Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kerry Sucks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kerry Sucks

    All of this is such BS. Just so you know I am a moderate in terms of political allegiance. I saw this Kerry and said wow he's a Vietnam vet who served when others burned thier draft cards ohh and wow I really like what he has to say about our country and his ideas about it..what he plans to do and so on. Then I found this.

    Voting Record Sample:

    Senator John Forbes Kerry DID NOT VOTE, and their position was unknown.
    Vote to adopt of the conference report on the bill that would authorize for fiscal 2004, $401.3 billion for defense and national security spending.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.
    Vote to pass the bill that would authorize $400.5 billion in appropriations for defense, military construction and defense-related work for the Department of Energy
    Senator John Forbes Kerry did not vote, and their position was unknown.
    Vote on final passage of a bill providing funds for defense spending in Fiscal Year 2000

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Vote to allow one round of military base closures beginning in 2001

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.
    Vote to limit further debate on a motion to proceed to a bill that would require the U.S. to deploy an effective National Missile Defense system as soon as possible.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.
    Vote to adopt the joint House-Senate conference report authorizing $265.6 billion for defense activities in fiscal year 1997.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Vote on an amendment to reduce the authorization for defense spending.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Vote on an amendment to reduce funding for a national missile defense program.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.
    Vote to consider a bill to require the deployment of a national missile defense system by 2003.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Vote on an amendment to reduce 1997 defense budget authority in the bill by $8.3 billion.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Eliminate funding for Trident II submarine-launched missiles.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Cut $150 million for additional B-2 stealth bombers.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Kill the amendment to withdraw all U.S. troops from Somalia.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Kill the amendment to prohibit funding of a third Seawolf-class submarine.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.
    Postpone the 1995 military base closing round until 1997.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Cut the Ballistic Missile Defense program from $3.4 billion to $3 billion.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Cut $2,686,572,000 from the bill for production of additional B-2 stealth bombers, halting production of the B-2 fleet at 15 planes instead of the 20 planes requested by the administration.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Reduce the defense spending levels for smaller weapon projects by $8.8 billion in fiscal 1993.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted YES.
    Discontinue production of B-2 bomber.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry voted NO.
    Vote to table [kill] an amendment that would keep the US strategic arsenal roughly in line with the US-Soviet strategic arms limitation treaty of 1979 [SALT II] which had not been ratified at the time.

    Senator John Forbes Kerry intro. bill/ YES 1995-2000

    Total Scaping and cutting of funding for: inc. R&D

    F-18
    F-22
    F-16
    F-15
    B-1
    B-2
    Patriot M.S.
    Sea Wolf prgm.
    Reduction of Army (LIU) Light Infantry Units down to 1...1...1....what the hell is he thinking!

    There are a hell of alot more that I didn't post because it would take so much time to read them all. I'm a Marine and I served in Iraq and that ***hole voted to stop and cut funding for us who were there. FYI Kerry voted and introduced legisature to cut and stop funding for military pay raises over 4 times. The majority of the military which is enlisted is below the poverty level and rates food stamps and wellfare. Now voting to kill defense spending in R&D and kill certain projects is one thing but to cut military pay increases is unforgivable!!!!


    "Well I actually voted for it before I didn't vote for it."

    John Kerry on his no vote for increased funding for troops in Iraq to include body armor.

    Semper Fi

    Check it out: http://vote-smart.org Reduction of Army (LIU) Light Infantry Units down to 1

  • #2
    Give Kerry a minute.....he'll switch sides!
    Pvt. Bob Mana,
    Co. B, 3rd Maryland Vol. Infantry, 1st Brigade, 1st Division, 12th Corps, Union Army of the Potomac

    For the Union

    Comment


    • #3
      Actually, now when you think about it...

      Kerry will just say, "I voted against it, but now I vote for it."

      Dan
      Major James Holden, Georgia Badgers Militia of Rainbow Regiment, American Civil War

      "Aim small, miss small."

      Comment


      • #4
        Don't worry, even if the Liberal Establishment Media want to bury his record, there are plenty of other outlets to get his voting record out there to the public. Kerry will have to answer for his sorry voting record.

        Amazing that the Dems would nominate such an anti-military, anti-defense ideologue to be the CinC during wartime! :crazy: They are soooo out of touch.
        "Going to war is always an admission of defeat." --Jacques Chirac

        "In the case of France, you're right!" --Rush Limbaugh

        Comment


        • #5
          for Marines

          Yes, Kerry does suck - the only question is who?
          Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
          (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

          Comment


          • #6
            One thing about legislative bills, theyr'e never what they say they are, as an example Customs officer pay authorization was an add on to the anti tobacco bill.
            There are always unrelated add ons to almost every bill, some people vote for or against a bill because of these add ons, pork barrel and such.
            I'm not trying to defend Kerry, I don't like him eighther, but going by the title of a bill and not the actual content means you have no idea what is being voted for or against.

