to excuse me if I don't
place a whole lot of credence in your Swiftboat redux.

No perhaps about it. Based on my knowledge of situation in Viet Nam at the
time he and I were there, there is no way in Hell that he witnessed all he
said under oath that he had. Also though we know for a fact that some of
the SwiftBoaters allegations were outright lies, based my own experiences
and on conversations I've had with fellow Naval officers who were in Nam at
the same time, and have no axe to grind Kerry, there is no way I can
accept as fact that all the allegations were lies. ...

Well Bob, I'm afraid you're just gonna have to accept that I
find you less credible than John Kerry (and all the living
members of his crew). You appear to have some sort of axe to
grind with the Vietnam Vets Against The War and with Kerry
being their spokesman before Congress. You also appear to be
if not a Swiftboater, then at least a Swiftboater wannabe.

BTW I was not and am not a Bush supporter. I was unable to hold my nose long
enough to vote for him even though based on my perceptionof Kerry's
character (actually his lack thereof) there was no way I would vote for him.
So I cast a futile protest vote for some non-viable 3rd party candidate
(can't even remember who at this point).

Yeah, I'm sorry but you're self-reported voting record is not
at all persuasive.

--
Ken Fortenberry

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On 17 Feb 2008 23:18:24 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

Got it. You chose between a liar and a deserter, and opted for the liar.

Deserter? What deserter? Kerry didn't desert. He didn't get an
honorable discharge, but he didn't desert. And *he* is the liar.
Before Congress. Under oath. Sort of like your hero.

Dave

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

"salmo bytes" wrote in message
. ..

snip

So I'd say your complaints about Kerry are word-parsing
errors. "First hand knowledge?" I had that too. I talked with
people who were there, who told me what they saw.

snip

I'd hardly call my accusation of outright lying word parsing. There's a
reason the courts make a bright line distinction between heresay and direct
knowledge - a distinction that your reply shows you don't understand. I
acknowledged that many if not all those atrocities likely occurred. Even
if they all did, it is immaterial to the fact that he lied when he said he
witnessed them.

Bob Weinberger

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On 17 Feb 2008 23:19:01 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

Scott Seidman wrote in
. 1.4:

Dave LaCourse wrote in
:

Comprendre? Comprendee?

Got it. You chose between a liar and a deserter, and opted for the liar.


oops, I mean deserter, of course. Or maybe it's liar AND deserter.

Ahhhhh, now I understand you. Do you have proof that Bush was a
deserter? No? Yeah, no one else does either.

Scott, we are fighting wars that happened long ago. You won't change
the way I feel about Kerry. He epitomizes the term scumbag both as a
warrior and a senator.

Dave

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:24:16 -0700, salmo bytes wrote:

I met a guy in 1968 who'd been a Green Beret medic at Khe Sahn and Lang
Vei (now a semi-famous writer). I heard first hand accounts of
executions and torture from him too.

Khe Sahn did not involve Special Forces (Green Berets). It was an
action by the III Marines and elements of the South Vietnamese Army.
No Green Beret medics at Khe Sahn; only USN Hospital Corpman

The trouble with Kerry's stories is that he wasn't exposed to the
enemy in that way. Most of the action, if not all of it, was aboard a
patrol boat. He got the stories from plants within the Viet Nam Vets
Against the War *who never were in country*.

Dave

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Dave LaCourse wrote:

Khe Sahn did not involve Special Forces (Green Berets). It was an
action by the III Marines and elements of the South Vietnamese Army.
No Green Beret medics at Khe Sahn; only USN Hospital Corpman


The guy I met in 1968 (Doug Peacock, the inspiration for Hay Duke in
the Monkey Wrench Gang) was a green beret medic, at Lang Vei
I believe. Now that I think about it, he told stories about
Khe Sahn, but never said he was there. At Lang Vei he was
.....unless I (like Andy Petitte the other day) "miss-heard."

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote in message
et...
Well Bob, I'm afraid you're just gonna have to accept that I
find you less credible than John Kerry (and all the living
members of his crew).

That's about as vile a statement as you could make, knowing my evaluation of
Kerry's credibility.

You appear to have some sort of axe to
grind with the Vietnam Vets Against The War and with Kerry
being their spokesman before Congress. You also appear to be
if not a Swiftboater, then at least a Swiftboater wannabe.

