"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it."

[treedancer]

Re:

Re:

Quote Omer

The best part Tree was recitin' verbatim Soviet Propaganda under oath with others who were proven frauds. Do you really think the American GI's were worse then Genghus Khan: Tree? Do you feel real proud that ol' John's pic hangs in the VC Museum? Swift Boats was the truth as much as anything. I for one am glad that it exposed that pos enough to barely beat him. I can't think of a worse person comming that close in American History Tree.

<<Quote Omer

(only one and ya have a whole book to choose from), of an inacurate fact in the well documented book? Thanks Mr Tree! JR>>

This is what you ask me to answer, I believe it I answered it, not to your liking evidently, as evidenced by the rambling post above I’m not going to get into a another big long winded post like the last one ,but will only ask you one question to answer me seeing as I answered you’re question.

Name one person in current administration that has a Viet Nam Combat Ribbon?? (

)

 

[Plainsman]

Re:

Re:

Quote Tree: "Name one person in current administration that has a Viet Nam Combat Ribbon??"

Jim Nicholson
Secretary of Veterans Affairs

"While serving in Vietnam, he earned the Bronze Star Medal, Combat Infantryman Badge, the Meritorious Service Medal, Republic of Vietnam Cross of Gallantry and two Air Medals."


http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/nicholson-bio.html

 

[treedancer]

Re:

Re:


My goof, should have stated executive branch, of course with all the head lines he most likely will be unemployed soon enough.:%

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re:

Re:

Quote Omer

The best part Tree was recitin' verbatim Soviet Propaganda under oath with others who were proven frauds. Do you really think the American GI's were worse then Genghus Khan: Tree? Do you feel real proud that ol' John's pic hangs in the VC Museum? Swift Boats was the truth as much as anything. I for one am glad that it exposed that pos enough to barely beat him. I can't think of a worse person comming that close in American History Tree.

<<Quote Omer

(only one and ya have a whole book to choose from), of an inacurate fact in the well documented book? Thanks Mr Tree! JR>>

This is what you ask me to answer, I believe it I answered it, not to your liking evidently, as evidenced by the rambling post above I’m not going to get into a another big long winded post like the last one ,but will only ask you one question to answer me seeing as I answered you’re question.

[colour=red]I dunno that you did answer my specific question or challange. I would need to get the book, (which is at home and I'm here at the salt mine), and look up the actual part that spoke to the issues in your reply, to see if the book presented an incorrect fact, (which I still think it did not but it has been over two years back that I read it). I will concede (which I guess I did not do very clearly) that there is contraversy about many incidents which were viewed over a 30 plus year period by various eyewitness accounts. When there is a lot at stake, (like maybe the US Presidency) eyewitness accounts, (from various points of the political spectrum) can vary a great degree. I DID READ THE BOOK TREE, (which you admitted you did not), I found it VERY CREDIBLE, as have many others who actually read it, and I FEEL IT MADE A VERY IMPORTANT VERY POSITIVE DIFFERENCE IN A VERY IMPORTANT ELECTION.[/colour]

Name one person in current administration that has a Viet Nam Combat Ribbon??

[colour=green]Tree my man, I will concede that I know of zero people that served in Nam, (actual theater), in the current administration. To reasearch your question would require a definition from you as to how far down the food chain one needs to go to find people in George Bush's administration, (who is considered a part of the administration). Rummy was a previous military man, and General Powel served in Nam if I recall correctly. I find this type of "straw man" question not worth my efforts, as I don't require people to have my financial services backround, (which I cornsider, sorry consider to be fairly extensive), to make very valid points about stocks, bonds, markets. I do not know JB's or Crunch's financial backgrounds but they have both made VERY PROFOUND statements that impressed me. That is a favorite trick of the Left (and sometimes the Right), to try to push the (slogan based shallow) way of analysis. Our greatest two WAR TIME PRESIDENTS #1 ABE LINCOLN and #2 FDR, had zero military experience. So the premise of serving in Nam, (or you have no right to say anything), is nearly worthless. You are quite skilled in debate my friend. Respectfully, JR[/colour]

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re:

Re:

I think FDR was Asst. Sec of Navy......

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re:

Re:

I think FDR was Asst. Sec of Navy......

