quote:

---

This week let me tell you about the worst kind of hypocritical behavior. This Sunday on John Gresham’s Gun Talk Radio Show the Director of the Second Amendment Foundation called in to make a very disturbing report. It seems that they have confirmed that John Kerry has a Chinese AK-47 hanging on his wall in his office in Boston. It seems that this is a weapon that he brought back from Vietnam with him as a war souvenir.

This raises all kinds of questions for me and should for you. First of all many of these weapons were full automatic weapons which unless you have a tax stamp from the BATF are illegal to posses as of the 1934 Machine Gun Act. As this weapon would have had to been smuggled illegally into this country there is no way to get the tax stamp for it.

According to the conversation on this radio program this weapon is also illegal to have in the State of Massachusetts. As I'm not familiar with the laws of that state I can't say for sure. However if that is the case it sounds to me like John Kerry has committed several felony violations of the law.

This all from the person who has voted to remove these weapons from you hands not once but twice. Even if this weapon is of the semi-automatic kind he still wants it made a law that you can't have one. Talk about your hypocritical flip flop this is one that is slapping you and I right in the face.

I don't know about you but it makes me mad that someone who wants to be President of the United States feels that he or she is above the law that we must all follow. The very same person that has been endorsed by all the anti-gun groups and all the environmental and animal rights groups. Makes you wonder what their real agenda is doesn't it? I wonder how many illegal weapons Sara Brady and that bunch have in there offices and homes. I guess it's OK for them but not for us no good, unwashed subjects of the America they want or see a perfect for them only.

I guess Laura Ingraham was right when she called them elitists who think they know what is best for the rest of us stupid people who need to be told how to live our lives.

The way I look at it is that they have figured out that the only way to control the unwashed masses is to disarm us and then only they will have firearms with which to control all of us. This is why our Founding Fathers put the Second Amendment in our Constitution. Not only should these people be charged with the obvious crime they should be charge with treason.

You should think real hard about these issues when you vote this November, even if you dislike our President George W. Bush. He may not be perfect but at least he is making the effort to maintain our security and rights here in America. I sure can't say the same for John Kerry and his friend in the anti-gun crowd.

Right now we are into my favorite time of the year, Hunting Season. Many of us here in America will go out into the back country of this great land of ours and exercise not only a sport but our way of life and a passion that we have to enjoy the freedoms of being an American. In many nations in the world this is something that can be enjoyed only by the chosen and the common people are not allowed to hunt and fish much less own a firearm for protection and sport.

I know there are people who don't own a firearm who don't care to own one, however this right is even important to them because it allows them all the other freedoms that they do enjoy. So they must also be very concerned about those who would remove this right because the other rights will fall one by one when this right goes away. Please remember this when you vote. Bush needs to have four more years.

God Bless America and God Bless our troops still in harms way.

Michael E. Cook, Coos County Sheriff, Retired.

---

quote:

---

WASHINGTON, Oct. 14 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Today Chuck Canterbury, the President of the nation's largest police labor organization, called on John Kerry to stop making misleading statements regarding his support from the law enforcement community. Both on the campaign trail and in Wednesday night's debate in Tempe, AZ, Senator Kerry has alluded that he has the support of the majority of these brave men and women.

"As the elected leader of the largest organization representing America's Federal, State and local law enforcement officers, I believe it's important to point out yet again that we do not support his candidacy for President," Canterbury said. "And to be perfectly frank, the groups which do support him actually share the same membership rolls and, taken together, probably comprise less than one-quarter of our nation's police officers."

Canterbury further noted that unlike the organizations which Senator Kerry touts, F.O.P. members as a whole decided that the Fraternal Order of Police would endorse the reelection of President George W. Bush. They based their decision, he said, on the record of the Bush Administration in supporting America's first responders-including helping to secure passage earlier this year of H.R. 218, the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act, the organization's top legislative priority. Bush also successfully fought to greatly enhance the benefits for the families of officers killed in the line of duty.

"While Kerry was flying around the country campaigning and leaving the actual work of the nation to his colleagues in the Senate, the President was out there working on our behalf," Canterbury said. "Senators Kerry and Edwards have missed so many crucial votes this Congress that I was beginning to believe there were only 98 members of the U.S. Senate."

Canterbury also said it was the height of irony that Kerry would use his position on the reauthorization of the assault weapons ban as a reflection of his support from police.

"First, if a police officer is killed by an AK-47, Kerry would oppose the death penalty for the killer," Canterbury said. "In addition, where was he when this issue was being discussed in the 108th Congress? Where was he when we were working to pass H.R. 218? When it came time to help push for final passage of legislation important to law enforcement, Senator Kerry was regrettably A.W.O.L."

"Given the facts, I would greatly appreciate it if Senator Kerry would refrain from making similar whimsical assertions regarding his support from the law enforcement community," Canterbury said. "The real majority of my fellow officers are standing behind President Bush, because he has been there for us."

