ExiledInIllinois
-
Posts
48,268 -
Joined
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ExiledInIllinois
-
-
I see a few questions, but correct me if I'm wrong, you have limited the breath of the response, though I'll give it a try.
Yes, Kerry did indeed make honorable service a big issue at the DNC and so far there is no HARD evidence he did not serve honorably. Take all the so called testimony by those who want to destroy John Kerry. Isn't it fair to examine the accusers motives and take a critical look at this so-called damning stories?
Fact: He could have exercised any number of options if he did not want to go to Vietnam. Listen to all the "yeah, buts" -- but he did go. Honorable service.
Fact: He did indeed take what was considered a very dangerous assignment. Again, listen to all the "yeah, buts" -- but did take the job. Again, isn't that honorable service?
Fact: His OWN crew believed he was a great leader and Captain. Smart, good instincts, fearless and did his duty. Listen to all the "yeah buts" from "other" soliders who DID NOT serve on his boat and often say him only a day or two (30 years ago) -- but those who knew him best said he served honorably.
Fact: The very men on his boat recount the story of the Rassman rescue, they have never changed their story, however, there is an incredible amount of evidence that his detractors are not nearly so accurate and have demonstrated clear POLITICAL motives to smear Kerry. Again, his mates and those who were closest to Kerry's actions that day say he served honorably.
FACT: the soldiers and officers supported the crew's version of events that day AND recommended a commondation at the time have now changed their story. It's not hard to see they did it for POLITICAL reasons and they have little or no credibility. They had very little reason to lie and give Kerry kudos for bravery and recommend a medal then but have ample reason to change their story now. Again, the men who served by him then say he served honorably.
FACT: he WAS wounded. It makes no difference in the severity. You get one for a scratch and you get one for losing three limbs. Kerry didn't make the rules and he got the PH like everyone else. One of four in a boat of twelve? It's that 33%casualties on one boat? Sounds like a nice little skirmish. There is no doubt he honorably conducted himself in the first action. Oh, and he was wounded twice more. That's at least TWO more firefights. The PH and the wounds are no less honorable because they weren't severe.
FACT: the scratch is NOT indispute by those who served closest to him. Why so quick to believe his political detractors? For God sakes the guy has scrapnel in his leg and he can't say it? How is this a bad thing? Should you ask yourself why this bothers you so much? May you're the one with the issues?
FACT: there is zip, zero credible evidence that John Kerry in any way dishonorably requested special treatment that allowed him to leave the field after 4 months. It makes no difference if the tour was 12-13 months, if he had the option to leave Vietnam there is no reason why he should not take it. The only people who suggest this wasn't honorable are those who do not want him president for ideological and partisan reasons.
One point that is missed is that to call Kerry a liar is to call his crewmates liars. To call Rassman and those who served with him day after day embellishers, stooges and dishonorable soldiers. It's a question of who you believe: the men who served with him or people with a clear political agenda? If the commanders and fellow officers who recommended him conduct, gave him PHs and offered him a chance to leave Vietnam thought he was a fine soldier and served honorably then NOW say they lied why should we believe them NOW? What is THEIR motivation for changing their story (hint, hint there's a presidential election maybe?)
Do you REALLY want to debate PROBABLE facts? Seems like a pretty loaded accusation for not having evidence at the ready. There is nothing approaching "possible" when it comes to his detractors and those who did not serve on his boat yet you so easily believe them.
As for the suggestion he manuevered his way out of Vietnam to run office: there is none. If anyone wants to believe such a lie then there is no stopping his enemies but their is nothing in the record or even someone credibily familiar with his life 30 years ago to back it up. Did he want to run for office: sure he did and no matter what you want to believe that is not akin to planning a crime, it's a career choice.
Moreover, his anti-war actions are another issue altogether. If you want to discuss it separately we can but it's even more steep in political agendas and motivations.
The only agenda lies with Kerry's political enemies and those who don't want to see a Democratic president. There is still no hard evidence to say that Kerry did not serve honorably in Vietnam.
Try as you might to find a reason to hate him you have to ask yourself why you won't give a man who served the benefit of the doubt while so eager to essentially call his crewmates liars.
Well said.
It is VETERANS bickering over VETERANS that is all.
