posted 04-15-2003 03:32 AM            

to remain economically sound and atop the polls....

At home, the fall of Baghdad has fortified President Bush's political standing. The poll found that 73 percent of Americans approve of his job performance — up from 59 percent the week before the war — and that his approval rating among Democrats was 61 percent. The finding is reminiscent of the spike in popularity Mr. Bush's father enjoyed for the first few months after the Persian Gulf war of 1991.

posted 04-15-2003 04:41 AM            

The success in the war greatly depressed the corrupt, amoral, immoral, self-centered left wing (that is to say, the majority) of the Democrat party, so now they are hoping to stand in the way of a recovering economy. You can bet that means obstructionism big time. They might even dust off the cobwebs from the master obstructionist Tom Daschle, himself (the mouse that roared) who we haven't heard too much from lately now that the war got in the way of his plans to demonize Bush as much as possible.

But, Dasshole or no Dasshole, I think the liberal movement is in trouble. Daschle is hated by so many people at this point who see him for the obstructionist that he is, that I don't think obstructionism is going to work for them as well as it has in the past. I think, that Bush, unlike his dad, will be far more aggressive (as he has shown to be his nature) and will take advantage of his current popularity to force a budget through congress that will get a majority of the things he is asking for passed, including a substantial tax cut. And the economy will recover nicely as a result.

A significant immediate, retro-active and across-the-board tax cut is critical for economic recovery...and the libs know it. That's why they are opposing it. Just like they didn't want victory in the war, and were disappointed that more American body bags didn't come home (yes it‘s true I hate to say), they will be disappointed if the economy recovers. That's why I believe they will pull out all the stops to attempt to prevent a major Bush tax cut.

But I don't think it's going to work, and the reason for this is because, as we've seen with his political maneuvering, and sheer genius in strategic decision making abilit, GW has been a highly underestimated tactician by both his enemies at home (liberals) and enemies abroad (terrorist a-holes). He runs circles around Democrats and liberals, and entire regimes like Saddam's because people have no clue to the brilliance of this man. They underestimate him...And that's why he will succeed with the economy.

You see, it's not going to be like it was with his father. GW will aggressively use his political capital from the war to get everything he needs passed in the economic policy. The only thing stopping it from succeeding are his opponents in congress....but if implemented, it will succeed.

Now, I consider GW a big government conservative (if that may sound like a contradiction in terms) and this is where I disagree with his approach. Like you say, he needs to trim the pork out of the budget with his veto pen, but he seems comfortable with large government spending, and takes the approach of growing the economy out of debt and deficit through increasing revenue by decreasing taxes.

As a fiscal conservative, I would take the approach of heavy spending cuts as well as tax cuts. Like you, I wish he would take this approach as well. I believe that essentially, the main thing that needs to grow in the budget is military spending...(I believe the military needs to be twice the size it is now)...but all other domestic programs are essentially pork, that have nothing to do with constitutional requirements. I would slash everything....but Bush hasn't shown himself willing to do this in the past, in fact this current budget has a significant increase in spending...(btw, this would be considered a cut in the eyes of corrupt Democrats who view any decrease in the rate of the increase as a cut)...

Already the economy is in a state of recovery however…and I don’t think it’s going to be too much of a problem to stimulate it further with the renewed sense of national pride and stability Bush has brought to America. I don’t think there is the fear of terrorism as there was before this war, now that the American public has witnessed first hand the strength of this great country in action. We are taking a pro-active role in the world now, and I think that’s going to go a huge way towards economic confidence, optimism and health. People are going to start investing again like crazy…because Bush has made an investment in the future, by cleaning up the terrorist threat in the present. I predict a whole new feeling of security will overtake the American population…and that spurs investment and spending and expansion of businesses…and hence, economic growth.

posted 04-15-2003 03:39 PM            

see jr. does not have the baggage of what was at the time the largest tax increase in world history being passed on his watch...like his dad...oh yeah the read my lips thing hurt too...

all bush has to do come election time is remind the public that he tried to put forth a stimulus package and the demonrats wouldn't play ball...

he tried to get us a big tax cut and they would not play ball...

