This is the kind of crap that pisses me off

[grimm]

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/summer04/tra...tory?id=1863751 (http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/summer04/trackandfield/columns/story?id=1863751)




Seth Wickersham Archive


Friday, August 20, 2004


By Seth Wickersham
ESPN The Magazine

ATHENS, Greece -- No, she's not a face.


Or at least she doesn't want to be.


She doesn't want to be a symbol, either, nor the poster girl for President Bush getting four more years. On Aug. 13, Bush unleashed a new ad, featuring an Olympic swimmer, saying that "two more democracies" -- Afghanistan and Iraq -- will be competing in this year's Games thanks to efforts by his Dubyaness.



Ala'a Jassim, left, finished 52nd out of 63 sprinters in qualifying for the 100.
The lone Iraqi woman in Athens, Ala'a Jassim, doesn't want to be packaged by politicos as living proof of freedom and Americana and the wonderful ways of the West.


She has been, of course. But why?


Because of the way she answers in English -- which she knows very little of -- when asked after Friday morning's 100- meter dash prelim if she would be running and representing her country if Saddam Hussein were still in power: "I don't know."


Because of what Ahmed Al-Samarri, Iraq's Olympic Committee President, said: "Women's sports started from ground zero here because of the previous regime, which had abused many, many girls who wish to practice or join sports."


Because of how the crowd at the opening ceremonies strongly applauded the few Iraqi athletes, who proudly carried their flag.


Because the night before her 100-meter race, as she slept, 77 Iraqis were killed and another 70 wounded in Najaf, and American writers want to see how she feels about the current state of her country.


And because she says, "I hope I'm the first step for a new generation" of Iraqi women who will see her sprint and train and flex and sweat and work for her own singular, liberating, empowering goals.


Ala'a sprinted 100 meters Friday morning and finished last in her heat, passing at 12.70 seconds, good for 52nd out of the 63 who ran. She is shorter and stockier than the other racers, less muscular -- and less wealthy. She wore glasses when sprinting and let her long black hair flow in a ponytail as she ran. On her feet were used shoes because she has no sponsors. Her uniform was not a collage of Iraqi colors but instead just navy blue.


She was nervous before the race from being around the sculpted and endorsed competition. "I was a little afraid of competing with such big names."


Her face is angular and defined, and she has perfectly white teeth, which rarely are shown in smiles because American journalists keep asking her about the war, which for the record, she says, "was a very bad idea."


She is anxious to point out the mess that the mostly-American military has made of her country. She says in Arabic that sometimes she cannot train because of bombs or street fights.


Still, she is here.


She left Olympic Stadium as a last-place finisher, yet proudly wearing her white and green jumpsuit with IRAQ in bold, black letters.


Iraqis athletes are no longer subject to the brutal torture chambers they faced if they turned in a lousy showing.


These athletes have been interviewed a lot during the Games, and most are critical of the Bush Administration and are very opinionated about being propped up with a smiley face as champions for his re-election campaign.


The Iraqis want to make this clear: They're here for their country, their people and themselves. Ala'a Jassim is included, and Al-Samarrai said that she's Iraq's lone female "success" story this year.


Says Ala'a: "I represent not only all Iraqi women, but all Iraqi people."


Notice she didn't say Saddam, which she would have four years ago. (If she had been allowed to compete in the Olympics.)


Ala'a Jassim covered a lot of ground in those 100 meters. Whether she wanted to or not.


Seth Wickersham covers the Olympics for ESPN The Magazine. E-mail him at seth.wickersham@espn3.com.

[Mike AI]

Why does this piss you off Grimm? You don't want women particpating in Olympics? Arabs? Muslims?

[XXXPhoto]

Will take a stab that he's pissed off at how Dubya is using her unwillingly for political gain... Were you purposely not listing that obvious interpretation Mike or covienently overlooking it?

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by XXXPhoto@Aug 22 2004, 06:57 AM
Will take a stab that he's pissed off at how Dubya is using her unwillingly for political gain... Were you purposely not listing that obvious interpretation Mike or covienently overlooking it?
Iraq would not be particpating in the Olympics if it was not for Bush. Some of these guys would be hanging from street corners, or going through the wood chipper.

