DescentBB

The average joe has to stand in line for 6 hours or more to pay his respects to former President Reagan. I'm sure in that line are people who had plenty of important things they had to do. Yet Kerry gets to jump to the front of the line because, well...why? His time is more important than all those other people waiting? He is a presidential contender so that make him above everyone else? And while he paid his 20 min. respects, did all those people in line have an additional 20 min. wait because of that?

"Like other dignitaries, Kerry did not have to wait hours with tens of thousands of mourners; an exception was made for the candidate and his visit lasted about 20 minutes."

So what was Kerry's pressing engagements that allowed him to cut to the head of the line? Had to meet his hair dresser I suppose.

stfu, you whiney hater.

lets not be partisan silly...I'm sure many "important" people got through faster, including republicans.

Thats kinda fishing for a criticism there

DON'T YOU KNOW WHO HE IS??!!

I bet John was livid that Reagan got the best seat in the house.

You have to figure if he did stand in line for 6 hours how many people he would inconvenience because the secret service would have to deal with the whole crowd multiplied by 6 hours, thus slowing the process even more than letting him cut in for his photo-opp and split.

When you consider the things Kerry used to say about Reagan before Reagan died you have to wonder why he wanted to attend the service.
If not for the cameras I seriously doubt he would be there so respect had nothing to do with it.
Kerry's visit was all about Kerry, not Reagan, and he's such an elite snob it wouldn't even occur to him how shallow and transparent it was to do it!

Oh, and Woodchip, Dude!!...Go get some fresh air, Kerry sucks and all but DAAMMNNN Man, you were really reachin there

Well Kerry is French Looking so I had to single him out. I would hold any self aggrandising yoyo who thinks their string is slicker than anyone else just because they hold some "esteemed" position in life. I fail to see how any politicians time is more important than say a plumber's. At least a plumber can do something of real value.

The politics on this board make me gag. Half of you don't even know what the differences between liberal and conservative are. Add to that the fact that the two are essentially reversing their philosophies these days.

I am registered independent. We should ALL be registered independent. Washington said so. As did other founders of this great country (and it is great).

I study Political Science in school. That doesn't mean much, except for the fact that I read from both sides. You should too, all of you.

Get a grip. What we should all be working for is peace, an end to violence, economic equality, social justice, and environmental responsibility. This is a task for both Republicans and Democrats. This mindless partisanship is disturbing.

Read Erich Fromm's "Escape From Freedom" for a sobering account of what's happening to America.

edit: This response is not directed to this post, but is the cumulative result of reading some of the threads on this board.

kufyit wrote:Get a grip. What we should all be working for is peace, an end to violence, economic equality, social justice, and environmental responsibility. This is a task for both Republicans and Democrats. This mindless partisanship is disturbing.

You a marxist or something?

Funny how the word INDEPENDENT is so hard to fathom.

kufyit wrote:Funny how the word INDEPENDENT is so hard to fathom.

umm... you are poli-sci student, is the concept of the political spectrum hard to fathom.

You are INDEPENDENT of the two parties, but your views do fall somewhere on the political axis.

fliptw wrote:You are INDEPENDENT of the two parties, but your views do fall somewhere on the political axis.

Actually, this is the kind of narrow-minded thinking we need to avoid. What if one's views fall all over this so-called political axis? Some of us can make up our minds on issues without subscribing to a point on your axis thingie. The political spectrum is an artifact of convenience that does little justice to thinking Americans. Generalizations may make people comfortable, but they also make people complacent.

If you have hate in your heart, let it out.

I don't think he meant your views fall all on the same point of the axis. Just that, regardless of your affiliation, or lack there of, ultimately all your views can be found somewhere on the scale relative to the far left or far right and depending on the topic at hand you may be alligned right or left depending on your 'independant' position.

Of course that's just my opinion, I could be Dennis Miller....

I would post my opinion, but why bother? the left will like it and the right will try to cut me down. so f it.

Not posting your opinion? F that, Ferno, that's F'ing F'ed up man. F you. That's my right-wing opinion and I'm sticking to it.

(Now quick, someone from the left, applaud him for not posting his opinion.)

Lothar wrote:(Now quick, someone from the left, applaud him for not posting his opinion.)

who would that be?

lol

Ok fine. If we must do this.

I believe in working towards an end to violence. That would make me fall somewhere along the lines of Ghandism or Quakerism or some other ridiculous "ism."

I believe in fiscal responsibility. That would put me on the Republican, or consrvative, side of the spectrum (not this administration though, unfortunately).