I do support bush the man and the doctrine, but from what I understand about this budget it is as chock full of pork as any under the clinton admin...

btw heard on the news the hollywood leftys are bitchin' because they feel they are being black-balled due to their stance on the war...

posted 04-15-2003 05:18 PM            

But trends are fickle things. We've seen in the past that public sentiment can change in a heart beat....Let's say Bush makes a mis-calculation with N. Korea or Syria, and a significant number of American's get killed by some nutcase unleashing a WMD. Bush's popularity could drop quicker than a hot poker grabbed from the wrong end. As I mentioned, we saw it happen with his dad....and then the public elected that Clinton bastard twice...despite his constant trail of scandals. In fact, Clinton was at his highest popularity ever during Monica-gate...That's why I'm cautious to not under-estimate the unpredictability and ignorance of a certain segment of the American public...

But barring horrendous catastrophe, I think the Democrats can pretty much give it up..and not spend any money on this one. We have a whole population that knows too much now, I think. NOBODY would have wanted Gore during 9-11. Had those attacks occurred on Gore's watch, the Taliban would still be torturing people over in Afghanistan. Ossama would have probably pulled off his next major attack by now, possibly nuclear (with blessings and funding from the Democrats). Al-Queda would not be on the run...In fact, Gore would probably be inviting prominent AL-Queda leaders, to Whitehouse coffees along with Arafat, Kim Jong Il, ...maybe Saddam & Son's for tea and crumpets...I'm sure Fidel Castro would be providing the after coffee cigars. Gore would be on his hands and knees whining…probably even pouring the coffee creamer, trying to bribe these people not to attack us again...

Let's see, I prefer Bush's approach. Let's just wipe the suckers out and give the world the message that America isn't taking any more crap. That’s a better approach to the terrorist problem.

I think the general public likes this message as well. America is strong again, and people can be proud. The public contrasts these patriotic feelings with the whining and hand wringing they see coming from the liberals in the Democrat party who have never been right about anything.

I think people can see this reality....However, like you point out, I hope this big government trend is reversed once we get a conservative majority in congress. It has seemed to me that Bush uses the same tactic with the Democratic party as Clinton did with the red Chinese. He capitulates too easily...gives them too much of what they want. I believe the reason for this is due to the fact that we really haven't had a conservative majority in Congress. I mean it's close, but there are several turn-coat Republicans. So Bush probably feels like he needs to compromise to set the “new tone“...and give into the likes of Teddy Kennedy and Hillary Clinton...He gives them the pork they seek. I suspect this would change with a conservative majority in congress...and my hope is that he will start dealing with the Democratic party the same way he dealt with Saddam.

posted 04-17-2003 04:31 PM            

I'd agree with that...

