Jump to content

Rush letter fetches $46,000 on ebay


Texsox
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 10:28 AM)
Yet you supported the Swifties. I don't get it.

 

 

Not hard to see really, in fact it's a perfect fit. The Swifties were out to expose John Kerry for his 2 faced conduct during the election cycle. He went around lying to the United States Senate during the Winter Soldier Investigations of 1971, bringing, to steal a phrase, a bunch of phony soldiers up there to testify about atrocities that they not only did not witness but in fact did not exist at all. His actions served to smear every man and woman that served in that war and that's exactly the type of person I have no use for whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NUKE @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 09:34 AM)
Not hard to see really, in fact it's a perfect fit. The Swifties were out to expose John Kerry for his 2 faced conduct during the election cycle. He went around lying to the United States Senate during the Winter Soldier Investigations of 1971, bringing, to steal a phrase, a bunch of phony soldiers up there to testify about atrocities that they not only did not witness but in fact did not exist at all. His actions served to smear every man and woman that served in that war and that's exactly the type of person I have no use for whatsoever.

That was an aside. The swifties' crusade was about Kerry's medal of honor, and his conduct during the mission(s) related to it. And in that crusade they had nothing but B.S. to fling at him. I don't see how you can support that, but be so angry about people like myself (being without military experience) saying the war is a terrible mistake.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 03:39 PM)
That was an aside. The swifties' crusade was about Kerry's medal of honor, and his conduct during the mission(s) related to it. And in that crusade they had nothing but B.S. to fling at him. I don't see how you can support that, but be so angry about people like myself (being without military experience) saying the war is a terrible mistake.

You have it backwards, but of course, you'll see it that way. Swiftboat was about exposing John Kerry as a hypocrite that he is.

 

As far as the other comment, ok, so the war was/is a "mistake". I disagree that the war itself was a mistake, but I 100% agree that the handling of the war was and continues to be a mistake. Now - instead of crying about it, why can't we unite to solve the problem and come up with a solution besides "get out of there"?

Edited by kapkomet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 09:52 AM)
You have it backwards, but of course, you'll see it that way. Swiftboat was about exposing John Kerry as a hypocrite that he is.

I have it backwards? Look at the name - Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. That was what they called themselves. What does a swift boat have to do with Kerry's testimony or hipocrisy? Zero. It was about his conduct that won him a medal of honor for his actions on a SWIFT BOAT. Now, later on, they went on to disparage Kerry for an assortment of other Nam stuff, some of which may have actually been true. But I am afraid you are mistaken as to what that organization was, originally. And that has nothing to do with "how I see it" - its right there in their bloody name for crying out loud.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 03:55 PM)
I have it backwards? Look at the name - Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. That was what they called themselves. What does a swift boat have to do with Kerry's testimony or hipocrisy? Zero. It was about his conduct that won him a medal of honor for his actions on a SWIFT BOAT. Now, later on, they went on to disparage Kerry for an assortment of other Nam stuff, some of which may have actually been true. But I am afraid you are mistaken as to what that organization was, originally. And that has nothing to do with "how I see it" - its right there in their bloody name for crying out loud.

I don't remember the timeline being that way. But maybe you're right. All I know is that they were exposing John Kerry for basically lying about his service record, hence the name "FOR TRUTH" - which goes back to my point.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NUKE @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 10:34 AM)
Not hard to see really, in fact it's a perfect fit. The Swifties were out to expose John Kerry for his 2 faced conduct during the election cycle. He went around lying to the United States Senate during the Winter Soldier Investigations of 1971, bringing, to steal a phrase, a bunch of phony soldiers up there to testify about atrocities that they not only did not witness but in fact did not exist at all. His actions served to smear every man and woman that served in that war and that's exactly the type of person I have no use for whatsoever.

 

So it is ok to smear soldiers you don't agree with and destroy the credibility of military honors?

 

:usa :usa I guess it's ok as long as there is political capital to be made for the GOP. :usa :usa

 

Support the GOP faithful Troops!! :headbang :headbang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 10:58 AM)
So it is ok to smear soldiers you don't agree with and destroy the credibility of military honors?

 

:usa :usa I guess it's ok as long as there is political capital to be made for the GOP. :usa :usa

 

Support the GOP faithful Troops!! :headbang :headbang

Since when is exposing the truth 'smear'? Or did Kerry speak truth during the winter soldier hearings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 04:26 PM)
Since when is exposing the truth 'smear'? Or did Kerry speak truth during the winter soldier hearings?