My father would see it all the time at the VA. Except during his time it was the WWII vets bitching about how they fought in the "Big War", "Real War".
Pure bullcrap!
-
I NEVER said unions were a bad idea... there is no way in HELL that I'd ever want to go back to the robber baron days of old, the 'call out the troops to fight workers' days. I am merely saying that when you demand MUCH more than you should be entitled to as an American worker and it really hurts the company you work for, then you have done a disservice to your fellow employees.
I blame them for HALF the problem... the other half is of course the greedy companies that I spoke of earlier (bad conditions, jobs overseas, etc..)
You can't change the system by re-electing the same politicians; that's why the two-party system is in itself bad for America.
I see both of the arguments here. There has been way too much blaming the unions. Yes, they are not immune to any blame, should they shoulder most of the blame? No. Why do we do it? Is it because the union guy is put more in the public spotlight, is seen everyday?
For some reason, as Americans, we have this warped sense of "attainment". We rationalize that the guy on top must have somehow worked his butt off to attain what he has, now they are entitled to coast and reap what they apparently sowed. Do we know how they attained it? No. We can't even begin to imagine what the story was. Good or bad we give them the benefit of the doubt.
Yet, somehow the guy on the bottom takes all the flak because he is appeared as being a slacker/lazy, wants something for nothing?
-
"I think I knew that BIB was a veteran."
Then why did you attack me? Do I need to post my resume to have an opinion?
as to the answers to your questions:
I was 19 at the end of the Viet Nam "Conflict".
Yes, I have worn the uniform. As an Army cavalry scout, a tank commander and as a Nuclear, Biological and Chemical warfare specialist. I've worn it on every continent of the planet, except for Antarctica. I continue to work in defense as a civilian contractor. I feel, my opinion, that I have served honorably.
Yes, I have considered the rights and wrongs and morality of the VN war. Where is this any issue with my question?
Yes, I have "put myself in Kerry's shoes" Why do you think I started the thread?
I don't appreciate you calling me a lemming because I have questions. The lemmings are the ones who don't ask any.
I like to ask questions. Does that not make me a lemming? Yes, I am voting for Kerry. All this stuff you bring to light is noted. Of course he was a man of influence, which politician isn't?
I am also a realist. There is only going to be one winner, Bush or Kerry.
I can see that you would want Bush, you are a defense contractor. You want defense contracts, it keeps you working.
You can see that I want Kerry, I am a DoD employee that doesn't want my job done by a contractor.
I guess that leaves the things open for another debate.
-
MY problem is when businesses whine and cry to the government to help bail them out. I say screw them, because if they want us to understand about their profit margins, and their outsourcing, and their wages, then they should live like the free enterprise system they love so much, and go under or file for bankruptcy. HOWEVER, the problem is that these same companies who do this to cut costs expect us to help them out when they mismanage their companies. They are trying to have their cake and eat it too. If Chrysler goes out of business, so WHAT. They'll be another company who will fill the gap in the market.
That's what I love so much about Southwest and JetBlue... they are FORCING these companies who have gotten fat off of high airline tickets to compete, and we ALL win. It's just beautiful. NOW THAT is free enterprise at work, not begging to kep a dinosaur airline operating.
I agree!
Then they blame everybody and their brother for the mismanagement. What gets me is the disproportionate amount between upper tier jobs and lower tier jobs. The working stiff hasn't made any headway, while the others have outpaced them ten fold. We are becoming a 2 class society. It is just a matter of time before it blows up in our face.
-
Like you said before... Some need food stamps... So the burden becomes the government's as the company lowers the "bottom line".
Why should taxpayers help the corporate "bottom line"?
It may be indirect, yet it is there.
-
Well good for your mom. Mine was making about 5k in 1979. We lived on foodstamps, on and off welfare, and even with that, she needed serious help from friends and family to make it.
But 20K is decent money. Granted you can't go out to eat every night, you can't go to hawaii on vacation, but it is enough to pay rent in North Carolina, put food on the table, still get basic cable to watch TV, and buy a decent car.
He was getting family medical and dental from the company, and to me this was his worst mistake. Walking away from a job and giving that up was stupidity, IMHO.
