Monday, May 23, 2005

beating a dead horse

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/service.asp

for those of you out there ignorant enough to still believe the BULLSHIT about John Kerry... here is a good starting point on rectifying that.

I almost feel guilty bringing this up, but it's a bone of contention with me... after butting heads with my father over the topic... my father having been mainly a medic in Viet Nam, as well as demolitions, etc. (he was a sergeant of some sorts I believe?)

he told me that he hated John Kerry so much that he wouldn't vote for him if he was the last man on earth, or if it killed him etc... that he was a traitor to his country etc.

so, I went and did a lot of studying, came back a few weeks later and had a nice long talk with him about it... and in the end, he said "I guess I really can't argue with that. I hadn't thought of it that way."

to me it's just a matter of perseverence sometimes in getting someone to consider a different viewpoint... to take a look at the facts and reevaluate them etc. and getting my own father to reevaluate something he was so passionate about, and to give any credence at all to the totally opposite viewpoint... it was quite an accomplishment for me.

so I guess the reason I still beat this dead horse now, is that even though Kerry lost the election, there is still a lot to learn in relation to the stories behind the candidates... and a lot of misinformation that has been left to stand since then. I don't see any reason to not try to correct that misinformation... if only to illustrate to people that they've been duped... and to maybe teach them a bit about doing a little research of their own.

oddly enough, it echoes what Kerry himself was doing after Viet Nam.... it wasn't just that he was fighting against the governments lies about Nam and the lives that it was costing.... it was about making sure that the American people knew what the government had done, and trying to make sure it never happened again.

think about it.

--------------------------

for the record, I'm not a big Kerry fan, I simply thought he was a better candidate than Bush. I would have probably voted for Dean, given the chance. it started as a matter of simply trying to figure out the best candidate... the lesser of 2 evils so to speak... but ended up turning into a matter of fighting to get people to learn the TRUTH behind crap... hell, even PC got suckered by all the propaganda, lies and bullshit (redundant?)... and after I argued with him for like 3 hours after I found out how he voted, he said "why didn't you tell me this sooner?" and I said "BECAUSE I THOUGHT YOU KNEW BETTER!!". PC is rather Libertarian... blah blah

anyway... I just try to make sure people have the facts straight and aren't making any more choices since the elections based on the horribly flawed BULLSHIT that most people were totally suckers for during the elections.

5 comments:

Lisa said...

I would never have voted for Kerry. He couldn't make up his mind on various issues.

Bush, no matter how wrong, at least knew what he thought. A leader needs to know what they think, and stick up for that...not waver when he's not sure what the public wants to hear.

Phreadom said...

case in point.

this whole BULLSHIT about Kerry "wavering" on issues... GO LOOK IT UP. if you can list for the me the issues he flip-flopped on, WITH THE DATES that he initially said something, and when he then said something to the contrary... I think that you'll be enlightened to discover in the process that many of these things were years and years apart... and that his "flip flops" were actually corrections in his stance based on the intervening YEARS of LEARNING MORE ABOUT A SUBJECT. it's called "being able to admit when you've made a mistake."

Bush might have known what he thought, but even when he lied to the American people or was flat out proven to be wrong, he would NEVER admit them. he almost always flat out refused to respond, and when he was forced to, he would say "we've all made mistakes, but do I feel that I've made a mistake in my presidency? no." etc.

PLEASE, feel free to correct me... or I might just post a nice big post on here showing you that you're wrong just for the heck of it, as an illustration for any other possible readers here of exactly the kind of misinformation victims I'm talking about.

if you can honstly say that a stubborn dumb man with good intentions who screws up repeatedly but refuses to learn from those mistakes or admit them, is better than a very intelligent man who admitted when he was wrong and adjusts to new information and grows...

well, then I guess there isn't much to debate here.

