To Kerry's defense, even though I think what he did was wrong, the rules of engagement were completely disreguarded in the Vietnam war for the most part. I mean, entire villages were distroyed, including women and children, on orders from a supposed unknown source (I'm talking about the massacre of My Lai by troops led by Lt. William Calley).

I watch Bush attack Kerry on television as well, sure it was not as often directly, but he did do it very often. If the Democrates had gone with Dean or Gephardt they would have won probably. I wouldn't have minded if Dean had made it and won actually, he was for universal health care.

So i suppose that its ok for kerry to commit war crimes then go back home and claim that all american soldiers commited such crimes?

Like I said, what he did was wrong, but he was not the only one that did it. You act like he was the only one that shot a defenseless Vietnamese citizen and that is not true. Horrible things were done in that war and it angers me to no end, but there is nothing I can do about it now since that was a good decade or so before I was born.

And it's not a claim that American soldiers commited such crimes, it is a documented fact that not even you can disreguard.

Ah, we are making ground here. Yes he was not the only on who commited such crimes. BUT! He was the only one who ran for president. And during ALL of his political campaigns he ran off of his service in vietnam. He claimed he was a war hero (HARDLY!!!). And after commiting such crimes do you believe it was just for him to use his service in nam as the center of this campaigns?

Originally posted by John

---

And during ALL of his political campaigns he ran off of his service in vietnam.

---

And Bush kept going back to 9/11 and Terrorists. Hm. =/

Personally I would have rather had the libertarian candidate, or preferably the constitution candidate win. I would have voted for Bush, but he was gonna win in SD anyways. Bush alienated his conservative base trying to cater to the left. In my opinion, he has way too many moderate points in his polotics. Just think about how he has expanded goverment? He isn't diehard enough for me. In my opinion he was the lesser of two evils though.

About Kerry, how about that group of veterans that were against him? I've heard alot about that and thought it was true. Can you discredit the 150 people who actually served with him? But I wasn't there so I don't know for suure.

Yes, those good ol' swifities against kerry. Nobody really liked kerry. After he fraudulently won his purple hearts, he didn't ask to leave. They told him to leave. He was doing more against them then for them.

Wow, I actually agree with Zylo for once, I would have rather saw the Libertarian canidate win as well. I watched a debate between him and David Cobb, the Green Party candidate and he made some good points. There was a few things that I did not agree with (mainly universal health care), but otherwise he seemed like a much better candidate.

News Flash John: Do you honestly think that Vietnam was the only war were American soldiers shot innocent people? Sure it was the most known, and most extreme, but come on, don't be so naive. Besides, at least he actually served in the war... or did you forget that Bush's military record consisted of him going AWOL from the National Guard?

Either way, I think that it is stupid to think that just because you served in the military during a war that you automatically qualify for office. I don't like war, I will be perfectly honest. Besides, just because you demonstrated that you can fire a gun does not mean that you should be able to run a country.

Originally posted by John

---

Well a few classic exapmles.
Who complains about the war?
Who complains about the elections?
Who complains about social security?
Who complains about the debt?
Who complains alot, period?

For the most part, the answer will be liberals.
From my P.O.V. the stereotypical liberal is not very optimistic.

---

Now see you are stereotyping and you can burn in hell everytime you stereotype. I mean come on John do you think anyone is going to take you seriously in this section if your going to stereotype groups.

Elara, that is false. The sources that claimed he went AWOL came clean and revoked their statements after more documents surfaced (suprise suprise, after the election ((but lets not get into that)).

Never-the-less, you are failing to realize my point. That is a completely bull$%@# platform to run on when you were a menace in times of war and commited such crimes. Just cuz other people did it doesn't mean its right! Just cuz there are thousands of murders every year doesn't mean its ok if you go out and murder.

Doot Doot, This year democrats ran off of death, destruction and bad things that were happening. If there is bad news its good news for the Democrats. I think that is what John was saying. Thanks for agreeing Elara and really, who cares about Kerry anyways lol. Just be happy he ain't president. Lets complain when it really matter and not keep beating a dead horse!!!! JK

Well to be honest I voted for Kerry, since Nadar wasn't on the California ballot. But that is besides the point. The election is over, so just drop it already and move on!

John, all people kill in war, all people do bad things because they were ordered to. Like I said, I hate war and I think that anyone that runs for office just because they were in a war needs to be smacked. For the record that goes for Eisenhower too.