Why/why not should your vote sway?, Reasons for voting. Options

[*CrackedRearView*]

For example, the way Kerry prances around bragging about his three purple hearts, when in reality the first was for a piece of shrapnel the size of a rose thorn...

The second one was when he got hit with rice that exploded on a Sampan.

The third was when his buttocks got knocked against the Pilot House of his boat.

And he's proud to have requested purple hearts for such minor injuries, none of which required any loss of duty time nor hospitalization.

I don't think Kerry's (or Bush's for that matter) war record should make someone vote either Democrat/Republican this year, and I don't think either candidate should make it a point to throw it out into the public as if people should vote for that reason.

Any other's you guys can think of?

[inlonelinessidie]

I don't really understand what this topic is about . . .

[*CrackedRearView*]

It's about the 2004 election, and which reasons for voting Bush/Kerry are legitimate, and which are not.

I'm sorry I'll try and make things more straightfoward from now on, if I confuse people

[highly_evolved]

For example, the way Kerry prances around bragging about his three purple hearts, when in reality the first was for a piece of shrapnel the size of a rose thorn...

The second one was when he got hit with rice that exploded on a Sampan.

The third was when his buttocks got knocked against the Pilot House of his boat.

And he's proud to have requested purple hearts for such minor injuries, none of which required any loss of duty time nor hospitalization.

I don't think Kerry's (or Bush's for that matter) war record should make someone vote either Democrat/Republican this year, and I don't think either candidate should make it a point to throw it out into the public as if people should vote for that reason.

Any other's you guys can think of?

woah hold on man. you get purple hearts if you are wounded in the war. im not sure if you know this but he saved one of his crewmans life whle he himself was injured. ANYONE WHO WAS HURT GETS AWARDED PURPLE HEARTS.you do not request to get purple hears.

you have a right to vote, and it is a privilage. THAT is why you should vote. excercise your right as a human.

o btw i trust someone more who was actually in the war and know wat its like rather than someone who went a-wall for a while year

[sikdragon]

why vote for someone who is too stupid to keep from going to war? kerry is a soldier he is not a leader. he is told what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. he follows orders to the T. Bush is harder for the puppet masters to control, he does things with or without the approval of other nations or his advisors, he is a cowboy who gets things done, he is like our founding fathers. but yeah i agree with you about the purple hearts they are awarded regardless of severity of injury. but remember kerry fought half heartedly and destroyed his awards.

[highly_evolved]

why vote for someone who is too stupid to keep from going to war? kerry is a soldier he is not a leader. he is told what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. he follows orders to the T.

yes. someone who follows orders who knwos wat war is about who knows what war is like who is experienced.

Bush is harder for the puppet masters to control, he does things with or without the approval of other nations or his advisors, he is a cowboy who gets things done, he is like our founding fathers.

i want a president who listens to other peoples adive. who does not go against the united nations. i think if he goes against the united nations there MITE b a reason that the united nations said no. i wish he could think about that first before doing anything. and you missed hte part about him killing innocent 10,000 iraqis when he knows that there is nothing in iraq.

[*CrackedRearView*]

woah hold on man. you get purple hearts if you are wounded in the war. im not sure if you know this but he saved one of his crewmans life whle he himself was injured. ANYONE WHO WAS HURT GETS AWARDED PURPLE HEARTS.you do not request to get purple hears.

Actually, you're misinformed, and absolutely wrong. You get purple hearts for serious, enemy-inflicted injuries, I repeat, enemy-inflicted injuries. He got a scratch on the arm by a piece of U.S. shrapnel.

Kerry was denied his first purple heart, and pussyfoot requested it in an attempt, probably, to gain ammunition for his future political career.

The Truth About Kerry's Purple Hearts


Kerry met with his immediate superior officer, Lt.Cmdr. Grant Hibbard, the next morning and requested a Purple Heart for his wound. Hibbard recalls that Kerry had a "minor scratch" on his arm and was holding in his hand what appeared to be a fragment of a U.S. M-79 grenade, the shrapnel that had caused the wound. "They didn't receive enemy fire," Hibbard tells Insight. Since this was an essential requirement for the award, the commander rejected Kerry's request. Hibbard does not remember that Kerry received medical attention of any kind and confirms that no one else on the mission suffered any injuries.

