[Rhodes22-list] Reply to Stan - Politics

[ed kroposki]

Stan:
	I am like many others on this list a Vietnam Veteran.  They never
sent me there for two reasons:  (1) my vision made me non-combat.  (2) They
made me into a nuclear weapons launch officer with access to War Codes (And
I was not allowed to leave the country with out special permission).  If who
ever were President turned to that officer with the brief case that was
always with him, and used that phone, I was one of those who were
responsible for executing the war order.  

	There are many like me who did that job around the county.  We were
all volunteers.  When I was on duty I was under arms.  I toted a 38
revolver, and qualified as an expert shot under the FBI field test.  

	I see this cause as a war against Islamic Terrorist.  I told someone
on this list last week that those people have zero respect for any opinion
other than their own.  They even have contempt for moderate Muslims.  I
would rather take the fight to them than have them destroying buildings
filled with people here.  Stop and look at the recent incident in Russia.
It is the same mindset of people.  

	I have no problem with those who say Bush in not that smart.  There
are many comments about his National Guard service.  He qualified as a
fighter pilot, not an easy thing to do.  And he was trained in an old
airplane.  The F102 was a dangerous plane to fly.  Quit kidding yourself and
others about his flyboy status.  Someone should pull the records and see how
many pilots were killed flying 102s.  It was supersonic; it flamed out and
even exploded in flight.  He was not that smart to fly 102's!  

	And I have a problem with his and Cheney's affiliation with 'oil'.
When I compare that to the threat from Terrorist, I have to appreciate the
inherent evil or contempt for others of the Islamist.  Stan those people
would just as soon kill you.

	I believe that Kerry would respond to the threat neither
appropriately or fast enough.  In his own words, he would have done things
differently.

	Early in the campaign, Edwards spoke in Greenville.  I went and
listened.  I had originally thought I would support him.  When I left that
talk, I believed that he was very articulate, but also a con man.  I
compared him to Jim Baker, if you remember who he was.

	No I do not like Chaney; I could think of a dozen others who I would
rather have.  I in no way believe that Chaney could ever be top man on a
ticket.  I agree with those who say that he is too close to oil interest.
But at least we know where we have to watch him.
	
	It is my opinion that neither Kerry nor Edwards are trustworthy.  I
trust you even though you are wrong.  I trust Roger even though his analysis
does not adequately weigh in that hard to evaluate think we call trust.  

	I have learned that people in general and in the news media are
critical of politicians.  I have met and known governors, and other state
officials.  Most are ordinary people and quite honest.  They are generally
articulate and what we call well spoken.  If you want to be critical of
people in pubic life, then I believe that you ought to get involved in
helping in 'politics'.  Knock on doors and introduce candidates to your
neighbors.  Stuff envelopes. Address envelopes.  The hardest thing of all is
run for public office.  These are the responsible things to do as Americans.
And, I believe that every American has the obligation to do the responsible
thing.   
	  
	In summary, your aversion to war does not fully evaluate the
Islamist threat.

Ed K
	

-----Original Message-----
From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
[mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org] On Behalf Of stan
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 10:11 AM
To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Politics: Reply to Effros

Ed,

It really gets down to life or death.  Some of the Rhodies have it right. 
Are you willing to give your life for the Iraq cause - not his life or her 
life but YOUR life?  Bush and Cheney went out of their way to not give up 
their life for the Vietnam cause and I agree with them.  Do you think they 
would now be willing to do what they are asking others to do?

If you truly believe that your leaders are ready to die for this cause and 
that YOU are willing to die for it, then I admire your misguided values and,

if you must, you have my blessing to vote for Bush.  I was willing to lay 
down my life in WW 2 but they would have to drag me fighting and screaming 
to give my life for this cause. Give me an honest answer and let's have all 
the others stop the bravado and sissy stuff and name calling and just give 
us an honest answer.  My guess is that you will not find one of our group's 
Bush supporters willing to die for this cause - maybe one.

And while I am at it, you reprinted an e-mail from Brad which, while 
addressed to many, only mentioned me.  If your wife slept with another man 
would you kill your wife or the guy she slept with?  In my opinion you would

be unfair if you shot the man instead of your wife.  (He was not married to 
you or took any religious vows.)

