We didn't get attacked by a foreign party under the terms of say Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, or many other presidents but I don't think that was necessarily to their credit.

So the '98 WTC bombing was a hoax? Beirut was a hoax? TWA Flight was a hoax? Hmm, I guess we should eliminate those parts in History Books.

- GX

Col: what if you had been allowed only two choices in your career; left or right? you probably wouldn't have written this blog. There is no problem with the voters, as you can see in the responses they are an Intellegent group. Given enough choices they will make the right decisions I'm sure. We should all insist on changing the structure of the debates. If we don't we will be the subject of the giggles of the two parties as we wrangle back and fourth and nothing gets solved. We have no shortage of intellegent people, Political or otherwise, We've been robbed of our choices and we should do something about it while we still can.

Draginol, I don't think that Bush supporters are less educated, just that often they do put their personal finances before the country. And this is fine. Its just not what I think is the best choice. Also, I do believe that the least educated white people in this country will vote for Bush. The people commonly known as rednecks, or hicks, seem to be bush supporters. Also, the confederate type seem to be drawn towarads bush. And the leader of the right party is not as smart as the leader of the left. These are just my opinons, and they are based I guess on what I have seen here, and I haven't seen many rednecks, but what ever. '

Reply #52 By: sandy2 - 10/9/2004 6:16:16 PM Draginol, I don't think that Bush supporters are less educated, just that often they do put their personal finances before the country. And this is fine. Its just not what I think is the best choice. Also, I do believe that the least educated white people in this country will vote for Bush. The people commonly known as rednecks, or hicks, seem to be bush supporters. Also, the confederate type seem to be drawn towarads bush. And the leader of the right party is not as smart as the leader of the left. These are just my opinons, and they are based I guess on what I have seen here, and I haven't seen many rednecks, but what ever. '

What a pile of unmitigated pile of doo-doo! Talk about piegonholing someone.Just because someone is a "redneck" or a "hick" does NOT mean they are ignorant!And not ALL southerners are renecks or hicks. You know you'd go alot further if you QUIT trying to put people down!

Sandy: People aren't putting their finances before the country, and if you would take the time to understand the conservative position you'd know that. I could just as easily say that Kerry supporters just want to keep poor people living in the projects so they won't have to worry about them moving into their neighborhoods. That wouldn't be fair, either, but it is no different than trying to equate conservatism with greed...

Well the problem with his opinions is that they're not backed up by reality.

Let's look at what Sandy's points:

• Bush supporters often put personal finances before the country.
• The ignorant white people will vote for Bush.
• Kerry is smarter than Bush

Correct me if I'm wrong but it's Democrats who are always proposing giving out free goodies to everyone. Free health care, more unemployment benefits, Subsidized housing, etc.  So whose supporters are really more motivated by personal greed?

You see, Sandy, in the real world, if you let the people who CREATE the wealth keep more of it, they will be able to do even more with it.  The Bush tax cuts, for example, are what help funded this website. Had Gore been elected, we wouldn't have had the tax cuts that helped pay for the employees who developed JU. Not only do people benefit from that from being able to use it but it also creates jobs and new opportunities which utlimately will lead to more tax income for the country.

Most Bush supporters support Bush because they want the US to vigorously fight the war on terror. We believe, strongly, that if we don't take the fight aggressively to the terrorists that the next attack will be much more devastating (smuggled nuke for instance).  It's not because of the tax cuts.

But if you want to talk about putting yourself ahead of the country, I think it's Kerry supporters have lead in that area. There's a big difference between advocating that one should keep more of the money they earn versus advocating taking someone else's money to give to people who haven't earned it in the form of "free" services.

Second point, exit polling data makes it pretty clear that Bush supporters, on average, are more educated than Kerry supporters (all colors).  If only college educated people got to vote, Bush would win easily.  It is true that Bush does well in the South, that has to do with a culture of self-reliance and general Jacksonian values.

Lastly, I agree that Kerry is probably smarter than Bush. That's irrelevant.  Carter was probably smarter than Reagan.  LBJ was probably smarter than Eisenhower.  McCellan was probably smarter than Lincoln.  Intelligence is very interesting in a debating all. But it doesn't make someone a better leader.

 Draginol. Just so you are aware, my father served with Col. Gene, I am not his daughter. Second, I do not support the attack on anyone's character. That was my entire point. Nice presumption on your part that I am a Kerry supporter as well.

"Second, I do not support the attack on anyone's character. "

Actually, you ARE supporting an attack on someone's character. The character of a sitting President, and, I might add, and attacks phrased in the most disrespectful, insipid, low-brow ways most often.

I'm not positive the COL. is a COL at all, considering the way he conducts himself. Strikes me in the same way as any other election-year, book-peddling profiteer, honestly.

Bakerstreet. Unfortunately, sometimes questioning our leaders and potential leaders does sound like a character attack. But as an American I do support questioning all of our leaders and potential leaders. That is why I love this Blog site and the comments it generates.