Ken Fortenberry

I have no axe to grind with the Vietnam vets Against the War or the fact
that Kerry was their spokesman. My heartburn is with those who I know for a
fact ( not just have a strong suspicion ) outright lied to make their point,
and with the defenders of such people, who simply cannot accept that their
champion can do any wrong. I have the same heartburn with regard to the
outright lies used by the Swiftboaters.
If I were a Swiftboater wannabe, I would have had no problem bringing out my
concerns and beliefs during Kerry's presidential bid. I chosre not to do
so because I had no desire to help Bush's chances.

I was glad that Kerry was defeated, but disappointed that Bush won 8).

Bob Weinberger

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:05:25 -0500, jeff miller
wrote:

it was an incorrect statement...

Well, I stand corrected, counselor.

but one heard frequently as part of
republican sloganeering...usually in conjunction with the pejorative use
of "liberal" in reference to a judge's or judicial nominee's
decision-making.

and...uh...you do know that the supremes were "making" law just as much
as, if not more than, the florida court, don't you? it was a political
act as much as a judicial act, and reconfirmed the insightful comment
that "No matter whether th' Constitution follows th' flag or not, th'
Supreme Coort follows th' illection returns."

The Florida law stated that election returns had to be counted by such
and such a date. Where not the Florida Supremes "making" law by
saying, "That doesn't count. We will allow the recount to continue?"
(In essence that is what they did.) I belive THAT is making law and
has NOTHING to do with Common Law. Hell, the most liberal of the
Florida Supremes, the Chief Justic himself, did not go along with it
knowing that it was against the Florida law.

When should the recount have stopped? When Gore was *finally* ahead?
They tried that, over and over and over, pregnant chads and all, but
Bush still came up the winner every time. In a futile attempt to hang
on to a possible win by Algore, the Supremes *attempted* to change the
law. There was all kinds of conspiracy stories, but bottom line is
that Bush won after many, many recounts, both electronic and manual.

Now, ask ME a question about laser/fiber optics - or at least
laser/fiber optics of 17 years ago when I retired. d;o)

Dave

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
Then why, pray tell, has no one been impeached? Why?



I wondered why those impeachment happy GOP members in the House suddenly got
cold feet myself.....
Tom
p.s. I'm guess blind ideologically driven cowardice, but that's just my
guess.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:16:45 -0600, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:


Yeah, there's that but perhaps he wasn't lying in the first place.
One thing we do know for a fact is that the Swiftboating of Kerry
was a pack of despicable lies so you'll have to excuse me if I don't
place a whole lot of credence in your Swiftboat redux.


You keep on going back to the Swiftboat thingy. Neither Bob nor I
have mentioned it. That had nothing to do with his perjury before
Congress. HE LIED UNDER OATH BEFORE CONGRESS! Throwing his medals
over the fence had NOTHING TO DO WITH SWIFTBOATS. Going to Paris
while in uniform had NOTHING TO DO WITH SWIFTBOATS. Kapeesh?
Comprendre? Comprendee?

Such an angry, angry man you are. All those caps! Chill out. Take an
extra blood pressure pill.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

Dave LaCourse wrote in
:

HE LIED UNDER OATH BEFORE CONGRESS! Throwing his medals
over the fence had NOTHING TO DO WITH SWIFTBOATS. Going to Paris
while in uniform had NOTHING TO DO WITH SWIFTBOATS. Kapeesh?
Comprendre? Comprendee?




I heard he used to hang out in German train stations ;)

I figured you need a laugh, Dave!


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Bob Weinberger wrote:
"Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
Well Bob, I'm afraid you're just gonna have to accept that I
find you less credible than John Kerry (and all the living
members of his crew).

That's about as vile a statement as you could make, knowing my evaluation of
Kerry's credibility.

Kerry was never a no show after I spent almost an hour
twiddling my thumbs and watching the fish rise just upstream
of where I was waiting next to a Minnesota trout stream, ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphis leg," and...
 

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 22:04:01 GMT, "rb608"
wrote:

wrote in message
Oooo-kay....how is that "racist?" It's a pretty well accepted term,

Accepted by you and your ilk, perhaps; but that speaks volumes in itself.
In that you've now used this "jungle" reference twice recently in clear
reference to a well educated and respected black candidate for the
Presidency cannot be interpreted as anything other than an intentional
disparagement of his race and himself personally. You knew exactly what you
were writing, you know exactly what it implies, and you know damned well
it's racist. Spare me the bull**** spin.