Yet this is what Brad and so many of his side of the isle are now trying to 
do to John Edwards.  Edwards is a very attractive candidate (compared to 
Cheney who has a sleazy record including now bribing the head of the Supreme

Court to keep we the people - who pay his salary - from seeing the records 
of what he talked about with the Enron gang and the plans to punish CA for 
not voting for Bush) so the Republicans strategy, as usual, is to damage his

reputation.  How.  By calling him a lawyer.  (Most of the lawmakers on both 
sides of the isle are of course lawyers but they know they can get emotions 
to override logic).  Of course they want to separate him from them by adding

that he is a trial lawyer.  "Let's make that a dirty word like we so 
successfully did to (my name) the name liberal".

They want us to now shoot the wrong person.

Most of us know that a lawyer is an officer of the court.  He must do what 
the law of this land says.  He is obligated to get the most reward or 
benefits or sentence for his client that he possibly can.  If he does not do

the best job he can, he can be prosecuted.  So if all of a sudden the other 
side is hollering for his scalp because he does a good job under his 
position as an officer of the court and under the laws of the land, why is 
the other side shooting him instead of the juries or the judges.  He only 
makes the points.  The others make the decisions - but no one is suggesting 
shooting the decision makers.

I happen to know that when Roger says Edwards is a fine fellow, he is 
correct.  When we got into a catch 22 (I went to high school with the guy 
who wrote that book) with government rules, we went to Edwards and he came 
to the rescue (for a very little guy who contributed nothing to his 
campaigns).

But now it starts - blast Edwards - he is going to vote for high court 
rewards.  We don't know that (and besides juries and judges set verdicts) 
but we do know what Cheney has done (and not done).  We now do know that 
Medicare costs have just taken their biggest jump ever and I guarantee you 
that you are just seeing the beginning of the results of the exploding 
deficit.

don't get me started ....

stan/gbi



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ed kroposki" <ekroposki at charter.net>
To: "'The Rhodes 22 mail list'" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 8:40 AM
Subject: RE: [Rhodes22-list] Politics: Reply to Effros


Mr. Effros:

So you think that you are entitled to use your free speech on the
internet.  I think that I will forward your name and email address to some
of my friends who happen to be of the Christian Right persuasion.  Some of
the emails that they send out could help you, in particular.  They believe
that they are as right or correct as you.

Let me start with some of their emails that I received recently.  This one
concerns the accuracy of a Kerry quote:

""The Lord has a way of revealing those of us who really know him, and those
that don't!  Think about it!  Kerry gave a big speech last week about how
his faith is so "important" to him.  In this attempt to convince the
American people that we should consider him for president, he announced that
his favorite Bible verse is John 16:3.
Of course the speech writer meant John 3:16, but nobody in the Kerry camp
was familiar enough with scripture to catch the error.  And do you know what
John 16:3 says?
John 16:3 says; "They will do such things because they have not known the
Father or me."

The Spirit works in strange ways.""
____________________________________________________

Here is an example of your logic:

""If D-Day Had Been Reported On Today by William A. Mayer

Tragic French Offensive Stalled on Beaches (Normandy, France - June 6,
1944) - Pandemonium, shock and sheer terror predominate today's events in
Europe.

In an as yet unfolding apparent fiasco, Supreme Allied Commander, Gen.
Dwight David Eisenhower's troops got a rude awakening this morning at Omaha
Beach here in Normandy.

Due to insufficient planning and lack of a workable entrance strategy,
soldiers of the 1st and 29th Infantry as well as Army Rangers are now bogged
down and sustaining heavy casualties inflicted on them by dug-in insurgent
positions located 170 feet above them on cliffs overlooking the beaches
which now resemble blood soaked killing fields at the time of this
mid-morning filing.

Bodies, parts of bodies, and blood are the order of the day here, the
screams of the dying and the stillness of the dead mingle in testament to
this terrible event.

Morale can only be described as extremely poor--in some companies all the
officers have been either killed or incapacitated, leaving only poorly
trained privates to fend for themselves.

Things appear to be going so poorly that Lt. General Omar Bradley has been
rumored to be considering breaking off the attack entirely. As we go to
press embattled U.S. president Franklin Delano Roosevelt's spokesman has not
made himself available for comment at all, fueling fires
that something has gone disastrously awry.

The government at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is in a distinct lock-down mode
and the Vice President's location is presently and officially undisclosed.