Shortly thereafter, Kerry was transferred to Coastal Division 11 at An Thoi. Apparently, Kerry petitioned to have his Purple Heart request reconsidered. Hibbard remembers getting correspondence from Kerry's new division, asking for his approval. In the hurried process of moving to a new command himself, Hibbard thinks he might have signed off on the award. If so, "it was to my chagrin," Hibbard remembers. Kerry's second commander, Lt.Cmdr. G.M. Elliott, says he has no recollection of such an event ever occurring.

you have a right to vote, and it is a privilage. THAT is why you should vote. excercise your right as a human.

That was random...

o btw i trust someone more who was actually in the war and know wat its like rather than someone who went a-wall for a while year

Once again, your logic is skewed.

According to the Washington Times:

"The White House yesterday released military records that it said demonstrate conclusively that President Bush completed the required drills leading to an honorable discharge from the Texas Air National Guard in 1973."

Bush was honorably discharged, and the gap between his service times is confirmed later in the article as time spent at Harvard...which was a commonplace occurance in the Guard; lapses in duty for college:

"Mr. Bush left the Guard six months early to attend Harvard business school and was honorably discharged in October 1973.
Many pilots resigned from the Guard before completing their enlistment term in those years. President Nixon was withdrawing thousands of troops from Vietnam, delivering a surplus of pilots to the active Air Force and the Air Guard."

yes. someone who follows orders who knwos wat war is about who knows what war is like who is experienced.

You think Bush wasn't experienced? He flew highly dangerous aircraft daily...

i want a president who listens to other peoples adive. who does not go against the united nations. i think if he goes against the united nations there MITE b a reason that the united nations said no. i wish he could think about that first before doing anything. and you missed hte part about him killing innocent 10,000 iraqis when he knows that there is nothing in iraq.

If I could cripple Al-Qaeda without the consent of the United Nations, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Bush gets things done, the U.N. talks about getting things done.

[highly_evolved]

you are wrong about the purple hearts btw. dont believe everything you read on the internet. kerry while injured by an enemy, saved a crewmans life.

Bush did go a-wall for a year. he was not honerably discharged for one year but as u said 6-months. (wich may be true but i do not believe the internet) yes father paid for him to be let out of flight skool early. noone knows were he was. for all i care he was on holiday. jsut like he was one month after the 9-11 attacks.

To attack a country you better as hell have good enough information to do it. Bush did not have this information thereforthe UN disagreed to help him or for that matter even let him go to war. HIS INFORMAITON WAS IN CONCLUSIVE.

o ya and about that random thing ya sry i thought that i had edited that out.

[waccoon]

woah hold on man. you get purple hearts if you are wounded in the war. im not sure if you know this but he saved one of his crewmans life whle he himself was injured. ANYONE WHO WAS HURT GETS AWARDED PURPLE HEARTS.you do not request to get purple hears.

you have a right to vote, and it is a privilage. THAT is why you should vote. excercise your right as a human.

o btw i trust someone more who was actually in the war and know wat its like rather than someone who went a-wall for a while year

i believe the correct term is AWOL, or "away without official leave"

and you're correct about the purple stars, you cannot request purple hearts. some facts need to be straightened here.

[highly_evolved]

o btw, i have never heard once kerry talk about his purple hearts.

[*Kathleen*]

Heh you've never heard him talk about his purple hearts? I have. But yeah, I don't think what they did in their past matters as much as what they'll do in the future. I mean, stop dwelling on the past and look to the future. Although, I have to admit that the past matters when it shows how reliable and honest you are. But yeah, highly_evolved, if you don't believe anything on the Internet? Where do you get your sources?

[*CrackedRearView*]

Umm, excuse me highly_evolved? Have you even clicked any of the links I've provided?

I've given you reputable sources showing Kerry's struggle to get Purple Hearts in the past. He was NOT AWARDED a Purple Heart for his first injury, because

1. It was too minor.
2. It was not ENEMY-inflicted.

I'll repeat it again next time you argue about it because I know I'm correct -- for the simple fact that I have three sources showing it, and you have your word of mouth.

1. FreeRepublic -- Kerry's Purple Hearts

2. Insight Magazine -- Kerry's Purple Hearts

3. Michael Savage -- Kerry's Purple Hearts

I doubt you'll take the time to read the articles, but the evidence of Kerry's cowardish struggle to get a Purple Heart is there.