            Comment


            • #7
              I'm not one to get nvolved in politics but I don't think that The army has found any traces of WMDs.

              It would be nice to have our men back home!!

              Down with Bush!!

              (No offense to any republicans)
              Peter Williams

              "We're not lost private, we're in Normandy"-

              Lt. Richard Winters 101st 506 pir

              Comment


              • #8
                Voting records

                Voting Records reveal little about a politician because they do not reflect the real issue(s) on the board. Study carefully the workings of our legislative system and you will discover that a bills seemingly innocent title can frequently hide action inimical to its original intent. Many times a legistator will sign on to a bill in the beginning only to vote against it in the end because of so-called friendly ammendments. Bills can be gutted in a number of ways so all is not as simplistic as you would wish it to be. Senator Kerry's votes must be examined in the same light as any other Washington politician unless of course your goal is to promote disinformation. There is far too much of that stuff floating around here as it is.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: for Marines

                  Originally posted by hogdriver
                  Yes, Kerry does suck - the only question is who?
                  The answer to that question is Senator Edward Kennedy

                  Well personally I would have voted for cutting the NMD program and cap the seawolf class at 3 or 6.

                  About the B-2, I'm not sure. If maintainablity and affordability issues were addressed, and if there wasn't so much corruption within Northrop, I would have advocated for 100 B-2C's on top of the 21 B-2A's already built.

                  In retrospect had we known the F/A-22 program was going to be expensive and way behind schedule. I would have purchased more F-15E Strike Eagles and the F-15F. Both of these models would have had the new 33 percent larger wing and 30,000lbs+ jet engines that was initially offered by MD. All the previous F-15E's I would have had modified.

                  A round number of about 400 E's (392 initially requested by AF but today the force is or going to number 227) and 400 F's to replace old A's and put C's in ANG. But this is only a dream anyway...

                  Personally I think the F/A-22's should be dumped like the Army's Commanche Helicopter. Now that was a huge waste of money.

                  I would have strongly advocated, and still do today, for the purchase of upwards of 500 C-17 Globemaster III's and about 250 of a tanker vairant and give the C-5's more powerful engines and the ability to carry increased load at "serious" ranges.

                  Also bring back the cancelled M8 Buford Armored Gun System!

                  And then there are the Battleships...bring them back. 5inch spitballs don't make for effective NSFS
                  "To know the weapons the enemy has is already to beat them!"

                  http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-photo-vf213-01l.jpg

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Like Churchill said, all it takes is some special interest rider on a bill to make ANY sane person vote it down. It's absolutely mind-boggling (OK, maybe not when politicians are involved) the amount of outright BS crap that gets added to the end of something meaningful... take an education bill for example, there isn't a single politician who would vote against better education; but after attaching rider after rider to it, the education part of it is nothing compared the attached pork and when people vote against the rediculous pork, they become 'anti-eduction' when the education part had nothing to do with why they voted no. The parties will even go so far as to add some far-out stupid, rediculous excuse for words-on-paper to a 'good' bill knowing the other side would never, ever, ever vote for it just so they can label those who say 'nay' as anti-whatever the bill was originally for.

                    Just remember, these guys are representing you and your best interests...

                    If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Re: for Marines

                      Originally posted by hellodoggie
                      The answer to that question is Senator Edward Kennedy

                      Well personally I would have voted for cutting the NMD program and cap the seawolf class at 3 or 6.

                      About the B-2, I'm not sure. If maintainablity and affordability issues were addressed, and if there wasn't so much corruption within Northrop, I would have advocated for 100 B-2C's on top of the 21 B-2A's already built.

                      In retrospect had we known the F/A-22 program was going to be expensive and way behind schedule. I would have purchased more F-15E Strike Eagles and the F-15F. Both of these models would have had the new 33 percent larger wing and 30,000lbs+ jet engines that was initially offered by MD. All the previous F-15E's I would have had modified.

                      A round number of about 400 E's (392 initially requested by AF but today the force is or going to number 227) and 400 F's to replace old A's and put C's in ANG. But this is only a dream anyway...

                      Personally I think the F/A-22's should be dumped like the Army's Commanche Helicopter. Now that was a huge waste of money.

                      I would have strongly advocated, and still do today, for the purchase of upwards of 500 C-17 Globemaster III's and about 250 of a tanker vairant and give the C-5's more powerful engines and the ability to carry increased load at "serious" ranges.

                      Also bring back the cancelled M8 Buford Armored Gun System!

                      And then there are the Battleships...bring them back. 5inch spitballs don't make for effective NSFS
                      The Iowa and the M8 aren't going to stop North Korean nuclear missles. An NMD will.
                      "Going to war is always an admission of defeat." --Jacques Chirac

                      "In the case of France, you're right!" --Rush Limbaugh

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Looks like election 2004 is going to be the lesser of 2 evils..........George W. may not know why he made a decision, but at least he's decisive.
                        Lance W.

                        Peace through superior firepower.

                        Comment

                        Latest Topics

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X