[grimm]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Aug 21 2004, 10:23 AM
Why does this piss you off Grimm? You don't want women particpating in Olympics? Arabs? Muslims?
no the use of an iraqi woman swimmer as a campaign tool. its just low. puts bush's campaign over her acheivment.

[XXXPhoto]

Originally posted by Mike AI+Aug 22 2004, 09:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mike AI @ Aug 22 2004, 09:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-XXXPhoto@Aug 22 2004, 06:57 AM
Will take a stab that he's pissed off at how Dubya is using her unwillingly for political gain... Were you purposely not listing that obvious interpretation Mike or covienently overlooking it?
Iraq would not be particpating in the Olympics if it was not for Bush. Some of these guys would be hanging from street corners, or going through the wood chipper. [/b][/quote]
Again Mike, you've not address the topic of Bush using foreign athlete in advert and avoided stating your thoughts on the matter...

[grimm]

Originally posted by Mike AI+Aug 22 2004, 09:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mike AI @ Aug 22 2004, 09:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-XXXPhoto@Aug 22 2004, 06:57 AM
Will take a stab that he's pissed off at how Dubya is using her unwillingly for political gain... Were you purposely not listing that obvious interpretation Mike or covienently overlooking it?
Iraq would not be particpating in the Olympics if it was not for Bush. Some of these guys would be hanging from street corners, or going through the wood chipper. [/b][/quote]
Iraq has participated in the olympic games before

[Rolo]

Hmmmm... I dunno what the problem is? Everyday we are bomb with messages/facts/stories from the media, and no one care, however once you throw a picture with it, then the chance that people will react multiplies... is it true, is it wrong, is it obscene - did it grab your attention?

Sometimes I´m shocked on how cold people react ex. "one million people facing hunger and disease in Sudan" - and no one lifts an eyebrow, however "iraqi woman in Bush ad" - and the spin is on... but then I remember that humans are not good at dealing with real major problems, because they are too depressing - they would rather spend their time on something, which they feel they can control - ex. Iraqi women in Bush Ads, and not hungry people in Sudan.

So lets take the Bush ad, and put it into the real world - how many people who were going to vote Kerry, would now vote on Bush? How many people who were going to vote Kerry, would now have another reason not to vote Bush? Did the ad really change anything, or did it just grab your attention?

Oliviero Toscani who made the famous "united color of benetton" ads - showed that real world events can be put in ads... some said it showed the truth, some said it was wrong, other just thought it was obscene - however it grab the attention of many, because many humans are not dumb - they can decode the message:

http://www.nakskov-gym.dk/erhverv/hold97/images/benet14.jpg http://www.nakskov-gym.dk/erhverv/hold97/images/benet13.jpg
http://www.nakskov-gym.dk/erhverv/hold97/images/benet15.jpg http://www.nakskov-gym.dk/erhverv/hold97/images/benet4.jpg

[XXXPhoto]

How is Dubya any different than the Girls Gone Wild folks alledgedly using women without permission in commercials?

[RawAlex]

The whole "Bush goes to Athens" flap on Drudge is getting funny. NBC quoted an Iraqi soccer player saying "Let Bush advertising himself some other way"... the Iraqis don't want to be part of the election campaign, I guess.

Bush is in trouble. They know it, and they are starting to get desperate for good press.

Alex

[XXXPhoto]

Alex,

Guess that mean another 'orange alert' this week or next.

[RawAlex]

I would not be surprised to see "credible threats" on places like Florida and other swing states as we get close to the election. I suspect the entire election will run under an orange alert "The terrorists want to disturb our democratic ways and take away your vote. With your vote for me, that won't happen!".

Cynical, I know.

Alex

[Rolo]

Alex, why wouldn´t terrorist do any attacks before the election???

[grimm]

Originally posted by Rolo@Aug 22 2004, 04:15 PM
Alex, why wouldn´t terrorist do any attacks before the election???
i believe alex was getting at the seemingly obvious fact that the alerts are used to obfuscate, or draw attention away from political issues that reflect negatively on the President. It is awful convenient to have your finger on the panic button to trump other items in the news.

[Rolo]

Ofcourse it is, however its also their duty to alert people if there is a threat... and I would rather have 10 falsh alerts, then missing the 1 alert, which was real.