If "truth" vets a (D), then it's "smear". If "truth" vets a ®, then it's "truth" and it's ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 10:58 AM)
So it is ok to smear soldiers you don't agree with and destroy the credibility of military honors?

 

:usa :usa I guess it's ok as long as there is political capital to be made for the GOP. :usa :usa

 

Support the GOP faithful Troops!! :headbang :headbang

 

 

So it's ok for the left to smear the military while someone on the right gets taken out of context and he's the devil? I understand your views perfectly now. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NUKE @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 11:45 AM)
So it's ok for the left to smear the military while someone on the right gets taken out of context and he's the devil? I understand your views perfectly now. Thanks.

 

Nope. I'm consistent, It is not ok. And that doesn't matter if it is a Dem or a Rep or an "entertainer" on radio. I find it especially distasteful when it is for personal gain. But I know how you like situational virtue. How you like to draw distinctions from perfect conservatives and the leftists. :cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Chet Lemon @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 11:51 AM)
My favorite part was when delegates at the GOP convention wore purple band-aids b/c Kerry deserved those more than a Purple Heart.

His whole issue of whether or not he deserved a Purple heart would have been greatly diminished if he had actually thrown his away in protest, like he pretended to do. if he had not held ontp the real thing for some reporter to see in his office, no story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 12:03 PM)
And the Winner Is... [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

bettyc — Betty Casey.

 

A great charity has over four million dollars coming its way, it would seem....

 

10/19 01:07

assuming the bid is real, a very good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 12:01 PM)
His whole issue of whether or not he deserved a Purple heart would have been greatly diminished if he had actually thrown his away in protest, like he pretended to do. if he had not held ontp the real thing for some reporter to see in his office, no story.

 

 

Exactly. The value is in what they do with the award. We all learned that the military hands these out like band aids without much fact checking. It is a shame that in the effort to smear and disgrace Kerry they caused every Purple Heart to be questioned. Only the most partisan GOPerheads will believe Kerry was the only one to fraudulently receive those awards. Only the most partisan will believe that all those other medals were earned. So how many were faked? 40%? 80%? 99% I guess we'll never know. I use to believe the military had honor and integrity and would not fake awards.

 

I believe the Swifties should have focused on his actions after serving his time. But instead some veterans felt the need to smear a fellow veteran. Ironic since the other candidate used family influence to avoid serving in Vietnam. It was one of several things I did not like about Clinton, and Bush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Harry Reid actaully has the pussiness to say he's the reason that this letter was auctioned? What a f***ing tool. I'm sorry... you did nothing but make a total ass out of yourself, Harry, and now you're like a cockroach chasing a firetruck to stay on board what ended up being a good thing, all while attempting to throw someone under the bus (IN THIS CASE) who didn't deserve it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 19, 2007 -> 01:03 PM)
Exactly. The value is in what they do with the award. We all learned that the military hands these out like band aids without much fact checking. It is a shame that in the effort to smear and disgrace Kerry they caused every Purple Heart to be questioned. Only the most partisan GOPerheads will believe Kerry was the only one to fraudulently receive those awards. Only the most partisan will believe that all those other medals were earned. So how many were faked? 40%? 80%? 99% I guess we'll never know. I use to believe the military had honor and integrity and would not fake awards.

 

I believe the Swifties should have focused on his actions after serving his time. But instead some veterans felt the need to smear a fellow veteran. Ironic since the other candidate used family influence to avoid serving in Vietnam. It was one of several things I did not like about Clinton, and Bush.

I am sure others received one that didn't quite deserve it as well. It happens. How many, I would have no idea, but more than one. But you sort of missed my point. If Kerry himself hadn't made such a showing of throwing away a medal that wasn't his, which he claimed was, then the whole flap of him deserving it or not would probably not come up. It came up because someone noticed it in his office, and remembered him making such a display of throwing it away. So a LIE came back to help bite him in the ass. A lie he didn't have to make. He could have just thrown HIS medal away if he really felt that way then, but he didn't so he lied, and got caught years later. As for focusing on his servioce, if he runs on his service, then it is a fair topic. You can't refer to your military service, and then say it is off limits for questions. Did some go overboard? SUre, elections are getting more and more partisan every year. But again, if they told the truth, why is that a smear?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 07:34 AM)
I get a good chuckle every time I hear the term "leftist". Its so absurd. I think I'll give up using the terms GOP or Republican, and go with Rightist.

 

I think 'rightist' is a legit tem. In fact, I saw it somewhere in the forum a few minutes ago. Don't ask me where, because I am too damn lazy to look for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...