posted 05-02-2003 01:05 AM            

President takes over plane's controls

By Bill Sammon

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

SAN DIEGO — President Bush helped pilot the jet that swooped down for a dramatic landing on the USS Abraham Lincoln yesterday, marking the first time he has taken the controls of an aircraft in more than 30 years.
"I flew it," Mr. Bush said with a grin upon landing. He called the experience "really exciting. I miss flying, I can tell you that."
The president sat in the co-pilot's seat and maneuvered the Navy S-3B Viking for about five minutes during the 15-minute flight from San Diego to the aircraft carrier, which was returning to the West Coast after serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The president was not at the controls when the plane made a picture-perfect landing on the flight deck, where its tailhook snagged the last of four steel cables, bringing the aircraft to a lurching halt in fewer than 400 feet. The original plan was for the Viking to snag the third cable.
Although landing a plane on a moving aircraft carrier is considered one of the most dangerous maneuvers in aviation, the White House insisted Mr. Bush was not playing the role of daredevil.
"If it wasn't safe, the president of the United States would not be doing it," said White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer. "And I remind you it's done every day, many times a day, by Navy pilots whose mission is to fly on an aircraft carrier."
But not all such landings are successful. On April 1, a Viking skidded off the deck of the USS Constellation. The two pilots were rescued and the Navy is investigating the cause of the mishap.
The president prepared for such a scenario by undergoing water-survival training in advance of yesterday's flight, said a senior administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The training reportedly involved sitting in a cockpit simulator that is filled with water, forcing the president to hold his breath.
Mr. Bush also underwent rigorous training in the late 1960s for his stint as a jet fighter pilot in the Texas Air National Guard. He had hoped to relive that excitement yesterday by helping pilot an F-18 fighter jet, which has just two seats, for the trip to the carrier.
But the Secret Service insisted on having an agent with the president, who agreed to take the four-seat Viking instead. The seats were occupied by Mr. Bush, a Secret Service agent, the pilot, Cmdr. John "Skip" Lussier, and a naval flight officer, Lt. Ryan Phillips.
The plane flew over the Lincoln twice amid cloudy skies and buffeting winds before smoothly approaching the deck at 150 miles per hour and landing without incident. Mr. Bush waved from inside the cockpit as hundreds of sailors and Marines cheered on deck.
The president emerged in a green flight suit with his white helmet tucked under his left arm. Grinning from ear to ear, he shook hands with the ship's senior leaders before plunging into a throng of F-18 pilots, with whom he posed for pictures.
The extraordinary images, which received extensive TV coverage, triggered grumbling among some Democrats, who dismissed the landing as an expensive photo opportunity that will show up in TV ads for the president's re-election campaign.
"The president is going to an aircraft carrier far out at sea with military surroundings, while countless numbers of Americans are frightened stiff about the economy here at home," said presidential hopeful Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat.
The White House shrugged off such complaints.
"The president has never politicized national security; nor will he," a senior official told The Washington Times. "And I think it would be unfortunate if Democrats did."
It was the first time a sitting president ever landed on a moving aircraft carrier. The White House pointed out that the Lincoln was commissioned in 1989 by Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, who is now the vice president.
Mr. Cheney yesterday watched the landing on TV from his office, a source close to the vice president said.
Mr. Bush said the Viking was "much more sophisticated" than the F-102 jets he flew in the Texas Air National Guard.
Before the landing, Mr. Fleischer jokingly told reporters to watch the plane for erratic movements in order to determine whether Mr. Bush was at the controls.
"The best clue will be if you see the plane flying on a straight line, you'll know that the Navy pilot is in charge," Mr. Fleischer said. "If it does anything else, it's an open question."
Upon landing, Mr. Bush said his role was to "just steer it" in a straight line.
Mr. Bush was scheduled to depart the carrier today on the presidential Marine One helicopter, because the ship will be closer to land. The Lincoln then will stop in San Diego before continuing to its home port of Everett, Wash

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030502-68419785.htm

posted 05-02-2003 02:34 AM            

BTW/ An honest vote count would be disaster for Bushylvania.

WMD proof
the receipts:
http://www.newsmax.com/images/stories/cdc_letter.gif

-----TRUTH below-----

Real veterans & chicken hawks: http://www.talion.com/georgebush.html

posted 05-02-2003 11:15 AM            

I'd say I love Bush too...(but that sounds bad)..

posted 05-02-2003 11:24 AM            

I remember what a phony idiot that the evil bastard Clinton looked like when he put on a flight jacket to take photo ops with the military he hated....

Now, thank God we have a genuine guy in the Oval Office who's almost universally loved by the military (for good reason)....who looks at home in flight gear...who was wearing it for a reason...(just came aboard via a dangerous tailhook landing on a Navy jet)

Four More Years!!!!!!

posted 05-02-2003 11:28 AM            

and someone tell shitoga to stop reposting the same crappy liberal biased info...he's spamming !!

please stop the spam !!!

posted 05-02-2003 11:49 AM            

Bush is the man behind two of the most successful military victories in US history. Bush was a fighter pilot...Bush knows how to run a military and he's demonstrated it. He's the best friend the US military has had in the White House in a long long time. Clinton was trying his best to destroy it....

posted 05-03-2003 12:45 AM            

When did the RNC add that one to the handbook?