Isn't that like **** Cheney bein' Secretary O' Defence Me Bro? JR

 

[treedancer]

Re:

Re:

Quote Omer

Reader Digest Version

Tree my man, I will concede that I know of zero people that served in Nam, (actual theater), in the current administration. Rummy was a previous military man, and General Powel served in Nam if I recall correctly.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Our greatest two WAR TIME PRESIDENTS #1 ABE LINCOLN and #2 FDR, had zero military experience. So the premise of serving in Nam, (or you have no right to say anything), is nearly worthless. You are quite skilled in debate my friend. Respectfully, JR

You can rule out Powell as he is no longer in the Administration, I was referring to the executive branch .What I was getting to was the fact that it seems that most of the Executive Branch with the exception of o Rumsfield did all they could to avoid going to Nam.

Your right about Abe, and Fdr, but you can also say that about our leaders that served in the Military,that would include Ike,remember what he said about the industrial military complex??? In my paranoid mind this is worth looking into

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re:

Re:

Quote Omer

Reader Digest Version

Tree my man, I will concede that I know of zero people that served in Nam, (actual theater), in the current administration. Rummy was a previous military man, and General Powel served in Nam if I recall correctly.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Our greatest two WAR TIME PRESIDENTS #1 ABE LINCOLN and #2 FDR, had zero military experience. So the premise of serving in Nam, (or you have no right to say anything), is nearly worthless. You are quite skilled in debate my friend. Respectfully, JR

You can rule out Powell as he is no longer in the Administration, I was referring to the executive branch .What I was getting to was the fact that it seems that most of the Executive Branch with the exception of o Rumsfield did all they could to avoid going to Nam.

Your right about Abe, and Fdr, but you can also say that about our leaders that served in the Military,that would include Ike,remember what he said about the industrial military complex??? In my paranoid mind this is worth looking into

Ikes' point is definately worth keeping in mind. One of those BIG ONES! The service in Nam or not is moot, IMHO. It is just a political talking point that is nearly worthless. Would a Creep like Cunningham impress you Tree? He used to impress me untill I found out what a CROOK he was. That said: someone's background is to be given due consideration when voting, but once they are in power, I'll judge them on what they do. Thank You very much! I find it much more telling that Murtha, Hastings, Frank and Jefferson are prominant CURRENT DEMOCRATS IN CURRENT POWER, (thank you Mrs P), as it seems that Libs and Democrats hoot n howl only at Republicans but vote for corrupt or morally challanged Democrats ALL THE TIME. That seems very striking to me, (as an obviously biased viewer). Respectfully, JR

 

[Haut Medoc]

Re:

Re:

I think FDR was Asst. Sec of Navy......

Isn't that like **** Cheney bein' Secretary O' Defence Me Bro? JR

Sorry, I thought they said competant....:$

 

[treedancer]

Re:

Re:

Quote Omer


AS it seems that Libs and Democrats hoot n howl only at Republicans but vote for corrupt or morally challanged Democrats ALL THE TIME. That seems very striking to me, (as an obviously biased viewer). Respectfully, JR

Omer I’m going to give you a chance to not go in this direction, Think about it a bit before you answer, and reread your last two sentences in your post.

 

[PW2]

Re:

Re:

Hmmmmm. Back to the topic.

I would hate to be held accountable today for what my views were over 40 years ago so I can't hold her accountable for what she wrote over 40 years ago.

Neither of us have been in cold storage for that time and that was over half of our living, learning, gaining experience time.

What I find interesting is that most of the people in my generation were very, naively, liberal in our thinking when we were 21. We had all the answers.

The older we get the fewer answers we have. The more we have learned that what we KNEW then, we merely believed. . . and that a lot of it was wrong. We have become more conservative. Not the big C, just more than we were.

Now, Hillary has gone from conservative to liberal. Or is that just an opportunist act? I sure don't agree with a lot of what she has to say today.

A lot of misinformation here. Hillary may well have grown up in a Goldwater conservative household, but she was not long a Goldwater conservative. Nor was Alinsky, but then he shed being identified with any political idealogy.

She worked for Eugene McCarthy's bid for the Democratic nomination in 68.

But then she was smart enough to understand that Johnson's "Great Society" and "War on Poverty" programs, while well meaning, were fundamentally flawed (as was Alinsky aware of this)

In those days being a Republican or Democrat means something different than it does today, and you could be a Rockefeller Republican.