And where is your evidence of this heroic life-saving action? Because I have a source which claims the exact opposite, and shows the viewpoint of Kerry's ex-crewmate Stephen Michael Gardner, who claims that Kerry was a coward who would not engage the enemy.

Check this page out -- it's full of Kerry's hypocrisy:

Hypocrite

Bush did go a-wall for a year. he was not honerably discharged for one year but as u said 6-months. (wich may be true but i do not believe the internet) yes father paid for him to be let out of flight skool early.

Do I have any reason at all to believe a word you're saying? You probably have no idea what you're talking about, for one.

And secondly, My Way News quotes:

"The White House says Bush attended enough training during other months in 1972 to fulfill his service commitment for that year."

And, to refute your claim that " noone knows were he was. for all i care he was on holiday. jsut like he was one month after the 9-11 attacks.", eye-witness accounts that Bush completed his training.

Oh, and a little funny note -- the Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAullife who accused the president of "being AWOL" during the Vietnam War, has never served in the military himself, and fumbled over his response to a press conference question demanding why John Kerry served only 4 months in Vietnam when the complete tour is one year.

To attack a country you better as hell have good enough information to do it. Bush did not have this information thereforthe UN disagreed to help him or for that matter even let him go to war. HIS INFORMAITON WAS IN CONCLUSIVE.

Okay, pay attention:

The link between Saddam Hussein, and the Al-Qaeda network, is definite.

1. Tony Blair claims "definite link".
2. Iraqi Al-Qaeda trained fighters.
3. TIME -- 9/11 Commission Links.
4. Washinton Times -- Al-Qaeda links.

I could go on and on...but I realize that in the past you've failed to take the time to read my sources, so why bother?

o btw, i have never heard once kerry talk about his purple hearts.

Well, you need to watch CNN.

[krazyxp]

at least kerry has had military experience. time did a whole expose on how bush's time in military training couldnt be really accounted for since no1 could find it records or remember him ;x

besides, what these politicians do, their decisions-- they're going to affect our futures. THAT is why we should vote. unless of course, you dont care what happens to you.

since we have a voice, we might as well exercise it. :D

[*CrackedRearView*]

at least kerry has had military experience.

Yeah? Kerry operated a machine gun. Bush operated a fighter plane.

[highly_evolved]

alright CrackedRearView. what you have there are magazine articles, you do not have official documents. magazine articles are part of the mass media. the mass media manipulates information. you only get awarded purple hears if you deserve it THAT IS HOW IT WORKS. im sorry but did you watch the democratic national convention? kerrys crewman specifically talked about the time that he saved a crewmans life. he operated one of the most dangerous boats possible.

I NEED TO WATCH CNN?! o ya and that is jsut about THE MOST RELIABLE NEWS SOURCE ISNT IT? well if u can find me something of kerry talking about his own purple hearts then i will believe you. but i have not heard him him ONCE talk about his own purple hearts so dont start talking about how he brags about them wen hedsnt even talk about them.

"Iraq does have weapons of mass destruction" THAT is why we went into irq. i have numerous videos of bush saything this himself "the truth will come out and the truth is that iraq does have weapons of mass destruction" again that is something bush said. then after we found out that there areno WMDs in iraq bush said that there were "programs of weapons of mass destruction" and then we find out that THERE ARE NONE. THAT is why we went into iraq, (or supposedly) your information is mass media. people will do anything to be part of the mass media so do not trust them. they do not have enoug hinformation so they are guessing that is why you are getting those articles because the people are guessing and saying wat they basically dont know.

watch "uncovered: the wholetruth about the iraq war" maybe then you will understand

[*Kathleen*]

watch "uncovered: the wholetruth about the iraq war" maybe then you will understand

And where could you see that? Isn't that from that DVD, Rock Against Bush?

[highly_evolved]

extracts are on the rock against bush dvd. but i actually own the "uncovered: the whole truth about the oraq war" dvd

[*CrackedRearView*]

watch "uncovered: the wholetruth about the iraq war" maybe then you will understand

LMAO! And a liberal-partisan documentary is more credible than non-partisan magazines and periodicles, such as TIME, The New York Times, The Washington Times, etc. All of which I've used to cite information.