Yes, I knew exactly what I was writing, but you're flat wrong about the
meaning and what I meant. The term "jungle fever" has nothing to do
with the character, education, or amount of respect shown the black guy
in question, it's a comment directed solely at white folks. In fact,
there would not even need to be an actual black person involved. I have
no idea what race the person who coined the term was, but I've heard it
more from black folks than white (usually good-naturedly gigging white
folks), I've never heard a black person say they were offended by it,
and it was popularized by a black guy - Spike Lee (Ossie Davis and Ruby
Dee, not to mention Sam Jackson and Wesley Snipes, seemingly didn't take
offense, either, and if Davis and Mrs. Dee didn't have a problem with
it, that's good enough for me).

HTH,
R

Joe F.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphis leg," and...
 

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:59:47 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
I'd bet big he's still a
scheming POS who doesn't do jack **** unless it benefits him and the
Kennedy machine.
I'm not too sure there really is a "Kennedy machine", in any real sense, at
this point in time. Their time has come and gone.
Given the landscape right now this minute:

I suspect McCain/just about anyone except Obama beats
Hillary/_anyone_, including Bill about as bad as is possible, say,
57%-43%-ish, the unlikely McCain/Obama beats _anybody_ else _at least_
75%-25%, and the likely McCain/whoever vs Obama/anyone but Hillary
goes 51%-49% or closer, flip a coin but _probably_ McCain. If Obama
screws the pooch and picks (or gets saddled with) Hillary, it's McCain
by 5 or so and Obama can get tips on dealing with ****ing away national
aspirations from Lieberman. Hillary's done - it looks like Barack van
Helsing put a stake right through her undead heart about December and
Teddy knew it before he got anywhere near that stage...and I'm pretty
sure this one ain't gonna have a sequel where the monster wasn't really
dead...
I think you are saying what I was trying to here. Teddy can do the math, and
was more jumping on the safest ship rather than extracting much in the way
of future favors.
Tom
p.s. Given the numbers Dems are turning out to primary elections, and that
most polled seem to be happy with either Hillary or Obama, my handicapping
of the fall race would put any Dem in front of McCain by a good 5 percent.
Obama could use McCain's weaknesses to stretch that to 15. And remember, who
told you Hillary was in more trouble than people thought several months
ago......g?

FWIW, the numbers I've seen show Obama peeked 2-4 weeks ago at about
plus-5 on McCain, and steadily slipped to about dead even, headed back
to slightly behind him (but probably within a slim margin of error, it's
flip a coin), and unless Obama really screws the pooch or if the
Clintonistas manage to cheat and steal the nomination and Hillary is the
nominee, McCain would have to go on the Sundays, **** on the Bible and
wipe his ass with the American flag while claiming his idea of a good
time was Britney Spears with a strap-on and an eight-ball of meth to
lose to her

As to Teddy, I don't see him needing to simply jump to a safe ship, or
jump at all, really. He could just stayed neutral until after the
convention and pimped whoever he wanted to pimp IF all he was doing was
stumping for the party. My guess is that he knows that Hillary is iffy,
at best, and if he didn't his hand in Obama's cookie jar now, before he
was nominated, he knew he wouldn't get as much.

TC,
R

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

wrote in message
...
...apparently, he gets middle-aged white folks - yep, the guy-crush
types, too - all jungle-feverish, but why should anyone vote for him? I
mean this seriously and I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't vote for
him (or should), but I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

TC,
R

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

wrote in message
...
...apparently, he gets middle-aged white folks - yep, the guy-crush
types, too - all jungle-feverish, but why should anyone vote for him? I
mean this seriously and I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't vote for
him (or should), but I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

TC,
R


hell, give the porch monkey a chance.couldnt do no worse than hellary.
that stuck up bitch be worse than ****for brains we got. hell, if bama
wins I'll buy all yaul a new cane pole..................

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Dave LaCourse:
wrote questionable statements about Kerry

....Dave also seems to lose perspective on Bush, who
was a cocaine sniffing draft dodger during this period.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Dave LaCourse wrote:
You keep on going back to the Swiftboat thingy. Neither Bob nor I
have mentioned it.

Dave, this whole "Kerry could not have witnessed" argument was
one of the unsubstantiated swiftboat allegations.

Here's an idea: why don't you bust a blood vessel and get Bob
to video tape it. You could put it on U-Tube and sell Google Ads.
And we could have a martini and have a good laugh. :-)

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

"salmo bytes" wrote in message
. ..