In regards to the Col's qualifications, I would suggest you look him up. There is a biography listed in the back of the book that he wrote; you can read the backpage without buying the book. He is a gradute of the Army War College; his graduating class is only 2 years behind my father's. I am not fully versed in the Col.'s other qualifications, since I was young when the Col. and my father were stationed together, but I can suggest that you look those things up yourself if you convinced his is only "any other election-year, book-peddling profiteer."

Reply #58 By: A Col's Daughter (Anonymous) - 10/10/2004 8:03:57 PM Bakerstreet. Unfortunately, sometimes questioning our leaders and potential leaders does sound like a character attack. But as an American I do support questioning all of our leaders and potential leaders. That is why I love this Blog site and the comments it generates. In regards to the Col's qualifications, I would suggest you look him up. There is a biography listed in the back of the book that he wrote; you can read the backpage without buying the book. He is a gradute of the Army War College; his graduating class is only 2 years behind my father's. I am not fully versed in the Col.'s other qualifications, since I was young when the Col. and my father were stationed together, but I can suggest that you look those things up yourself if you convinced his is only "any other election-year, book-peddling profiteer."

Young lady, Im sure I don't have to tell you that the man you knew then *may not* be the man you know now. People change. His book may have absolutly nothing to do with the fact that this is an election year. But having read ALL the *Col* posts, he IS indeed a book-pedling profiteer. And in a way "bakerstreet" is right. If the *Col* really is a *Col* then he needs to act like one. From what I have seen before this is most definitly "conduct unbecoming" an officer and or a gentleman.

So the '98 WTC bombing was a hoax? Beirut was a hoax? TWA Flight was a hoax? Hmm, I guess we should eliminate those parts in History Books.

Would you at least make some acknowledgement of the point I was trying to make? I was suggesting that we didn't suffer an attack of 9/11 proportions under those examples. Just because we haven't been attacked by Alqueda since 9/11 does not necessarily mean we should credit Bush. At least not anymore than Clinton can claim credit for the lack of meteors falling on the White House during his two terms. I know that Clinton did not vow to make the White House safe from meteors but you make it sound like the U.S. has been under constant terrorist attack throughout time at least, up until the mighty George Bush put a stop to all of it....that's ridiculous. There is that chance that if Bush had done nothing that we wouldn't have been attacked again. David Koresch in Waco Texas, McVeigh in Oklahoma City, Columbine etc, we don't blame these attrocities on any particular president nor do would we credit any one if such domestic terror incidents ceased.

suspeckted

You continue to think acts of foreign nationals are okay because we can compare them to acts of domestic terrorism. Give me a frigging break.
We have not suffered a single attack in three years from both threats of foreign and domestic loonies, and that I must give him credit for.

Your using meteor as analogy shows your poor judgment in how much sercurity has been beefed up, if it was not because of him than who? If he has no effect like you imply, where are the other attacks? Come on where are more attacks? Hmm, give me one attack on US Soil that has taken place after 9/11 by either a Foreign (or Domestic to make it easier), come on just name one, simple.

Seriously attack something tangible and truthful like Bush and Kerry's weak stance on Border Control instead of pull opinions out of your...

- GX
The Anti-Demican Anti-Republicrat Libertarian

Reply to drmiler

I have been on the road and have been reading some of the replies.

First, I am trying to have people read my book to make people think about what is at risk in this election. I do not know if you have taken the time to read my book but the factual material as well as the expert opinions are clearly documented so that anyone who in truly interested in the facts can verrify the information or go further. The issues in my book are what is at stake in this election.

The political Ads and the half truths in the debates do not begin to get at what this election will mean. There are more major issues that will have to be addressed by the next president then in any time since WWII. We have security, foreign relations and economic issues that MUST be faced.

From your input I do not believe you want to look at the isues facing our country but they will need to be faced like it or not.

And, frankly, insulting people is a poor way to advertise your book, which, frankly, is the whole point, isn't it?

very true baker.....


But remember for the left....they equate ones intelligence with the amount of education they recieved....which has led them to become more arrogant and angry as a large part of the population doesnt agree with them.....they take this to mean that those who dont agree with them are uneducated, trailerpark, bible thumping idiots....it's all rather laughable as is their man ..Kerry

I am not trying to insult anyone and I am not from the left. I have been a moderate Republican for over 40 years and was a member of the Republican Committee in PA in the mid 70's. It is the GOP that has changed. Prior to 1980, the GOP was dedicated to a fiscal and economic policy that was responsible. The GOP leadership was captured by the VooDoo supply side economic supporters. Like George W. the leadership of the GOP is not looking at reality nor are they interested in adopting policies that fit with the MAJORITY but meet the desires of about 30% (conservatives). Many Republican voters are not being helped by the policies of the Republicans - Energy (oil prices), Social Security(funding), Medicare(funding), Jobs (lack of), shipping jobs out of US, increasing health care cost and loss of coverage etc.

I want to have the Republican party control returned to leaders that are intetrested in a far more centrest policy (where the majority of Americans are) and one that does not mortgage the future of our country!