Dude/dudette -- you need a serious, embracing reality check.

[highly_evolved]

it is not a liberal - partisan documentary. i did not say it was either.
and the washington times is run by a crazy man

[Alpha240]

Actually, you're misinformed, and absolutely wrong. You get purple hearts for serious, enemy-inflicted injuries, I repeat, enemy-inflicted injuries. He got a scratch on the arm by a piece of U.S. shrapnel.

If Kerry did not DESERVE his purple hearts, then why did they give it to him??? think about it man...

Bush is harder for the puppet masters to control, he does things with or without the approval of other nations or his advisors, he is a cowboy who gets things done, he is like our founding fathers

Isn't that more of a reason NOT to vote for Bush?! Why would you want a leader who doesn't take any input from his people or advisors... sounds like a dictator to me. I agree with you that Bush does whatever he wants, that's why we are in this god-forsaken war in the first place. Are there any valid reasons to be at war besides Bush's own motives? NO. And describing Bush as one of our founding fathers has no backing. If your saying that he is like one of those leaders who took over the country by driving the native americans away, then I would totally agree with you.

you are wrong about the purple hearts btw. dont believe everything you read on the internet.

I agree that you can't believe a lot of things on the internet. I am a biology major and in my class our professor was telling us how Bush's new Clear Skies policy is going to cause more pollution and increased global warming. I told this to my friend and he claimed that those facts were wrong and in fact Bush was reducing emissions and gases by 70%. And I looked it up on the internet and was surprised to find a website claiming the same story as my friend. I couldn't believe that my professor would lie to us so I looked harder and found out that my professor was right all along, Bush's Clear Skies act will implement less pollution laws then the ones already in effect! So I looked at the first website and realized it was for the White House. oh, and look who's currently president... how freakin convenient. I think I believe what I learn at a place of EDUCATION over the claims of President Bush, not the most credible man these days.

Bush is a liar and an idiot. The whole discussion about Kerry's purple heart is so trivial compared to what Bush did.


ANYONE BUT BUSH!

[highly_evolved]

sweetx305 you are smart and im glad to see thatthere is finally somone else wh does not agree with bushes doings. not that i can see how anyone would

[ComradeRed]

he is a cowboy who gets things done, he is like our founding fathers.

Only whereas cowboys and founding fathers treated government as our biggest enemy, George seems to think it should be your friend. The last cowboy-ish act in American history, The Sagebrush Rebellion in Nevada, Idaho, Utah, and other Western States. This was in the Early 80s and was supported by Ronald Reagan and his secretary of the interior, James Watt. However, it was opposed by Vice President Bush, as well as our current Bush. Osama Bin Laden gets things done without other people's approval too. Is he a cowboy or a founding father?

[*CrackedRearView*]

sweetx305 you are smart and im glad to see thatthere is finally somone else wh does not agree with bushes doings. not that i can see how anyone would

That's because you're close-minded, and too caught up listening to yourself talk to read through my credible sources. Like most of my liberal friends.

At least I have the courtesy and patience to consider the opposition's argument, rather than repeat myself like a broken record.

And sweetx305...

If Kerry did not DESERVE his purple hearts, then why did they give it to him??? think about it man...

I already posted an article about this -- but yet again, no one has the brain capacity to thumb through evidence.

Insight Magazine -- Interview: Lt. Cmdr Grant Hibbard

Since you probably won't take the time to click the link, here:

But Kerry met with his immediate superior officer, Lt.Cmdr. Grant Hibbard, the next morning and requested a Purple Heart for his wound. Hibbard recalls that Kerry had a "minor scratch" on his arm and was holding in his hand what appeared to be a fragment of a U.S. M-79 grenade, the shrapnel that had caused the wound. "They didn't receive enemy fire," Hibbard tells Insight. Since this was an essential requirement for the award, the commander rejected Kerry's request. Hibbard does not remember that Kerry received medical attention of any kind and confirms that no one else on the mission suffered any injuries.