Phreadom said...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/09/23/MNGQK8TI8O1.DTL

there's an article for starters... I think I have a number bookmarked and archived on this computer somewhere, and if I need to, I'll see if I can't dig more up... but the general gist of this should give you an idea in the way in which you are wrong.

Kerry's vote to authorize force was a calculated choice to give the president more bargaining power, and that in the event of all other diplomatic channels etc failing, then he would IN THE END back the actual USE of that force. he did NOT back Bush's use of that trust, which was the "fuck you" to the international (and domestic) community and march off to preemptive strike land.

Kerry said that given the choice, knowing what he knows today, he would still have voted the same... why? BECAUSE OF WHAT I JUST SAID. it wasn't a vote to "GO TO WAR WITH IRAQ!!" it was a vote for authorizing the POSSIBLE EVENTUAL use of force, in order to give Bush a stronger hand in negotiations should the need arise etc.

...

*breathe* *exhale*

the point here is that almost every case I've seen of people saying shit about Kerry flip-flopping, is from an acute lack of any knowledge of the actual facts beyond "Kerry is a flip-flopper!". oh yeah? why? care to explain? and then even if they can name ANY points at all... they will be the most overly simplified, mutilated shadows of the actual events that they're almost unrecognizable. almost every single Kerry issue like this that I've investigated has fallen into this category. a case of pro-Bush assholes bending things SO FAR from the truth, and then pro-Bush idiots spreading it like the gospel, and nobody bothering to actually check the veracity of any of it!

which to put it simply, is quite sad... because statistically speaking, most people are too lazy or too stupid to understand what Kerry has done... and most people feel comfortable with simpleton Bush and his fuck-ups because "well, he's a nice guy, and he means well, and he believes that what he's doing is right and he's steadfast."

...

ie; you're too fucking stupid to see a highly intelligent man capable of negotiating highly complex situations, adapting to changing environments and situations and admitting mistakes when made? so you'd rather follow an idiot who is ruining the United States both domestically and internationally, who is incapable of admitting any errors... who himself cannot grasp the full complexity of Kerry or the situations at hand... but it's all ok, because he MEANS WELL? because he has GOOD INTENTIONS?

WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU THINK JOHN KERRY HAS?

seriously... PLEASE illustrate to me some evidence here. now we're not talking about 2000 or 3000+ year old religious bullshit and dogma.... we're talking about well documented events from the last few years.

this can be settled fairly quickly and easily.

I feel a few more actual posts on this vein coming on... (not to mention that I covered some of this material in some of my Meta posts a few weeks back I believe. guess I'll have to go digging again.)

(and sorry for swearing Lisa. :-/ I get a little heated.. and that's not all aimed directly at you... I'm kind of speaking to everyone in general, and a lot and people take it as a direct personal attack. just imagine you saying something to me, then me getting on a soap box and speaking out it to a crowd which you are a part of... if that makes it any better. :P heh)

Lisa said...

I would have voted fot Kerry. BUT, having said that...I am not a citizen so my point of view is moot. Not to mention the fact that my vote would have just cancelled out my husband's vote anyway =) I thought Kerry was a more persuasive speaker, he addressed the questions asked instead of reiterating the same answer in different form for each question. Plus, he was eloquent and I am a sucker for eloquence...hence my lurking about on your page.... hah!

Have a good week. I'll be back to hound you next week...unless of course I am banned for my stalker-like qualities...

Phreadom said...

hahaha

actually I didn't even vote. Kerry took both the counties I could have possibly voted in (and the state too), so I don't feel too bad after the fact.

I got a lot of shit for not voting, having been one of the loudest voices bitching at everyone else to make sure to vote and blah blah blah

now I'm going to crawl back into bed for a few more hours rest, then it's off to the bank, oil change, cleaning around here etc... then eventually heading over to the other side of the state to HOPEFULLY find a house to rent. considering I HAVE to be out of this one COMPLETELY in about 1 week. :(

bleh. shitty. bleh. ;)

and likewise enjoy your week. ttyl.