I believe in social welfare for the needy. No, that doesnt necessarily mean WELFARE, it means helping out people that need help, and there are many ways to do that. I guess that would put me more on the Democratic, or liberal, side of things.

I believe in reexamining wealth distribution. Sure, that falls in line with Marx. But am I a MARXIST? No.

I believe in evironmental responsibility. This one alligns me with the Green side.

I believe in (ideally, if things are going well) less government. This makes me a Republican (again, the parties are shifting their views on this).

I believe in (ideally, if things are going poorly, as they are) more government. This makes me a Democrat, sort of.

I believe in multilateralism in regard to international affairs. Thatmakes me DEMOCRATIC, as opposed to AUTOCRATIC.

Peace is all I want really.

*sniffles

that was beautiful kufy. that's how i am.

Back on topic... How ironic that someone has to die before people pay their respect to them

Tricord wrote:Back on topic... How ironic that someone has to die before people pay their respect to them

Or...how shameful that those who didn't respect him pose as one who did only because of the publicity they gain from it.

There are many who showed resect and appreciation before he died and now show their respect at this final moment.

Then there are those who constantly showed disrespect and even vitriolic hatred for him who now "pay their respect" in front of the cameras.

And finally there is the media who don't point out the hypocrisy of the poseurs.

Will,

You have to admit that if he didn't go, you and those on your side would be criticizing him probably even more. "he was too good for Reagan", "kept his grievance against him even after Reagan's death", etc etc.

There is nothing wrong with paying your last respects too someone whom you radically disagreed with. Even someone whom you didn't perticularly care for, so long as you still believed that he was trying to do what he thought was best for everyone.

Lothar wrote:(Now quick, someone from the left, applaud him for not posting his opinion.)

I hereby applaud him.

Gooberman wrote:Will,

You have to admit that if he didn't go, you and those on your side would be criticizing him probably even more. "he was too good for Reagan", "kept his grievance against him even after Reagan's death", etc etc.

There is nothing wrong with paying your last respects too someone whom you radically disagreed with. Even someone whom you didn't perticularly care for, so long as you still believed that he was trying to do what he thought was best for everyone.

Not to mention the fact that one can violently oppose a persons politics and views but still respect the position that person holds.

I am not trying to defend Kerry but it is possible that he is paying his respects to the President and not to Regans political agenda. I don't see any hypocricy at all.

heh i remember about 10 years ago this comedy skit on aussie TV (the show was called "fast forward" if i remember) where a politician was being interviewed on TV, and the polly was going on and on about how stupid and inept some guy (call him Senator Williams) from an oposing political party was.

then the interviewer gets a call, stops teh interview, and says "oh, it seems Mr Williams has been involved in a very serious car wreck, and he's dead"

then the polly starts talking about how great the guy was and how he will miss him.

reporter gets another call: "no wait, it seems that he's still alive and being taken to hospital"

polly: as i was saying, he's an arrogent inept looser who just doesn't know how t....
(another call, "no he's dead")
polly: ...GREAT he was as a human being, and i miss him already, i always loved...
(another call, "he lives")
polly: ...how he used to contradict himself almost constantly and never knew how to THINK, let alone debate anything....
(at this point the interviewer is on the phone constanatly, and just simply annoucing: dead)
as greatly as the last issue he was talking about, in which he made the most excellent of points and we could all learn a lesson or 2 from him. he will always be remembered as an honest...
(alive)
stuckup
(dead)
lovely
(alive)
retarded
(dead)
caring family man who
(alive)
couldn't even tie his shoelaces if
(dead)
he saw someone else's shoelaces needed tieing first
(no he's alive)
before he ripped them off for all they were worth and then pissed on his mother's grave.

That's funny roid

If anyone is politicizing this, it's the republicans. No democrats will speak at Reagan's death.

Kerry on Reagan
Kerry on Reagan II (ewww, newsmax)

one can violently oppose a persons politics and views but still respect the position that person holds.

That's true, but it seems unlikely that one would suddenly begin to respect that person's position after they died. It's not as though Kerry had previously said things like "I respect Mr. Reagan as president, even though I disagree with his views" -- so it's kind of silly to assume that's what he's doing after Reagan's death.

I am not making that assumption. I am merely stating that it is possible. I don't follow Kerry at all. I have no idea what he has said about Reagan in the past or what his views on him were/are.

It could also be that it's tradition for those currently involved in the national political scene to pay their respects to presidents lying is state.

It could also be that Kerry is a sleazy two faced liar.

All in all I really don't know, and I really don't care.

Just pointing out alternatives to the "Kerry is paying his respects to Reagan so he must be a hypocrite" sentiment.