Now, if Alex is correct, then the alerts should drop, if Kerry becomes president - on the other hand, then it would make sense for terrorists to shatter any "safe" feeling people might get from a new president in power... the question will be - how will people react, when Kerry has issued 10 falsh terrorist alerts as president? Will they say he is doing this because of credible intelligence, or so he will look "strong", or maybe he will be presented as a president who has "no control" of the situation... character killing can be slow and painful, but once Kerry sits in the oval office, then the negative spin will be on him - sometimes the job of a leader is to choose between two evils - in this case issue a alert or do nothing...

[grimm]

The effectiveness of the alert levels is nill. they are so overused that they have faded into the periphery.

[XXXPhoto]

Originally posted by grimm@Aug 23 2004, 12:06 AM
The effectiveness of the alert levels is nill. they are so overused that they have faded into the periphery.
Grimm,

Could be wrong but pretty sure the market dropped a good sized chunk when last 'targeted' alert went out... Shorting tool like that sure could be useful to help GOB network out.

[Rolo]

I agree that people are getting numb to terror alerts, because of the terror levels... in europe the terror level is high, however it has been more specific when goverments have made terror alerts - ex. letting people know that if they are at a crowded place like a trainstation, then be alert for any strange behaviour etc... the alerts have helped making people more aware of the out of place situations, and probably given the intelligence network alot of possible suspects/leads.

You are probably right about the foolish color coded terror levels (either you are at risk or you are not), however there is a real constant terror threat... so what version of the truth will you and other voters sleep better at night knowing?

1. that terrorist are working as we speak on making new deadly attacks, and goverment can do little or rather close to nothing to prevent them?
2. that goverment is in the known about terrorist attacks, and do something to prevent them?

:unsure:

[RawAlex]

Grimm, I think you hit it on the head - having your finger on the alert button allows the president total control over the news cycle. Almost without a doubt, if the alert level goes up (and there always seems to be a press conference of some sort) the lead story of the day on the evening news is the terror level.

It will be story #1 on CNN.COM
It will be story #1 with a picture on Drudge.
It will be the headline story in most newspapers tomorrow.

The news cycle is thus controlled.

I noticed that when more US troops were dying in Iraq, there seemed to be more terror alerts, those general ones without targets.

Odd how that happens.

We might see Orange for labor day, yellow right after, and then Orange starting about a week before the election.

Alex

[Meni]

when's red alert coming?

Red alert! Red alert!
It's a catastrophe
Don't worry.....Don't panic
Ain't nothin' goin' on but history, yeah
But it's alright, don't panic

And the music keeps on playin' on and on
And the music keeps on playin on and on (repeat)

On and on
On and on
And the music keeps on playing on and on ( repeat )

The way you shake, shake, shake, shake
The way you shake, shake, shake, shake
Baby

Yippie-yay-yay-yay-yo
Yippie-yay-yay-yay-yo
Yippie-yay-yay-yay-yo
Yippie-yay-yay-yay-yo

On and on
On and on
And the music keeps on playin' on and on ( repeat )

And the music keeps on playin on and on....

[spazlabz]

I want to jump in on this one, for like the first time really.
When I hear members of the GOP saying that we are safer now then we were in the past because of Bush's leadership in National Security I have to laugh. Seems like a lot of people are forgetting the span of time between the first WTC attack and the one on 9/11. Bin Laden and his boys just dont work that quickly. They take years to plan out their attacks to insure the highest probability of success. I don't believe we have avoid/averted any new attacks at all. It's lip service to try and make Bush's descisions look legit. I highly suspect that we are going to get more alerts the closer we get to election and the day before aught to be interesting.
"Very real and creditable threats concerning election day." Yeah, keep everyone afraid and you'll get another 4 years georgie.


spaz :matey:

[Meni]

THE CULTURE OF FEAR

[grimm]

Originally posted by XXXPhoto+Aug 23 2004, 12:19 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (XXXPhoto @ Aug 23 2004, 12:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-grimm@Aug 23 2004, 12:06 AM
The effectiveness of the alert levels is nill. they are so overused that they have faded into the periphery.
Grimm,

Could be wrong but pretty sure the market dropped a good sized chunk when last 'targeted' alert went out... Shorting tool like that sure could be useful to help GOB network out. [/b][/quote]
yeah but themarket has been so on tilt for the last 4 months, could be coincidental. but i agree, although i don't seehow a less stable economy would help the bush camp

[grimm]

Originally posted by Rolo@Aug 22 2004, 05:45 PM
Ofcourse it is, however its also their duty to alert people if there is a threat... and I would rather have 10 falsh alerts, then missing the 1 alert, which was real.