Yes he is lazy, IMHO, because he had the opportunity to go better himself, learn a higher level skill, and he needed to consider that part of his job. He was happier to come back and watch his TV and drink a few at night instead. Maybe he did a good job during his 40 hours per, but he also needed to spend an extra 5 per learning.
If he was getting full medical and dental... Then I don't know? That is pretty good to get 100% of that.
My mom was an accountant... So I guess she had skills.
Up here building engineers earn about 35 bucks an hour.
-
Disregard all the attacks. Read the original post, and the ones following that actually address it. to simplify:
FACT. A tour of Viet Nam was 12-13 months.
FACT. JK completed one third of his assigned tour.
FACT. None of the injuries resulting in a purple heart were severe enough to miss any work.
FACT. Kerry was the only guy out of four in a twelve foot boat to get wounded on his FIRST MISSION. He received a scratch on his arm. Not disputed by anyone. how he got the scratch is in dispoute. Fact is, it was a scratch. I've been hurt worse mowing the lawn. At least it needed stitches.
Probable FACT (have not been able to fully research yet) JK was likely the only Naval Officer in VN to pull the three PH thing, leaving in an upright position.
FACT. Kerry returned from VN and went into high profile anti-war mode, while making a bid for a House seat from a very democratic Mass. What timing. Would he have been in a position to run for Congress had he finished his tour?
FACT (Deny it all you want) Kerry made this honorable service (he actually uses the phrase) a big issue at the DNC. "Reporting for Duty" He continues to do so. I was listening to excerpts from one of his speeches on NPR (that bastion of right wing reporting) and the subject was the economy. Before his statement was over he managed to work in "still carrying the shrapnel in his leg from VN." Well, stevestojan...you and about a hundred thousand other people.
I'm asking if anyone can see a possible agenda here. And if not, why? There's obviously something wrong here. This is about as non-typical a tour of duty that can be imagined.
Your responses come back as "But Bush" or "If he were a Republican". I want you, to tell me...why none of what I'm pointing out matters. We're talking about John Kerry. Not GW Bush, not Max Cleland, not John McCain. Kerry.
Because God ordained him to be prez. someday. Why would he run the risk of killing him off earlier in his life. He had bigger plans for him.
-
I can just see it now... The "Sky Rage".
-
Exactly, that was my point... I was being sarcastic. People today couldn't handle it back then.
What was that... 58,000 (dead or wounded) in one day at the Somme (WWI)? 400,000 by evening's end lay dead on the battlefield at Passcendaele [sP] (WWI)?
1,000 is nothing!
-
You guys are trying. I still honestly don;t understand what the government is going to do for this guy. His unemployment is probably only going to be 1/3 of his normal pay. Would you expect the govenment to fully pay him for the rest of his life?
As far as your Bush is evil remark, that makes no sense to this specific situation. How is it Bush's fault, that this guy has been this same way for 30 years, but now it's Bush's fault.
20K is a very high salary for a janitor, and in most places in North Carolina, it would not qualify someone for food stamps. In fact 20K is double minimum wage, and is very close to the average salary of a person in this country as a whole.
You know what I think. Joe needs to go back to his company and ask for his job back at 20K. Say he is sorry and understands that over the year, he was overpaid, and tha he will work on learning some new skills by taking advantage of the free education benefit. If Joe needs more money, then he should go get a second job so he can maintain his families lifestyle, or he should make some serious cuts in lifestyle, until he is reeducated and doing a higher level skill, making more money.
He still has almost 20 years until he could even consider retiring on Social Security and he will be in for a shock there when he realizes how little the government will give him based on his salary.
I think the company should force him to sit down with a financial planner, and I think that the company did everything correct here, except maybe not pay attention over the years to how much he really was making.
You are right. The governement needs not to take care of him forever. He definitly DOES NOT need to go back to his old job. Most likely, it won't be there at all in the future.
What is the situation on his benefits?
He is still young. He needs to get off the "schnide" and leave, start new somewhere else. The problem is, he doesn't seem like that kinda guy. What's happening down there is what happened up here (the Rust belt). The problem is he doesn't even have a college degree. Where do you start?
Learn to drive a truck Joe, go over the road for a while until you get your experience. Maybe then you can settle into one place with a higher paying local job.
Start a landscaping business.
