As a Desert Storm vet, I can tell you that my buddies in the military,
putting politics aside, still can't stand Clinton. I think the "Chinagate"
scandal is probably most disturbing to us.
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Kaytor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 1:50 PM
Subject: RE: Waaay OT: US elections (soap boxish)
> Ah yes, was it the words of Jefferson - " I may disagree with what you
say,
> but I would give my life to insure your right to say it?" One of my very
> concepts.
>
> Actually, most of the combat veterans that I know ( quite a few, as I used
> to work in the post office) felt that clinton's election was a slap to
their
> face.
>
> -GK
>
>
> >From: Dan Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: RE: Waaay OT: US elections (soap boxish)
> >Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:24:46 -0800
> >
> >And the great thing is that we CAN disagree! The presidential election
is
> >a
> >great example of that. People can't agree on Burger King vs. McDonalds
let
> >alone something like Clinton's merits. Hell, we can't agree on CF issues
> >sometimes! I think over time we'll see a very different view of his
> >presidency within the United States vs. internationally. Similar to
Nixon.
> >
> >My views? Ummm, mixed. I'd still vote for him over Gore or Bush (daddy
or
> >son) just because Monica and the military issue aside he has done fairly
> >good job as President. And please don't read into that statement that he
> >has done it all - he, his aides and advisors, the House, the Senate, the
> >states, have all done their part - I am just commenting on his job as
> >President. As for the military issue, I have to assume you will find
very
> >different views among those with a military background versus those
> >without.
> >That is an assumption though.
> >
> >Anyways, back to the real job - where I sometimes have the only vote. ;)
> >
> >Dan
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: George Kaytor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 9:02 AM
> >To: CF-Community
> >Subject: RE: Waaay OT: US elections (soap boxish)
> >
> >
> >Dan,
> >
> >I disagree. The president is also the leader of the armed forces. How can
> >Clinton tell anyone to go sacrifice their lives for America when he
refused
> >himself? I believe in leadership by example, In that regard Clinton is a
> >very poor leader.
> >
> >-George
> >
> >
> > >From: Dan Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Subject: RE: Waaay OT: US elections (soap boxish)
> > >Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 14:59:27 -0800
> > >
> > >Extremely well said.
> > >
> > >To take it one step further - let's all realize we are human beings and
> > >that
> > >noone has ever chosen their own birthplace. Everyone keeps that in
mind
> > >and
> > >the need for a military quickly diminishes. Naive, yes. Not worth
> > >thinking
> > >about. Never.
> > >
> > >Dan
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: John Allred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > >Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 10:31 AM
> > >To: CF-Community
> > >Subject: Re: Waaay OT: US elections (soap boxish)
> > >
> > >
> > >George,
> > >
> > >I suppose, by this logic, that those of us from the Vietnam era who
> > >failed to enlist are forever enjoined from doing anything in public
> > >life. Sounds pretty unamerican to me.
> > >
> > >As for myself, had I been drafted (difficult with a lottery number of
> > >360), I would have "served." Given that there was little consensus and
a
> > >lot of divisiveness over the issue, I never felt a duty to volunteer.
> > >
> > >In present times, I thoroughly resent those in public life who are
> > >promoting polarization among the armed services (e.g., the current flap
> > >over overseas absentee ballots in Florida), like those of five or six
> > >years ago did with religion. I'm naive, I suppose, in thinking that we
> > >should all consider ourselves Americans first, and begin acting like
it.
> > >
> > >Our Constitution provides for civilian control over our military. While
> > >it's coincidental that many Presidents did serve, I certainly don't see
> > >it as a prerequisite. Those who try to turn the military against their
> > >Commander-In-Chief should be tried and shot as traitors. Of course,
> > >since we're not at war, maybe all we can do is lock them up. That's
> > >still better than they deserve.
> > >
> > >By the way, our President represented ALL Americans on his recent trip
> > >to Vietnam, not just the military.
> > >
> > >JMHO,
> > >--John
> > >
> > >George Kaytor wrote:
> > > >
> > > > John,
> > > >
> > > > I'll agree with you on most points. But take a gander at this
> > >difference.
> > > > George Bush (sr) volunteered for service when this nation was in a
> >war,
> > >and
> > > > volunteered for combat duty. He could have easily gotten out of
> >service,
> > >as
> > > > his daddy was a powerful senator. He volunteered because he felt it
> >his
> > >duty
> > > > to SERVE his country. Compare those actions to those of willy
clinton
> > >and
> > > > maybe my point will be clearer to you. I just bring up this example,
> > >because
> > > > willy finally made it to vietnam.
> > > >
> > > > -GK
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