Hillary was then, as she is now, fundamentally a pragmatist who believes in doing what works, and not doing what doesn't work. (As does Bill, BTW)

The label thing is largely an invention of her critics, who find it easier to criticize her when they get to define what she believes in.

I don't necessarily support Hillary, but I can certainly understand where she is coming from, and I see no inconsistency in her evolution of political thought, except, as you pointed out, we all tend to get less idealistic and more realistic as we mature.

 

[Plainsman]

Re:

Re:

Quote PW: "But then she was smart enough to understand that Johnson's "Great Society" and "War on Poverty" programs, while well meaning, were fundamentally flawed (as was Alinsky aware of this)"

I would add the health care plan she proposed to this. Health care for all would be nice if everyone that benefited from it put into it. Sorry if I don't want to pay for the lazy or addicted or illegals. So in other words a tax increase for those of us that do earn a living. No thanks. For every case of the person that can't get it, there is a case of someone who brought themselves up out of the gutter or wherever they have been that does have. It's self respect and self control.

Quote PW: " In those days being a Republican or Democrat means something different than it does today, and you could be a Rockefeller Republican."

I agree with this statement.

Quote PW: " Hillary was then, as she is now, fundamentally a pragmatist who believes in doing what works, and not doing what doesn't work. (As does Bill, BTW)"

Who doesn't? I can't think of anyone that says to themselves " Wow, this will never work, let's do it" so that point is mute.


I don't like long winded replies, so excuse me if mine is short and to the point.

 

[treedancer]

Re:

Re:

Quote Plainsman

Who doesn't? I can't think of anyone that says to themselves " Wow, this will never work, let's do it" so that point is mute.


Happens in politics all the time, the house will pass a bill that they know will not get pass the Senate. They hang so much crap on it in the Senate just lets it die. They don’t want it passed and most of the Congressmen in the house don’t want it to pass, but some lobbyist put some pressure on someone and there it is lying in the dead bill slot.

 

[Plainsman]

Re:

Re:

Point taken Don.

 

[PW2]

Re:

Re:

Re: The Health Care Plan. While not to argue about the specifics of her proposal, It simply is not on the table whether we cover some, and not others. When someone collapses on the street, they are taken to a hospital somewhere, and not left to die on the street. Someone pays for that service.

That someone is the taxpayer, namely you and me.

What's at issue is how the care is distributed, and whether you need to be totally destitute in order to qualify for aid.

I don't agree with the Canadian system of a completely paid system, but economically we are at a disadvantage to countries like Canada whose large corporations don't have to spend huge amounts of money for their health care to employees and retirees.

It is a difficult, serious issue worthy of reasonable rational debate, and perhaps she over-reached, but it is an issue that needs to be resolved sooner, rather than later, Doing nothing regarding this issue is simply not realistic, in my view, nor does it make any sense.

And there are tons of examples of policies that are proposed based on idealogical principles (on both sides of the political spectrum) rather than if they will be successful

 

[RubberFrog]

Re:

Re:

I am definately farting in this one!

 

[technostingray]

Re:

Re:

Your fart would smell like lilac compared to this thread.

 

[crunch]

Re:

Re:

That's one thing I've noticed with all of my dealings with "old folk".... they seem to lose the sense of smell last .... before the lose of eyesight, before the incontinence, before being bedridden.

The really senile ones start thinking their farts are just air... must be tough getting old..

My heart goes out to both of you.

 

[ricksrster]

Re:

Re:

She cited scholars who claimed that Alinsky's small gains actually delayed attainment of bigger goals for the poor and minorities.>>Sure sounds radical to me, maybe a radical sixtys Republican.

Her another little radical 1960,s Republican gem from her thesis.
<< In the end, she judged that Alinsky's “power/conflict model is rendered inapplicable by existing social conflicts” — overriding national issues such as racial tension and segregation. Alinsky had no success in forming an effective national movement, she said, referring dismissively to “the anachronistic nature of small autonomous conflict.>>

It was the radical Republicans that got the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed. The Dems were against it including Agore's dad.

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re:

Re:

Frog, Ray, crunch, back on topic please and no farting.8)