Etc... Etc...
Don't glorify 20k... It is sad... For crying out loud, my mother made 28k back in 1979...
-
I'd say lazy, because he didn't bother to look for a better job and a better position. He had no ambition to further himself, and he paid for it with his job.
Companies will PAY MORE for people that are an asset to them, believe me. They don't make money off of janitors or telephone people(non-sales) or delivery drivers, they make money off of people who help them provide their service. It's up to the person who WANTS more out of their working life to go out there and BE THAT ASSET.
Fair enough.
IMO, how you treat your support staff looks favorably on your company. More times than not, this is how you are judged.
-
I know, I know... You are hard to "pin" down on this board with all its polarizing people.
I don't see why they paint you as a "liberal". I guess that is the in vogue thing to do here.
I'd feel less sympathy for "Joe" if he were making twice as much... As it was, he seemed to be barely keeping his head above water, yet enjoying the modern pleasures in life (yet, not to extravagently I might add). Why the bitterness toward "Joe" and his family over a lousy 20k?
-
Companies don't care... their job is to watch the bottom line, and if he doesn't provide a service for a reasonable cost, then he's out. The guy making 20k is probably already drawing government food stamps, or he has a second job, and so either way he's providing somehow. These jobs aren't here for just anyone; they are for the people who either are incapable of finding a better job, OR they don't WANT to. I myself passed the minimum wage job category LONG ago, and I'm well on my way to earning a teaching certification. No one gave me this opportunity... I had to TAKE the opportunity.
That is where the problem is. The company is watching the bottom line. Grant you, that is good for them. Is it good for all? No. By your own ommission, the guy at 20k is drawing foodstamps. Now the burden shifts towards the government.
What would you rather have Joe at 40k and self-sufficient (even know he will have to work till he is dead), or, the guy at 20k drawing stamps?
Isn't the new guy "subsidizing" the company's bottom line?
-
THERE!
THAT is what does not make me a liberal, and maybe most of you will never understand that. NOBODY is 'OWED' anything if you don't work for it. The guy had his chances to set himself up and provide some kind of security for himself, and yet he chose NOT TO. No furthering education, no retirement savings, no interest in bettering himself. THAT is the prime example of someone who chose to get by on a job without looking to the future, and it bit him in the ass. That job didn't go overseas, it stayed right here... How do you think this country has survived for 228 years? Certainly not by letting everyone suck at its teats just because they don't have the ambition to do anything besides hang on at a company for over 30 years, doing nothing to work up the ladder in the company. I certainly don't want to pay for that person because they were lazy. Not me.
Was he lazy or just short-sighted? Nowhere does it appear that he was lazy. I admit he made mistakes.
We all pay in the long run for a company's choice like this.
-
They needed to cut 85k?
Joe makes 40k?
Does Joe get health benefits?
Were did the other 45k come from?
Did anybody in the company get raises?
So...
They want to cut Joe's 40k and hire somebody half as much.
His (Joe's) severence was 23k for 30 weeks he didn't work. Do they stop cleaning for 30 weeks?
Joe walks.
The company hires somebody at 20k.
Will this person get health benefits?
Now the company shells out 43k the first year Joe is gone.
This means it takes the second year for the company to realize its savings.
Does this all seem like "chump change" in the grand scheme? Is it like "throwing" the baby out with the bath water?
Can one support a family on 20k a year? Let alone purchase the company's computer products? Or is does this company only cater to the major players?
What I am getting at is all these actions seem counter productive for what the negative impact will be on Joe, his family, the government and the economy?
All for what? No savings the first year for the company, in fact 3k more in expenses. Where did that money come from and was it passed down to the customer the first year? Will the customer see a decrease in prices the second year?
Joe is taking a step backward. Who's moving forward? The guy making 20k, that can't support a family and might (most likely) have no health benefits?
-
HEY, I think that you have loonies from BOTH sides... but you could never tell on this board, because conservatives totally outnumber moderates and liberals, and of course the majority is NEVER silent here.
I think I do a great job of bringing something good here, and I know I'm totally outnumbered, but it won't stop me from defending what I believe in. That is what being an American is all about... having a voice and being able to use it, NOT being scripted or restricted or gagged like in a censored society.