Whether the second in command should have gone into hiding during such a
crisis will have to be answered at some future time, but many agree it does
not send a good signal.

Miles behind the beaches and adding to the chaos, U.S. Naval gunships have
inflicted many friendly fire casualties, as huge high explosive projectiles
rain death and destruction on unsuspecting Allied positions. The lack of
training of Naval gunners has been called into question numerous times
before and today's demonstration seems to underlie those concerns.

At Utah Beach the situation is also grim, elements of the 82nd and 101st
Airborne seemed to be in disarray as they missed their primary drop zones
behind the area believed to comprise the militant's front lines. Errant
paratroopers have been hung up in trees, breaking arms and legs, rendering
themselves easy targets for those defending this territory.

On the beach front itself the landing area was missed, catapulting U.S.
forces nearly 2,000 yards South of the intended coordinates, thus placing
them that much farther away from the German insurgents and unable to direct
covering fire or materially add to the operation.

Casualties at day's end are nothing short of horrific; at least 8,000 and
possibly as many as 9,000 were wounded in the haphazardly coordinated
attack, which seems to have no unifying purpose or intent.  Of this number
at least 3,000 have been estimated as having been killed, making June 6th by
far, the worst single day of the war which has dragged on now--with no exit
strategy in sight--as the American economy still struggles to recover from
Herbert Hoover's depression and its 25% unemployment.

Military spending has skyrocketed the national debt into uncharted regions,
lending another cause for concern. When and if the current hostilities
finally end it may take generations for the huge debt to be repaid.

On the planning end of things, experts wonder privately if enough troops
were committed to the initial offensive and whether at least another 100,000
troops should have been added to the force structure before such an
audacious undertaking. Communication problems also have made their presence
felt making that an area for further investigation by the appropriate
governmental committees.

On the home front, questions and concern have been voiced. A telephone poll
has shown dwindling support for the wheel-chair bound Commander In Chief,
which might indicate a further erosion of support for his now three year-old
global war.

Of course, the President's precarious health has always been a question. He
has just recently recovered from pneumonia and speculation persists whether
or not he has sufficient stamina to properly sustain the war effort. This
remains a topic of furious discussion among those questioning his
competency.

Today's costly and chaotic landing compounds the President's already large
credibility problem.

More darkly, this phase of the war, commencing less than six months before
the next general election, gives some the impression that Roosevelt may be
using this offensive! simply as a means to secure re-election in the fall.

Underlining the less than effective Allied attack, German casualties--most
of them innocent and hapless conscripts--seem not to be as severe as would
be imagined. A German minister who requested anonymity stated categorically
that "the aggressors were being driven back into the sea amidst heavy
casualties, the German people seek no wider war."

"The news couldn't be better," Adolph Hitler said when he was first informed
of the D-Day assault earlier this afternoon.

"As long as they were in Britain we couldn't get at them. Now we have them
where we can destroy them."

German minister Goebbels had been told of the Allied airborne landings at
0400 hours.

"Thank God, at last," he said. "This is the final round.""

_____________________________________________________________
Submitted for Bill Effros's edification.
Ed K
_____________________________________________________________
-----Original Message-----
From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
[mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org] On Behalf Of Bill Effros
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 1:20 AM
To: R-22
Subject: [Rhodes22-list] Politics: Bring It On!

"President Bush made a comment a week ago,
and he said 'bring it on!' Well, they brought it
on, and now my nephew is dead."

Mary Kewatt
Aunt of a Soldier Killed in Iraq
July 10, 2003


>From "Quote Without Comment" -- a book of quotes.

"Quote Without Comment" is neither a "Democratic" nor a "Republican" book.
All points of view are represented.  All quotes are accurate.  No one is
quoted out of context.  Each side in the upcoming election wants you to look
at some of these quotes, and to ignore others.  I want you to look at them
all.

More Quotes at
www.QuoteWithoutComment.com


***Constitutionally Protected Political Free Speech***

They used to call this a "Broadside".  Now some people call it "Political
Spam".  But whatever you may call it, the United States Constitution calls
it the highest form of "Free Speech".

I plan to send out a quote a day until the election.  Then I will stop.


If you are not on this list and wish to be added to it, send me an email
with the Subject: "Subscribe" (no quotation marks).   The sending address
will be added to this list.

Bill Effros
Author
"Quote Without Comment"

Bill at QuoteWithoutComment.com
___________________________