Shortly thereafter, Kerry was transferred to Coastal Division 11 at An Thoi. Apparently, Kerry petitioned to have his Purple Heart request reconsidered. Hibbard remembers getting correspondence from Kerry's new division, asking for his approval. In the hurried process of moving to a new command himself, Hibbard thinks he might have signed off on the award. If so, "it was to my chagrin," Hibbard remembers. Kerry's second commander, Lt.Cmdr. G.M. Elliott, says he has no recollection of such an event ever occurring.

Cut, and dry.

[highly_evolved]

thats really not the point. look one of ur sources was the washington times wich is run by a crazy man. if kerry did deserve the the purple hearts then he got thiem. it dsnt matter wat he got them for. so if he deserved the the pruple then he fot the,. thats how it goes thats how it works.

[Alpha240]

I already posted an article about this -- but yet again, no one has the brain capacity to thumb through evidence.

Insight Magazine -- Interview: Lt. Cmdr Grant Hibbard

Since you probably won't take the time to click the link, here:

But Kerry met with his immediate superior officer, Lt.Cmdr. Grant Hibbard, the next morning and requested a Purple Heart for his wound. Hibbard recalls that Kerry had a "minor scratch" on his arm and was holding in his hand what appeared to be a fragment of a U.S. M-79 grenade, the shrapnel that had caused the wound. "They didn't receive enemy fire," Hibbard tells Insight. Since this was an essential requirement for the award, the commander rejected Kerry's request. Hibbard does not remember that Kerry received medical attention of any kind and confirms that no one else on the mission suffered any injuries.

Shortly thereafter, Kerry was transferred to Coastal Division 11 at An Thoi. Apparently, Kerry petitioned to have his Purple Heart request reconsidered. Hibbard remembers getting correspondence from Kerry's new division, asking for his approval. In the hurried process of moving to a new command himself, Hibbard thinks he might have signed off on the award. If so, "it was to my chagrin," Hibbard remembers. Kerry's second commander, Lt.Cmdr. G.M. Elliott, says he has no recollection of such an event ever occurring.

Cut, and dry.

your link didn't work for me, so working with the excerpt you posted all I have to say is WHO CARES. why does it matter how Kerry got his purple hearts? atleast he went to war and fought for his country. So your claiming that all 3 of Kerry's purple hearts were unwarranted. However I find it interesting how the army enforces strict rules on receiving a purple heart. Yet, Kerry managed to receive not one or two, but THREE purple hearts without any real merit??

Taken from http://www.americal.org/awards/ph.htm
"While clearly an individual decoration, the Purple Heart differs from all other decorations in that an individual is not "recommended" for the decoration; rather he or she is entitled to it upon meeting specific criteria. "

So if Kerry really did not deserve any of his purple hearts, it's not his fault that SOMEHOW he was able to surpass any or all of the necessary requirements. I think if anyone has a problem with it they should take it up with the Army for giving him those awards in the first place.

Now back to the real topic.... I don't think that a candidate's war-related past should be a huge concern when electing the president. However, i think that he should have experience at war so he knows what he is putting american soldiers through. Therefore he will be more able to make a decision if the ends justify the means. It is especially important these days when we have american soldiers overseas.

This just inspired me to make a new topic.

[*CrackedRearView*]

So if Kerry really did not deserve any of his purple hearts, it's not his fault that SOMEHOW he was able to surpass any or all of the necessary requirements. I think if anyone has a problem with it they should take it up with the Army for giving him those awards in the first place.

A scratch on the arm doesn't get you a Purple Heart.

Stubbing your toe won't get you a Purple Heart.

Your Comrade punches you in the face and you get a bloody nose, you won't get a Purple Heart.

Lt. Commander Hibbard has admitted in interviews that he should not have issued Kerry his first Purple Heart.

And when you ask "WHO CARES?" you might consider your candidate choice.

Kerry's the one WHO CARES, and makes it a point that everyone in the United States CARES about his Purple Hearts, as well.

[Mini]

Yes, John Kerry really was a puppet. He just followed orders. He even protested about the war. The fact is John Kerry couldn't see the greater good that he and his colleagues were asked to do to in the name of America's struggle against Communism. He wouldn't be fit as president as Bush would. Bush did seek advice in going to war with Iraq, I mean if Congress didn't support him, why the heck would he go to war? Bush has balls, but he isn't stupid either. Even though John Kerry served in the military means swat to me, all I want to know is that if Kerry can fit as president, can he give orders and try to make America and the world a better place?