Now, if Alex is correct, then the alerts should drop, if Kerry becomes president - on the other hand, then it would make sense for terrorists to shatter any "safe" feeling people might get from a new president in power... the question will be - how will people react, when Kerry has issued 10 falsh terrorist alerts as president? Will they say he is doing this because of credible intelligence, or so he will look "strong", or maybe he will be presented as a president who has "no control" of the situation... character killing can be slow and painful, but once Kerry sits in the oval office, then the negative spin will be on him - sometimes the job of a leader is to choose between two evils - in this case issue a alert or do nothing...
does anyone, honestly, feel safer more or less, dependant on the color of the alert? Does anyone look over their shoulder more than usual? I think the extra police and dogs and guns are good enough.

[grimm]

Originally posted by RawAlex@Aug 23 2004, 07:15 AM
Grimm, I think you hit it on the head - having your finger on the alert button allows the president total control over the news cycle. Almost without a doubt, if the alert level goes up (and there always seems to be a press conference of some sort) the lead story of the day on the evening news is the terror level.

It will be story #1 on CNN.COM
It will be story #1 with a picture on Drudge.
It will be the headline story in most newspapers tomorrow.

The news cycle is thus controlled.

I noticed that when more US troops were dying in Iraq, there seemed to be more terror alerts, those general ones without targets.

Odd how that happens.

We might see Orange for labor day, yellow right after, and then Orange starting about a week before the election.

Alex
Agreed 100%

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by spazlabz@Aug 23 2004, 07:49 AM
I want to jump in on this one, for like the first time really.
When I hear members of the GOP saying that we are safer now then we were in the past because of Bush's leadership in National Security I have to laugh. Seems like a lot of people are forgetting the span of time between the first WTC attack and the one on 9/11. Bin Laden and his boys just dont work that quickly. They take years to plan out their attacks to insure the highest probability of success. I don't believe we have avoid/averted any new attacks at all. It's lip service to try and make Bush's descisions look legit. I highly suspect that we are going to get more alerts the closer we get to election and the day before aught to be interesting.
"Very real and creditable threats concerning election day." Yeah, keep everyone afraid and you'll get another 4 years georgie.


spaz :matey:
Actually. My family have a good friend that I have known for 10+ years that is now working for the Secret Service. He has told us that there have been numerous major incidents that have been averted since 9/11 and they are not published for fear of creating panic and economic disasters.

You can believe your "evil GOP"conspiracy theories all you want, but I beleive this person....he has always been the most non-political straight-shooting guy I've ever known.

[spazlabz]

Originally posted by sperbonzo+Aug 23 2004, 10:21 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (sperbonzo @ Aug 23 2004, 10:21 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-spazlabz@Aug 23 2004, 07:49 AM
I want to jump in on this one, for like the first time really.
When I hear members of the GOP saying that we are safer now then we were in the past because of Bush's leadership in National Security I have to laugh. Seems like a lot of people are forgetting the span of time between the first WTC attack and the one on 9/11. Bin Laden and his boys just dont work that quickly. They take years to plan out their attacks to insure the highest probability of success. I don't believe we have avoid/averted any new attacks at all. It's lip service to try and make Bush's descisions look legit. I highly suspect that we are going to get more alerts the closer we get to election and the day before aught to be interesting.
"Very real and creditable threats concerning election day." Yeah, keep everyone afraid and you'll get another 4 years georgie.


spaz :matey:
Actually. My family have a good friend that I have known for 10+ years that is now working for the Secret Service. He has told us that there have been numerous major incidents that have been averted since 9/11 and they are not published for fear of creating panic and economic disasters.