Oh, BTW did I interrupt your zieg heiling

or posting the same pictures and PR over and over (spamming)
for the deserter in chief?

Did truth make you throw up on your brownshirts, or what?

Continue the namecalling;
It proves to visitors the accuracy of my comments of where your heads are at!

posted 05-03-2003 01:05 AM            

one good thing about that site(s) you posted...this pic...this is the guy you would have wanted as president ?

thank God for judicial intervention...

posted 05-03-2003 01:36 AM            

Do you want smaller government?
Do you want an end to the welfare state, to government destroying our health-care system, to government at all levels taking 47% of the national income in taxes, to government intrusions into your life and your business?

Do you want smaller government?

Stop Supporting Big Government
If you do, the first step toward getting it is obvious:

You must stop supporting those who are making government bigger.
You can't go east by moving west. It's a physical impossibility.

You can't make government smaller by rewarding those who make government bigger. It's a political impossibility.

Only when you begin asking for what you really want do you have any chance of getting it.

Al Gore wants to make government bigger. He's proposed a long list of new government programs.

George W. Bush wants to make government bigger. He's proposed an equally long list of new government programs to show that he's as compassionate as Mr. Gore — as though having government spend your money somehow demonstrates compassion.

Pat Buchanan says he wants a return to constitutional government. But he's made no specific proposals to reduce government, while proposing to have government fix what he thinks is wrong with America. For one thing, he wants to tell you what kind of car you can drive.

And Ralph Nader wants to tell you whether you can drive a car at all. But that's the least of his many plans to make government much bigger.....<

I campaigned for Pat Buchannon in the primary..

Then Browne in the general.

Knowing the fix was in...I volunteered
with local Dems (to gather proof) on election day.

posted 05-03-2003 03:18 AM            

so sad...read some ayn rand...then you might see that it's really a beautiful day...

don't let it get away.....

posted 05-03-2003 01:35 PM            

Her belief that rape is acceptable behavior?
Only people who believe a woman's body belongs, not to herself, but to 'the Republican
parody' could consider rape acceptable.

An Rand is a favorite of the Aryan nation also, as I'm sure you are aware.
(Ask your buddies or your supervisor.)
Tim McVeigh (TimMcVey@AOL.com) used to quote her in AOL chat rooms. (1993-94)

I've all her books on lower shelves,
next to those ghost written for Rush & Bill Bennett.
(in case of flooding- nothing of value is lost)

William Simon's "A Time For Truth", Jack Kemp's books, the only autographed
copy of "Taking The Stand" (Ollie North's Iran Contra testimony)
my bound copies of Nixon campaign internal memoes & other
real conserative works -of value
from before
the (former) 'Republican Party' became the 'Republican Parody' of today;
are on upper shelves.

***

Passed on from another forum by a member who read this topic/
posted to me:
>This may get your PR buddies to pull their heads out
of that source of their ideas..<

http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_cr ime&Number=581880&page=&view=&sb=&o=&vc=1&t=1#Post581880
Source: Counterpunch
Published: April 22, 2003 Author: WAYNE MADSEN
For Education and Discussion Only. Not for Commercial Use.