Dave, this whole "Kerry could not have witnessed" argument was
one of the unsubstantiated swiftboat allegations.
snip

OK lets ignore the knowledge of Naval Officers who were in Viet Nam at the
same time as Kerry and who were familiar with Swift boat operations (this
include me), and lets assume that Kerry didn't lie when he testified under
oath that he had witnessed all those atrocities. As a civilian who has no
direct knowledge of the military, you are probably are unaware that if he
indeed witnessed such atrocities as he testified that he did, but failed to
take any action to try to stop them, or to even report them promptly to
higher command, he committed a prosecutable ofense under the Uniform Code of
Military Justice. Don't use the excuse that he was afraid of repercussions
from the high command if he did so. Admiral Zumwalt was known far and wide
as someone who would not tolerate illegal actions by those in his command
and had the most open door policy of any Admiral I ever encountered.

Even ignoring the UCMJ legal ramifications, what does it say about his
character if he witnessed such things and didn't try to stop them or report
them in a timely manner.

So I leave it up to you as to whether he lied under oath or is a moral
coward who violated military law. There are no other options.

I can readily believe that he was told about such atrocities by others in
the organization he was speaking for when he testified before Congress, but
I am convinced that he never actually witnessed most or likely any of them,
and thus lied when he testified that he had.

I treat the oath I swore to upon becoming a Naval Officer very seriously and
thus may take a harder stance in judging the conduct of a former fellow
officer than would someone who is more inclined to treat actions such as
outright lying under oath as justifiable if the cause is "right".

Bob Weinberger

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphis leg," and...
 

Dave LaCourse wrote:

Now, ask ME a question about laser/fiber optics - or at least
laser/fiber optics of 17 years ago when I retired. d;o)

Dave







that the supreme court majority on the main issue declared the opinion
would have no precedential value is a clue to what a clusterf**k it
really was. it was "a big bowl of wrong" all around.

and, uh, laser/fiber optics...isn't that like, uh, magic? i doubt i'll
ever have a question about either, except "damn, how did he/she do
that?" i'm just one of those guys in the stupefied section of the audience.

jeff

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:16:17 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:

I wondered why those impeachment happy GOP members in the House suddenly got
cold feet myself.....

Uhhh, House is controlled by the Dems. And all the impleachment happy
members were Dems. Why haven't the Dems impeached anyone?

Dave

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:32:52 -0700, rw
wrote:

Such an angry, angry man you are. All those caps! Chill out. Take an
extra blood pressure pill.

Touche. Well, almost. The caps were to bring attention to the words
that Ken seems unable to read.

Dave

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On 18 Feb 2008 00:54:33 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

I heard he used to hang out in German train stations ;)

I figured you need a laugh, Dave!

Who you talkin' 'bout? Ken or Kerry?

d;o)

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 23:19:11 -0700, salmo bytes wrote:

...Dave also seems to lose perspective on Bush, who
was a cocaine sniffing draft dodger during this period.

Proof please. I do believe you are confusing Clinton with Bush.
Clinton's brother about cocaine, "He has a nose like a vacuum
cleaner." And it was Clinton who dodged the draft, *twice*.

Dave

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Dave LaCourse wrote:

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:16:17 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:


I wondered why those impeachment happy GOP members in the House suddenly got
cold feet myself.....


Uhhh, House is controlled by the Dems. And all the impleachment happy
members were Dems. Why haven't the Dems impeached anyone?

Dave



because they are a kinder/gentler people? g ... and, they know it's a
colossal waste of time, money, and political capital. i still think he
oughta be waterboarded instead... g

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

"Bob Weinberger" wrote in message
OK lets ignore the knowledge of Naval Officers who were in Viet Nam at the
same time as Kerry and who were familiar with Swift boat operations (this
include me), and lets assume that Kerry didn't lie when he testified under
oath that he had witnessed all those atrocities.

I've been avoiding most of this latest round of Kerry-hate and rebuttal; but
I am a bit uninformed as to when these supposed lies took place. Are you
talking about the better-known Fulbright hearing on 4/22/71, or was there
another time he testified under oath about this stuff?

Joe F.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:02:59 -0700, salmo bytes wrote:

The guy I met in 1968 (Doug Peacock, the inspiration for Hay Duke in
the Monkey Wrench Gang) was a green beret medic, at Lang Vei
I believe. Now that I think about it, he told stories about
Khe Sahn, but never said he was there. At Lang Vei he was
....unless I (like Andy Petitte the other day) "miss-heard."

You do know that Khe Sahn was a seige, don't you? The three
battalions of III Marines were under seige for about two months or so.
Six thousand against 20,000 NVA. There was no hand to hand combat, no
atrocities of civilians because the only ones inside the wire were
wives of the SVN Army troops that fought with the Marines. No
atrocities occured at Khe Sahn. If he wasn't there, how the hell
does he know what happened? Your story is poor bull****.