Birdseye wrote:That's funny roid

If anyone is politicizing this, it's the republicans. No democrats will speak at Reagan's death.

Thank God for that! Remember the Wellstone funeral debacle?

I believe that involved same-party pandering during a funeral. Arguably that is most susceptable with republicans. Are you arguing that republicans are any less likely than democrats to politicize an issue?

fliptw wrote:

kufyit wrote:Get a grip. What we should all be working for is peace, an end to violence, economic equality, social justice, and environmental responsibility. This is a task for both Republicans and Democrats. This mindless partisanship is disturbing.

You a marxist or something?

So this is what distinguishes marxists from democrats (not the party, the mindset) people? Shame on you. Think before you write.

I am not American, and I know how much American's appreciate non-Americans interfering with their politics (although they like to do the exact same thing with other nations themselves), but to me Kerry looks like a better president than Bush:

He is courageous (highly decorated Vietnam veteran)
He is intelligent
He does not have Bush's record of lieing to your nation, intimidating your population, and working against your constitution.

He may not be perfect, but imho he is the way lesser evil than the gang around Bush.

I am amazed how many Americans still applaude to Bush (because he's a "simple man like Joe average"?), overlooking what harm he has done to your nation.

And I am amazed how many Americans seem to think that things like "environmental protection", "peace", etc. are signs of a "communist". Imo these are things every reasonable person should strive for.

Birdseye wrote:I believe that involved same-party pandering during a funeral. Arguably that is most susceptable with republicans. Are you arguing that republicans are any less likely than democrats to politicize an issue?

Bird, while both parties do politicize issues, doing so at a mans funeral is despicable. Lets see if during Reagans eulogies, any slams are made against democratic attendee's or anyone uses the funeral as a pep rally for their party.

Diedel wrote:He is courageous (highly decorated Vietnam veteran)
He is intelligent
He does not have Bush's record of lieing to your nation, intimidating your population, and working against your constitution.

His courage is very debateable and his decorations were self appointed...reluctantly awarded by his superior officer in one case at least.

His intelligence, how do you measure it?
No, he doesn't drool when he talks and he speaks well, albeit very boring and with a condescending delivery but I don't see any evidence he's smarter than Bush. They both graduated from Yale.
He just speaks better in public.
What he says and why he says it is much more important than how well he delivers it!

As to his record of lies and subverting the constitution...just check his record as a senator! He's got a record he's been trying to get everyone to ignore because it exposes him to be the very person you say he isn't! That's why he wants everyone to focus on his "brave vietnam record".

Kerry is no better than Bush and in some areas he's worse...unless you're Saddam, Chirac or Ossama bin Laddin, then Kerry's your guy!

Diedel wrote:So this is what distinguishes marxists from democrats (not the party, the mindset) people? Shame on you. Think before you write.

Huh?

Flip: do you believe that a person who believes in peace and economic equality is a marxist?

And will.. why on earth would you put chirac in the same context as bin laden??

Ferno wrote:...why on earth would you put chirac in the same context as bin laden??

I was naming some examples of foreigners who would prefer Kerry to Bush because with a president Kerry their anti-american activities wouldn't be challenged like they are by Bush.

Kerry has many anti-american views in spite of his serving a whopping 4 months in Vietnam and proudly awarding himself those medals he only pretended to throw away.

What the hell is an anti-american view?... if even a presidential candidate can have it? No, really, what do you mean by that?

Anti-American can have multiple senses. I think the one Will is going for is the typical leftist "America is in a moral rut and we need to change that by eliminating big business, socializing health care, taxing the rich until they're brought down to our level, etc." That's even a bit extreme for John Kerry (at least I hope, but you can never be too sure with that guy), and more along the lines of Dennis Kucinich (whose name I STILL cannot pronounce).

I'm talking about surrendering our right to act pre-emptively in our own defense and instead submitting to the dictates of the U.N. to control our troops deployed outside our borders.
He's in favor of a world government and I think we're about 300 years away from that being acceptable...from an american perspective anyway!

That is a position Kerry has taken in his past and recently as well.

That isn't the only "anti-american" position he's taken but it's the one that most illustrates his willingness to sell out america.

He's a big stuffed shirt full of his own bluster and grand ideas that don't really work in the real world, they just sound impressive to other "intellectuals" when they get together and puff up their chests and compare ego's.

McCain for pres.

I must admit that though not agreeing with many of President Bush's policies, I still would favor him over John Kerry. Kerry seems like he's too insecure to take a firm stand on anything. Though if I could vote, I would have to vote third party

Wait for the 2008 election...I'll be able to drink AND vote, and hopefully I'll have someone worth voting for.