And when people die for no reason, I'm going to say something. If I risk being labeled something that I am not, then I will take that chance willingly.
Outnumbered, but NEVER out.
Freedom and Unity
I am with you Bro! Not always on the same page but, with you!
-
Why should the government take care of him?
Because he is an American. A short-sighted American none the least, he is still a hardworking, dedicated employee. With all his short-comings, Joe, still needs the chance to correct the error of his saving ways.
He has been a "player" in an increasingly greater service economy.
He supported the "love of his family" even know his financial interests were short-sighted.
How would you expect the government to take care of him, other then normal unemployment?
I think this question should be:
How would you expect his employer to take care of him, other then normal unemployment or miniscule cost saving measures?
Cost saving measures. What were the differences now and the past between the top tier employees and lower tier employees? Is the question really "cost saving" or is that the "official line"?
The government response could be to see if everything is on the "up and up"... Not just and attempt to drive labor costs down, so other cost could be raised.
Why does he deserve anything other then what he got?
Because he was a loyal, honorable, hard-working employee. Sure you can bring in the cheaper labor, what will the turn-over rate be? Will the job get done as well with the cheaper labor? Will they have the same belonging that Joe had?
Is 100,000 K going to make a difference, or will the decay of morale win out?
How is this Bush's fault, as Kerry implied?
Because Bush is a cold, uncaring, bastage that would rather see "Joe" fall off the face of the planet because of his mistakes. It goes back to Bush's own insecurity. He knows he effed up in the past just like Joe did, yet he was continuely bailed out by his contacts. By bailing Joe out, he "waters down" his own accomplishments. So in other words, Bush's insecurity makes him feel superior over Joe... Let the bastard suffer!
IMO, I think this insecurity is reoccuring thoughout his policy.
Is this the "bleeding heart" response you want? I have only touched on a few. Hope I am not confusing you AD and Gavin!??
-
And the best part. It can assemble a car for .39 an hour. Of course the intial cost is in the millions...
Pretty cool non the least!
-
Jesus H. Christ on a popsicle stick.....you've GOT to be fuggin joking. How the hell does this nonsense become news???
It's a silly little plastic toy folks. It doesn't look like airliners Rosening into skyscrapers. I can not believe how pathetically hyper-sensitive people have become in this day and age. What's next? Do we need to change the emergency phone number because people will be offended by "9-1-1"??
Good grief!!
Exactly KD!
Gentle People!
-
How many of the you know who's have their house done up like think. I am betting at least 5 or 6. Can't find the hat in this picture though.
http://www.wftv.com/slideshow/news/2691965...68;p=news;w=431
Hay! Just because I sit on aluminum foil doesn't mean I have my whole house like this!
-
Or... Buffalo... Pratt and LAMBERT paints?
Pratt & Lambert opened for business back in 1849 in Buffalo, NY with a product that dried linseed oil paint. Soon afterward, the company grew and established itself as a quality paint producer. In 1908, it opened its industrial research laboratory dedicated to developing new products and ensuring quality control.
-
CNN political unit has a 274-264 advantage for Bush......presidentialelect.org has the same number.....their last update was on July 29th.
From the CNN thing....WV and AZ....dems conceding those states now.
ORG and WAS could come into play for Bush, but not likely.
OH, FLA, NV and MO lean towards Bush......
IA, WI, MN lean towards Kerry.
FLA isn't getting much notoriety yet......2 years ago, Jeb Bush won re-election by 13 points.
Democrats focusing on a higher turnout in Miami-Dade.
Kerry campaign has made few inroads south of Maryland.....Kerry starting to pull ads from Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana. Dem strategists concede they have little chance in those states.
This was interesting: "Part of Kerry's problem, aides say, has been a failure to generate support among a large segment of the African-American vote, particularly in states like Louisiana."
I guess it is for more years of dieing soldiers? Ah, but who cares, it's been only a 1000 or so?
-
-
Excellent point?
So you advocate running down people in the street? Next time someone gets in your way... Run 'em down... Hay the guy had an attitude!
Violence at the NYS RNC Convention
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
I have a friend that moved from Chicago to Seattle about 10 years ago. He was complaining how he got a "JayWalking" ticket in Seattle...
I guess they still enforce them in places?...