Dave

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

"rb608" wrote in message
news:uUeuj.5784$zo3.4883@trndny04...

I've been avoiding most of this latest round of Kerry-hate and rebuttal;
but I am a bit uninformed as to when these supposed lies took place. Are
you talking about the better-known Fulbright hearing on 4/22/71, or was
there another time he testified under oath about this stuff?

Joe F.

Joel,

At this point in time, I don't remember which hearing it was. I just
remember watching his testimony on, I believe, CNN and staring at the tube
in disbelief upon hearing him swear to what I knew to be lies.

Bob Weinberger

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Bob Weinberger wrote:
"rb608" wrote:
... Fulbright hearing on 4/22/71,

At this point in time, I don't remember which hearing it was. I just
remember watching his testimony on, I believe, CNN and staring at the tube
in disbelief upon hearing him swear to what I knew to be lies.

CNN made its first broadcast on June 1, 1980.

--
Ken Fortenberry

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:02:59 -0700, salmo bytes wrote:

The guy I met in 1968 (Doug Peacock, the inspiration for Hay Duke in
the Monkey Wrench Gang) was a green beret medic, at Lang Vei
I believe. Now that I think about it, he told stories about
Khe Sahn, but never said he was there. At Lang Vei he was
....unless I (like Andy Petitte the other day) "miss-heard."

You do know that Khe Sahn was a seige, don't you? The three
battalions of III Marines were under seige for about two months or so.
Six thousand against 20,000 NVA. There was no hand to hand combat, no
atrocities of civilians because the only ones inside the wire were
wives of the SVN Army troops that fought with the Marines. No
atrocities occured at Khe Sahn. If he wasn't there, how the hell
does he know what happened? Your story is poor bull****.

Dave


I'm still waiting for that blood vessel video Bob. I think it's great
idea. We're talking about what happened 40 years ago. What what's his
name (Hay Duke) said about Khe Sahn wasn't what happened reports,
it had to do with his constiracy theory about why we risked those
marine lives in the first place...recreating Dien Ben Fu in an
unwinnable way. He thought the military wanted to have 6000 lives
threatened, so they'd have an excuse to ask permission for the use
of tactical nuclear weapons. The first hand stories he told we about
the places he'd actually been. Take a deep breath and get a life.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling"uphisleg," and...
 

On Feb 17, 6:41*pm, "Bob Weinberger"
wrote:
I
acknowledged *that many if not all those atrocities likely occurred. *Even
if they all did, it is immaterial to the fact that he lied when he said he
witnessed them.

Now, you say with apparent conviction that Kerry lied when he says he
witnessed atrocities, but you don't remember when he said that. You
acknowledge that atrocities occurred, but will state categorically
that Kerry is a liar for having said he saw some. From here, your
allegations are looking long on hatred but short on facts. I do
uinderstand the visceral hatred some vets have for their perceptions
of his betrayal of them; but I'm not, no could I, address that
conflict. But the "Kerry lied under oath" meme is itself a lie not
worthy of men of honor.

I asked about the Fulbright hearing because that's the only time I am
aware of where Kerry testified under oath (There may well be more, I'm
really not that deep into this whole thing). Here's a link to the
transcript.
http://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~eb...Testimony.html
Find an instance in that testimony whre John Kerry told a lie under
oath.

Joe F.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 06:42:27 -0700, salmo bytes wrote:

Take a deep breath and get a life.

Translation: "I don't know what the eff I'm talking about, Dave."

d;o)

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

rb608 wrote in
:

I asked about the Fulbright hearing because that's the only time I am
aware of where Kerry testified under oath (There may well be more, I'm
really not that deep into this whole thing). Here's a link to the
transcript.
http://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~eb...rryTestimony.h
tml Find an instance in that testimony whre John Kerry told a lie
under oath.


Joe--

I don't know why you'd sentence poor Bob to read pages and pages of Kerry
testimony. Even the current Supreme Court would call that cruel and
unusual. In fact, banning it should be an amendment to the anti-
waterboarding bill.


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg,"and...
 

rb608 wrote:
"Bob Weinberger" wrote:
I
acknowledged that many if not all those atrocities likely occurred. Even
if they all did, it is immaterial to the fact that he lied when he said he
witnessed them.