You can believe your "evil GOP"conspiracy theories all you want, but I beleive this person....he has always been the most non-political straight-shooting guy I've ever known. [/b][/quote]
Yeah, Boy-0-Boy!! them Dept of the Treasury boys some bad assed terrorism fighters. I think I shall hold on to my GOP conspiracy theory because its slightly more believeable to me then some credit card chasing, ear piece wearing wannabe FBI agents word to me.
Cheers


spaz :matey:

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by spazlabz+Aug 23 2004, 12:12 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (spazlabz @ Aug 23 2004, 12:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by sperbonzo@Aug 23 2004, 10:21 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-spazlabz@Aug 23 2004, 07:49 AM
I want to jump in on this one, for like the first time really.
When I hear members of the GOP saying that we are safer now then we were in the past because of Bush's leadership in National Security I have to laugh. Seems like a lot of people are forgetting the span of time between the first WTC attack and the one on 9/11. Bin Laden and his boys just dont work that quickly. They take years to plan out their attacks to insure the highest probability of success. I don't believe we have avoid/averted any new attacks at all. It's lip service to try and make Bush's descisions look legit. I highly suspect that we are going to get more alerts the closer we get to election and the day before aught to be interesting.
"Very real and creditable threats concerning election day." Yeah, keep everyone afraid and you'll get another 4 years georgie.


spaz :matey:
Actually. My family have a good friend that I have known for 10+ years that is now working for the Secret Service. He has told us that there have been numerous major incidents that have been averted since 9/11 and they are not published for fear of creating panic and economic disasters.

You can believe your "evil GOP"conspiracy theories all you want, but I beleive this person....he has always been the most non-political straight-shooting guy I've ever known.
Yeah, Boy-0-Boy!! them Dept of the Treasury boys some bad assed terrorism fighters. I think I shall hold on to my GOP conspiracy theory because its slightly more believeable to me then some credit card chasing, ear piece wearing wannabe FBI agents word to me.
Cheers


spaz :matey: [/b][/quote]
Beleive what you would like......and good luck with that. You would obviously have better sources of info than my friend would.

I bow to your superior access.

[spazlabz]

Originally posted by sperbonzo+Aug 23 2004, 02:58 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (sperbonzo @ Aug 23 2004, 02:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by spazlabz@Aug 23 2004, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by sperbonzo@Aug 23 2004, 10:21 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-spazlabz@Aug 23 2004, 07:49 AM
I want to jump in on this one, for like the first time really.
When I hear members of the GOP saying that we are safer now then we were in the past because of Bush's leadership in National Security I have to laugh. Seems like a lot of people are forgetting the span of time between the first WTC attack and the one on 9/11. Bin Laden and his boys just dont work that quickly. They take years to plan out their attacks to insure the highest probability of success. I don't believe we have avoid/averted any new attacks at all. It's lip service to try and make Bush's descisions look legit. I highly suspect that we are going to get more alerts the closer we get to election and the day before aught to be interesting.
"Very real and creditable threats concerning election day." Yeah, keep everyone afraid and you'll get another 4 years georgie.


spaz :matey:
Actually. My family have a good friend that I have known for 10+ years that is now working for the Secret Service. He has told us that there have been numerous major incidents that have been averted since 9/11 and they are not published for fear of creating panic and economic disasters.

You can believe your "evil GOP"conspiracy theories all you want, but I beleive this person....he has always been the most non-political straight-shooting guy I've ever known.
Yeah, Boy-0-Boy!! them Dept of the Treasury boys some bad assed terrorism fighters. I think I shall hold on to my GOP conspiracy theory because its slightly more believeable to me then some credit card chasing, ear piece wearing wannabe FBI agents word to me.
Cheers


spaz :matey:
Beleive what you would like......and good luck with that. You would obviously have better sources of info than my friend would.

I bow to your superior access. [/b][/quote]
Thank You.


spaz :matey:

[Dravyk]

Originally posted by Meni@Aug 23 2004, 01:59 PM
THE CULTURE OF FEAR
The Bush Culture of Misdirection, actually.

Have an alert, wag a dog, try to discredit Kerry's Nam record, lookie here, lookie there, nothing up the sleeves, presto ... but for God's sake don't let anything about ISSUES actually come up!!

Draw people's attention away any way they can, because the Administration cannot bear the brunt of a microscope so make sure none gets pointed in their direction.