Bush's "Christian" Blood Cult
Concerns Raised by the Vatican
by WAYNE MADSEN
George W. Bush proclaims himself a born-again Christian. However, Bush and fellow self-anointed neo-Christians like House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, John Ashcroft, and sports arena Book of Revelations carnival hawker Franklin Graham appear to wallow in a "Christian" blood lust cult when it comes to practicing the teachings of the founder of Christianity. This cultist form of Christianity, with its emphasis on death rather than life, is also worrying the leaders of mainstream Christian religions, particularly the Pope.
One only has to check out Bush's record as Governor of Texas to see his own preference for death over life. During his tenure as Governor, Bush presided over a record setting 152 executions, including the 1998 execution of fellow born-again Christian Karla Faye Tucker, a convicted murderer who later led a prison ministry. Forty of Bush's executions were carried out in 2000, the year the Bush presidential campaign was spotlighting their candidate's strong law enforcement record. The Washington Post's Richard Cohen reported in October 2000 that one of the execution chamber's "tie-down team" members, Fred Allen, had to prepare so many people for lethal injections during 2000, he quit his job in disgust.
Bush mocked Tucker's appeal for clemency. In an interview with Talk magazine, Bush imitated Tucker's appeal for him to spare her life - pursing his lips, squinting his eyes, and in a squeaky voice saying, "Please don't kill me." That went too far for former GOP presidential candidate Gary Bauer, himself an evangelical Christian. "I think it is nothing short of unbelievable that the governor of a major state running for president thought it was acceptable to mock a woman he decided to put to death," said Bauer.
A former Texas Department of Public Safety officer, a devout Roman Catholic, told this reporter that evidence to the contrary, Bush was more than happy to ignore DNA data and documented cases of prosecutorial misconduct to send innocent people to the Huntsville, Texas lethal injection chamber. He said the number of executed mentally retarded, African Americans, and those who committed capital crimes as minors was proof that Bush was insensitive and a "phony Christian." When faced with similar problems in Illinois, Governor George Ryan, a Republican, commuted the death sentences of his state's death row inmates and released others after discovering they were wrongfully convicted. Yet the Republican Party is pillorying Ryan and John Ashcroft's Justice Department continues to investigate the former Governor for political malfeasance as if Bush and Ashcroft are without sin in such matters. Hypocrisy certainly rules in the Republican Party.
Bush's blood lust has been extended across the globe. He has given the CIA authority to assassinate those deemed a threat to U.S. national interests.<
(now we know why Gore decided not to try to beat Bush again)
> Bush has virtually suspended Executive Orders 11905 (Gerald Ford), 12306 (Jimmy Carter), and 12333 (Ronald Reagan) which prohibit the assassination of foreign leaders. Bush's determination to kill Saddam Hussein, his family, and his top leaders with precision-guided missiles and tactical nuclear weapon-like Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) bombs is yet another indication of Bush's disregard for his Republican and Democratic predecessors. It now appears that in his zeal to kill Hussein, innocent civilian patrons of a Baghdad restaurant were killed by one of Bush's precision Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs). Like it or not, Saddam Hussein was recognized by over 100 nations as the leader of Iraq -- a member state of the United Nations. Hussein, like North Korea' Kim Jong Il, Syria's Bashir Assad, and Iran's Mohammed Khatami, are covered by Executive Order 12333, which the Bush mouthpieces claim is still in effect. Bush's "Christian" blood cult sees no other option than death for those who become his enemies. This doctrine is found no place in Christian theology.
Bush has not once prayed for the innocent civilians who died as a result of the U.S. attack on Iraq. He constantly "embeds" himself with the military at Goebbels-like speech fests and makes constant references to God when he refers to America's "victory" in Iraq, as if God endorses his sordid killing spree. He makes no mention of the children, women, and old men killed by America's "precision-guided" missiles and bombs and trigger-happy U.S. troops. In fact, Bush revels in indiscriminate blood letting. Since he never experienced such killing in Southeast Asia, when he was AWOL from his Texas Air National Guard unit, Bush just does not seem to understand the horror of a parent watching one's children having their heads and limbs blown off in a sudden blast of shrapnel or children witnessing their parents burning to death with their own body fat nurturing the flames.
Bush and his advisers, previously warned that Iraq's ancient artifacts and collection of historical documents and books were in danger of being looted or destroyed, instead, sat back while the Baghdad and Mosul museums and Baghdad Library were ransacked and destroyed. Cult leaders have historically attempted to destroy history in order to invent their own. The Soviets tried to obliterate Russia's Orthodox traditions, turning a number of churches into warehouses and animal barns. Cambodia's Pol Pot tried to wipe out Buddhism's famed Angkor Wat shrine in an attempt to stamp out his country's Buddhist history. In March 2001, while they were negotiating with the Bush administration on a natural gas pipeline, Afghanistan's Taliban blew up two massive 1600-year old Buddhas in Bamiyan. The Bush administration, itself run by fanatic religious cultists, barely made a fuss about the loss of the relics. It would not be the first time the cultists within the Bush administration ignored the pillaging of history's treasures.
