(Original Question)Why did people lie about John Kerry? Will they do the same to John Mccain?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The National Guard didn't need to fight. Know why? They were busy protecting our sea border's from invaders. Our other military, Army, Navy, and Marines were doing a damn good job keeping the enemy in their own lands, and kicking the tar out them. John Kerry got shot, but it was a superficial wound, and I never heard of anyone out to get him, more like he was out to get the USA, with his lying testimony to the Congress! John Kerry only joined the military to achieve a better status for his political career, which is more than obvious. John McCain did his duty for the American People, for his country, and he suffered greatly. He stayed the course, no matter if the war was popular or not. Did John Kerry? Did he? Did he? I don't think so! First chance he got, he turned traitor. Did John McCain? Did he? Did he?
2007-02-23 05:14:45 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Why is thinking such a hurdle for so many of you?
The National Guard didn't need to fight???
Huh??? Men were dying in Vietnam and you tell me some didn't have to go because they were too scared to join the Marines or even the Army but you tell me these LEGAL DRAFT DODGERS were brave and didn't need to go but somehow KERRY is a bad person......WHAT A JOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-02-23 05:23:37 · update #1
Reminds me of the Repub convention in 2004- a bunch of fat f***s who never gave two minutes' service to their country wearing purple heart bandaids, thereby disrespecting every veteran who ever served and every american hero who was ever awarded the purple heart. I wanted to take a flamethrower to that rathole.
These idiots spout off about war like they have the first inkling what it's like to put one's life on the line for this country. They make me sick their talking heads make me sick and their elected leaders make me sick.
2007-02-23 06:11:21 · answer #1 · answered by Schmorgen 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Okay you listed like 10 questions(I didn't really count so don't hold it against me). But I would assume that you are talking about how the media gives John Kerry and John Mccain a free ticket. First my opinion of John McCain is that he is a sorry republican but one of the only good demcrats around. This would make John McCain one of the few good american democrats along with Leiberman. Now on the John Kerry. I hate him. Why do people even like him? During the election he made his political stance obvious in that it wasn't. He kept on switching back and forth which means that he will believe and stand for anything the polls tell him to. Recently he has been traveling all our the world insulting America, the President, and the Troops. I mean "If you work hard and go to college you can suceed, but if you don't get stuck in Iraq". He said something like that.
Anyway now to the reason of why he gets treated specialy. John McCain is a Republican, George Bush is a Republican, John Kerry is Democrat, and Hillary is a Democrat. Now why is this important? Carefully watch the different networks and how they talk about the corresponding politican. It becomes obvious that every news network has a political slant. John Kerry is let go of any talking mistakes because he is a Democrat. The is because the Democrats own a large majority of the media. Most TV news, newspapers, a lot of internet blogs, and even most of the professors in univerisities. The only media outlet that the Republicans have a monopoly on is Talk radio. So it isn't a dumb response, you are just giving the media too much credit by thinking they aren't biased. Look at other international news station and it becomes obvious that our media is as biased as Al Jazeera was before we invaded Iraq.
2007-02-23 06:14:36 · answer #2 · answered by Annonymas 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sounds like he was on something. Frankly, I'm sick and tired of people equating blind loyalty with patriotism. I believe that's referred to as "fascism", a form of totalitarian government where dissent is forcibly squashed.
And, the whole "superficial wound" nonsense- an indictment of his character because he wasn't more seriously injured, as if mortal injury equals heroism - is just a silly tactic used by those who have never seen combat. I certainly never see the same individuals questioning Bush's "military record" and patriotism; his worst injury was a paper cut.
2007-02-23 05:43:52 · answer #3 · answered by kena2mi 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This was a quote? Who said it? Trouble with most quotes is, they're used out of context. This one sounds very opinion based and doesn't rely to heavily on facts. I like facts -- verifiable facts. Most opinion based excerpts (in my humble opinion) come off sounding pretty stupid. But hey, that's just my opinion!
2007-02-23 05:23:07 · answer #4 · answered by Doc 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There is no place to start with people like that. They are incredibly stupid and always will be. And it is not a question of just being ignorant, because once presented with the facts, they still spout the same old garbage.
2007-02-23 05:25:09 · answer #5 · answered by capu 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
ummmn that answer seems quite full of reason compared to some of the total lunatic answers ive seen.
2007-02-23 05:34:21 · answer #6 · answered by sociald 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I've seen answers that make this one seem downright reasonable. Sad to say.
2007-02-23 05:29:02 · answer #7 · answered by Chredon 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
the facts in regards to John Kerry speak for themselves. No this response was not dumb.
2007-02-23 05:18:51 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
No,,seen a lot worse
2007-02-23 05:17:48 · answer #9 · answered by Sean 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No,it is not the dumbest response at all times.
2007-02-23 05:19:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