Can't wait for the televised debates when GWB is on stage sans any of his myriad magic tricks at his disposal. Kerry will be ahead by a minimum of 8% afterwards. :)

[Rolo]

Originally posted by Dravyk@Aug 25 2004, 09:15 AM
Can't wait for the televised debates when GWB is on stage sans any of his myriad magic tricks at his disposal. Kerry will be ahead by a minimum of 8% afterwards. :)
Kerry might win the debates, but it will only because he is taller than Bush... not because Kerry has ANYTHING slightly memorable to say... :awinky:

[grimm]

Originally posted by Rolo+Aug 25 2004, 10:10 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rolo @ Aug 25 2004, 10:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Dravyk@Aug 25 2004, 09:15 AM
Can't wait for the televised debates when GWB is on stage sans any of his myriad magic tricks at his disposal. Kerry will be ahead by a minimum of 8% afterwards. :)
Kerry might win the debates, but it will only because he is taller than Bush... not because Kerry has ANYTHING slightly memorable to say... :awinky: [/b][/quote]
he has a lot to say, and is a good orator. i dont agree with some of it, but its a lot more refreshing than the same old rhetoric i hear daily from the Administration.

Bush is evidently a good debator, he will be forced to pipe down and lt others speak, i am looking forward to hearing both sides

[grimm]

Originally posted by Dravyk+Aug 25 2004, 09:15 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dravyk @ Aug 25 2004, 09:15 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Meni@Aug 23 2004, 01:59 PM
THE CULTURE OF FEAR
The Bush Culture of Misdirection, actually.

Have an alert, wag a dog, try to discredit Kerry's Nam record, lookie here, lookie there, nothing up the sleeves, presto ... but for God's sake don't let anything about ISSUES actually come up!!

Draw people's attention away any way they can, because the Administration cannot bear the brunt of a microscope so make sure none gets pointed in their direction.

Can't wait for the televised debates when GWB is on stage sans any of his myriad magic tricks at his disposal. Kerry will be ahead by a minimum of 8% afterwards. :) [/b][/quote]
thats what got me on the fence. The Bush camp doesnt seem to have anything new to say, when there is plenty to alk about. If President Bush has ideas, I want to hear them. Open Forums. a informed public might just help him

[dantheman]

of coarse we're safer, now they KNOW if they blow something up somebody will be blowing their ass up..........no matter what you think of Bush, he's a cowboy and will pull out his six shooter. He will use the military to fight back. Now on the other hand Kerry during his stint as a sen voted against every bill that would have help our military, pay raises, weapon programs everything. He's very anti military. IS that someone you want in office while there's a group of folks dieing to kill us?
NOT ME!
I'm not real happy with the last 4 years, and yes there's some folks in bushs camp that shouldn't be there, but in the big picture, we need a cowboy in office at this time in history. We're in a WAR, and it's going to last a long time. It's not the time to back step from it and I'm afraid that's what would happen with Kerry.

just the humble opinion of a old marine :salute:

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by dantheman@Aug 25 2004, 02:23 PM
of coarse we're safer, now they KNOW if they blow something up somebody will be blowing their ass up..........no matter what you think of Bush, he's a cowboy and will pull out his six shooter. He will use the military to fight back. Now on the other hand Kerry during his stint as a sen voted against every bill that would have help our military, pay raises, weapon programs everything. He's very anti military. IS that someone you want in office while there's a group of folks dieing to kill us?
NOT ME!
I'm not real happy with the last 4 years, and yes there's some folks in bushs camp that shouldn't be there, but in the big picture, we need a cowboy in office at this time in history. We're in a WAR, and it's going to last a long time. It's not the time to back step from it and I'm afraid that's what would happen with Kerry.

just the humble opinion of a old marine :salute:



:okthumb:

[XXXPhoto]

Originally posted by dantheman@Aug 25 2004, 11:23 AM
He's very anti military.
At least Kerry showed up and fought... HE can be any damn thing he fucking wants, he's EARNED it... Yeah, Bush is cowboy quick to pull his 'six shooter'... easy to do when someone else is doing the fighting and dying for you and you can make some bucks for your friends over it to boot...

Fill a military bill with pork and it most likely should be voted against... That doesn't make someone anti-military, it makes 'em anti-pork. Just more bs spinning... You think if there was bill that stated simply $X for kevlar for troops Kerry would have voted against it? Hell no... Yet that is the crock of shit commercials are claiming. Another way of saying it is stating he voted against giving Haliburton another blank check to screw over kids wanting books for school... As spun as that is, it's damn sight closer to the truth and you know it.