The ransacking of Iraq's historical treasures is explainable when one considers what the blood cult Christians really think about Islam. Franklin Graham, the heir to the empire built up by his anti-Semitic father, Billy Graham, has decided being anti-Muslim is far more financially rewarding than being anti-Jewish. Billy Graham, history notes from the Nixon tapes, complained about the Jewish stranglehold on the media and Jews being responsible for pornography.
Franklin Graham continues to enjoy his father's unfettered and questionable access to the White House. But in the case of Bush, the younger Graham has a fanatic adherent. Graham has called Islam a "very evil and wicked" religion. He then announces he wants to go to Iraq. Graham obviously sees an opportunity to convert Muslims and unrepentant Eastern Christians, who owe their allegiance to Roman and Greek prelates, to his perverted form of blood cult Christianity. Graham says he is ready to send his Samaritan's Purse missionaries into Iraq to provide assistance. Muslims and mainstream Christians are wary that Graham wants to exchange food, water, and medicine for the baptism of Iraqis into his intolerant brand of Christianity. In the last Gulf War, Graham could not get away with his chicanery. The Desert Storm Commander, General Norman Schwarzkopf, stopped dead in the tracks Graham's plan to send 30,000 Arabic language Bibles to U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia. Today's Pentagon shows no such compunction to put a rein on Graham. It invited him to give a Good Friday sermon at the Pentagon to the consternation of the Defense Department's Muslim employees. To make matters worse, under Bush's "Faith Based Initiative," Graham's Samaritan's Purse stands to receive U.S. government funds for its proselytizing efforts in Iraq, something that should be an affront to every American taxpayer.
Bush's self-proclaimed adherence to Christianity (during one of the presidential debates he said Jesus Christ was his favorite "philosopher") and his constant reference to a new international structure bypassing the United Nations system and long-standing international treaties are worrying the top leadership of the Roman Catholic Church. Well-informed sources close to the Vatican report that Pope John Paul II is growing increasingly concerned about Bush's ultimate intentions. The Pope has had experience with Bush's death fetish. Bush ignored the Pope's plea to spare the life of Karla Faye Tucker. To show that he was similarly ignorant of the world's mainstream religions, Bush also rejected an appeal to spare Tucker from the World Council of Churches - an organization that represents over 350 of the world's Protestant and Orthodox Churches. It did not matter that Bush's own Methodist Church and his parents' Episcopal Church are members of the World Council.
Bush's blood lust, his repeated commitment to Christian beliefs, and his constant references to "evil doers," in the eyes of many devout Catholic leaders, bear all the hallmarks of the one warned about in the Book of Revelations - the anti-Christ. People close to the Pope claim that amid these concerns, the Pontiff wishes he was younger and in better health to confront the possibility that Bush may represent the person prophesized in Revelations. John Paul II has always believed the world was on the precipice of the final confrontation between Good and Evil as foretold in the New Testament. Before he became Pope, Karol Cardinal Wojtyla said, "We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through. I do not think that wide circles of the American society or wide circles of the Christian community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church, of the Gospel versus the anti-Gospel." The Pope, who grew up facing the evils of Hitler and Stalin, knows evil when he sees it. Although we can all endlessly argue over the Pope's effectiveness in curtailing abuses within his Church, his accomplishments external to Catholicism are impressive.
According to journalists close to the Vatican, the Pope and his closest advisers are also concerned that the ultimate acts of evil - the September 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon - were known in advance by senior Bush administration officials. By permitting the attacks to take their course, there is a perception within the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy that a coup d'etat was implemented, one that gave Bush and his leadership near-dictatorial powers to carry out their agenda.
The Pope worked tirelessly to convince leaders of nations on the UN Security Council to oppose Bush's war resolution on Iraq. Vatican sources claim they had not seen the Pope more animated and determined since he fell ill to Parkinson's Disease. In the end, the Pope did convince the leaders of Mexico, Chile, Cameroon, and Guinea to oppose the U.S. resolution. If one were to believe in the Book of Revelations, as the Pope fervently does, he can seek solace in scoring a symbolic victory against the Bush administration. Whether Bush represents a dangerous right-wing ideologue who couples his political fanaticism with a neo-Christian blood cult (as I believe) or he is either the anti-Christ or heralds one, the Pope should know he has fought the good battle and has gained the respect and admiration of many non-Catholics around the world.
Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and columnist. He wrote the introduction to Forbidden Truth .