Now, you say with apparent conviction that Kerry lied when he says he
witnessed atrocities, but you don't remember when he said that. You
acknowledge that atrocities occurred, but will state categorically
that Kerry is a liar for having said he saw some. From here, your
allegations are looking long on hatred but short on facts. I do
uinderstand the visceral hatred some vets have for their perceptions
of his betrayal of them; but I'm not, no could I, address that
conflict. But the "Kerry lied under oath" meme is itself a lie not
worthy of men of honor.

I asked about the Fulbright hearing because that's the only time I am
aware of where Kerry testified under oath (There may well be more, I'm
really not that deep into this whole thing). Here's a link to the
transcript.
http://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~eb...Testimony.html
Find an instance in that testimony whre John Kerry told a lie under
oath.

You can listen to Kerry's testimony he

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/2/2...errys_historic

Not that Swiftboat Bob or Chief Louie are ever gonna let actual
facts get in the way of their anti-Kerry slanders. They saw it
with their own eyes on CNN. ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 06:42:27 -0700, salmo bytes wrote:

I'm still waiting for that blood vessel video Bob. I think it's great
idea. We're talking about what happened 40 years ago. What what's his
name (Hay Duke)

said about Khe Sahn wasn't what happened reports,

That sentence makes little sense.

it had to do with his constiracy theory about why we risked those
marine lives in the first place...recreating Dien Ben Fu in an
unwinnable way.

Well, in the first place it is Dien Bien Phu. Those 6000 Marines and
RVA troops held at bay 20,000 NVA troops who could have been doing
lots of damage elsewhere during Thet. Giap wanted another Dien Bien
Phu but did not count on the firepower three batalians of U.S. Marines
could bring forth. It was a losing proposition for Giap to begin
with. It was not an "unwinnable way". Giap got his ass kicked. It
was a brilliant tactical move to have only 3 batalians hold off two
divisions (provided you know the difference between a batalian and a
division, of course. Hint: several batalians make up a brigade and a
division is made up of several brigades.) d;o) Pretty neat trick for
three batalians to hold off two divisions, but the tactical aspect of
that is certainly lost with your jaundiced brain.

He thought the military wanted to have 6000 lives
threatened, so they'd have an excuse to ask permission for the use
of tactical nuclear weapons.

Absolutely bull****. Where did you find this guy? His first mistake
was "he thought". Lots of wannabes out there.

Dave

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphisleg," and...
 

On Feb 17, 9:48*pm, wrote:
Yes, I knew exactly what I was writing,

Yes, I knew that.

but you're flat wrong about the
meaning and what I meant. *

No. I'm not.

The term "jungle fever" has nothing to do
with the character, education, or amount of respect shown the black guy
in question, it's a comment directed solely at white folks. *

In your context, it's a racist red flag highlighting Obama's African
ancestry and trivializing the respect he deserves for his
accomplishments, and in particular, his acceptance and endorsement by
a white woman. But you knew that.


In fact,
there would not even need to be an actual black person involved. *

Well, that's just laughable.


I have
no idea what race the person who coined the term was, but I've heard it
more from black folks than white (usually good-naturedly gigging white
folks),

Yeah, I hear the n-word used when good-naturedly gigging folks too.
Why don't you just cut the obfuscation and go right to how you feel.

I've never heard a black person say they were offended by it,
and it was popularized by a black guy -

A movie was made by Spike Lee that examined the racial conflicts
inherent in the phrase. That's a big difference from popularizing of
the racist use of the phrase itself.


Spike Lee (Ossie Davis and Ruby
Dee, not to mention Sam Jackson and Wesley Snipes, seemingly didn't take
offense, either, and if Davis and Mrs. Dee didn't have a problem with
it, that's good enough for me). *

So you've spoken with them and understand their feelings as black
professionals on the derogatory use of the phrase, or are you just
assuming that their appearance as actors in a social critique are all
the insight you require?

Joe F.

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling"uphisleg," and...
 

On Feb 18, 8:55*am, Scott Seidman wrote:
I don't know why you'd sentence poor Bob to read pages and pages of Kerry
testimony. *

:-)

When this came up a while back, I looked up the Kerry testimony as
part of my usual fact-check whenever I get a "send this to everyone
you know" message. Apparently it was "common knowledge", or at least
often repeated that Kerry had lied in his testimony, so I checked. He
didn't.

Not only that, I thought it was a pretty good read and a relevant
lesson for what we're now doing in Iraq. He was spot on in most of
his analysis, and without the benefit of the 20-20 hindsight we now
enjoy almost four decades years later.

Joe F.