>If true (Madsen's usually been dead on), even the Pope thinks 9/11 was an inside job.< http://whatreallyhappened.com/ http://cms.firehouse.com/content/article/article.jsp?id=9824§ionId=46

BTW
Mech-
Absence without leave for more than 30 days is desertion.
Here is what happens when one's daddy is not in congress, & grandad is not a former Senator:
>appellant was tried by a military judge sitting as a special court-martial. Appellant pleaded not guilty to a single specification of desertion but guilty to the lesser-included offense of absence without leave. Compare Art. 85 with Art. 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §885 and 886, respectively. Contrary to her pleas, she was found guilty of desertion, and the military judge sentenced her to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 5 months, forfeiture of $555.00 pay per month for 6 months, and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade.
<
PR hacks (troll team)
Easy to prove W did not desert:
find one member of the AL national guard who saw him on duty during the missing year!
$7,000.00 reward has been offerd to any AL guardsman who will swear under oath he served with the
"deserter-in-chief" during that year.
Even in KKK/'Republican Parody' ruled Alabama, no one will tell such a whopper
under oath!

posted 05-03-2003 03:11 PM            

This means that A is A, that facts are facts, that things are what they are — and that the task of man’s consciousness is to perceive reality, not to create or invent it

I'd really hate to live in your world shitoga...dark cold and cloudy......

over here....it's a beautiful day !

posted 05-03-2003 05:58 PM            

That almost sounded like origional thought.

Disparaging the patriots who served while praising the deserter/

How 'tail-gunner-Joe' of you;

At least Gore spent time in the Nam, where there were no front lines-
no unarmed crowds to shoot into;
anyone could be carrying a grenade at any time, and many were/
a President (Johnson) who authorized a Northwoods faked attack as justification for war...

funny how that fits so well again..today

Americans preventing citizens of a foriegn nation from choosing their own leaders

deja vu

posted 05-03-2003 06:05 PM            

"I don't know if you saw Bush yesterday on that aircraft carrier....they loved the guy"

WRONG. Those Sailors are REQUIRED to OBEY the Commander in Chief..period.

I doubt any of them "Love him". especially after being on a $H!+hole carrier for 10 months. Underpaid and overstressed..if you are enlisted.

Brilliant man?

BUSH = GLOBALIST TOOL.

No further comment required.

Shatoga,

I know some kids (now adults) who went AWOL from the military for better reasons than Bush and are now in Leavenworth making big rocks into little rocks.

posted 05-03-2003 08:19 PM            

It is their job you know, Mech. We have an all volunteer army, they chose to be there. They took the initiative to join to protect their country.

posted 05-03-2003 08:45 PM            

"I will support and defend the CONSTITUTION of the United States."

How about YOU Chem Captain. Are you a Chickenhawk..or do YOU honor the Constitution?