The Fraternal Order of Police is the nation's largest law enforcement labor organization, with more than 318,000 members.

---

quote:

---

An Open Letter to Senator John F. Kerry
From Robert Bowie Johnson, Jr.
October 19, 2004

Dear Senator Kerry,

I never met my uncle Will. He was a lieutenant in the Navy during WWII. He was killed in action on his PT boat in the Pacific. For his fatal wounds, he received the Purple Heart posthumously.

The first-captain of my West Point class took a bullet through the heart while leading a South Vietnamese airborne battalion into combat. For this fatal wound, he was awarded the Purple Heart posthumously.

My senior year roommate at West Point became a tunnel rat. A booby trap explosion killed him in the tunnels of Duc Pho. The army awarded him the Purple Heart posthumously. My plebe year roommate lost an eye and became permanently crippled. For his extensive wounds, he received the Purple Heart.

My battalion commander in Viet Nam was one of the bravest men I ever knew. He went out ahead of the troops in his light observation helicopter to find and kill enemy before they had a chance to fire on his men. That's how he died. For his fatal wounds, he received the Purple Heart posthumously.

My words pale in their import compared to the terse comment of a high school classmate of mine. We played lacrosse together in Baltimore. He went to the Naval Academy and upon graduation became a marine. This past July at our annual lacrosse crab feast, I asked him what he thought of your Purple Hearts. He said, "Bob, nine of us lieutenants went over there together, and only three of us came back. All three of us who survived spent at least a month in the hospital recovering from wounds we suffered in combat."

You didn't need any recovery time from your three alleged "wounds." How does one get "wounded" and yet not need to recover from those "wounds"? With wounds comes suffering. Where was your suffering? How could you merit a Purple Heart when you weren't even a casualty? You did not earn your Purple Hearts; you wrangled them from the system through deception so you could go home early and get out of eight months of combat. That is despicable and shameless. During the democratic convention, your flagrant boastful show of your "heroism" gave the impression that you had been a man in the thick of combat, when in fact, you had been a man on the very edge of it, all the while slyly conniving your way out of it. Instead of "Reporting for duty," you should have said, "Derelict in my duty." I marvel at your pomposity, and at the astonishing facility with which you present your phony war record as fact to the American people.

Let's compare your wounds with those of a West Point classmate of mine and his men. As my classmate directed artillery fire onto suspected enemy positions, shrapnel from an enemy mortar ripped into his leg. A medivac chopper took him to the American Division field hospital. When he returned to his company two weeks later, many new faces met him: the lieutenant who had taken over had marched the company into a u-shaped ambush resulting in two-thirds of the men being killed or wounded. Those wounded in that battle didn't have to put themselves in for the Purple Heart, Senator Kerry.

You exhibit the characteristics of a Narcissist. Narcissus, for whom this malignant character defect is named, fell in love with his image in a pool of water. As with Narcissus, your image has become the focus of your life. This image of yourself with which you are enamored, so greedy for recognition and praise, is only two dimensional: it has breadth and width, but no depth. And while your image may appear grand and heroic on the surface, there is no substance to it. My high school marine friend and my West Point classmate, true heroes, didn't take movie cameras with them to Viet Nam, but you did-with the express purpose of recording your imaginary exploits and feeding your grandiose image of yourself.

The truth is you faked combat wounds in Viet Nam, and your actions were devious and self-serving. You were a "Purple Heart hunter," just as the Swift Boat Vets say. Narcissus was an actor, and so are you.

I don't understand how any veteran, or any member of a veteran's family, or any sane-thinking American could even consider voting for you—a man who faked Purple Hearts in wartime. A man who will fake Purple Hearts for the sake of glorifying his image has no integrity and misdefines truth as whatever enhances the power and prestige of that image. A man without depth and substance stands for anything and everything-so long as his image is glorified. Narcissists such as you cannot be trusted; and they can be very dangerous, especially when they become paranoid about protecting their image, especially when they occupy positions of great authority and consequence. The issues in this election are truthfulness and character, and you lack both.

In 1971, I became a regional coordinator for Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) for a short time. I and many other vets were very angry at our government. We had experienced horror, terror, trauma, and grief in a no-win war and couldn't see the reason for it. We felt betrayed by our government and our military leaders. You stepped in and became our spokesman.

What enabled you to rise to the leadership of VVAW? What caused us, back then, to respect a four-month mini-veteran of the war? The answer is your medals: your phony medals for valor and your three phony Purple Hearts. Your congressional testimony about the war began with your own assertions that you had received the Silver Star and three Purple Hearts. What better spokesman than an heroic, thrice-wounded veteran! Our mistake was that we all assumed you were an honest and good man. But well before your antiwar days, you had decided to trade your integrity for the spotlight, and to barter your loyalty for vain political ambitions.

Most of us in VVAW expressed our outrage with government war policies through speeches, marches, and protests. We told the truth about what we saw and did in Viet Nam and we demanded from our leaders acknowledgement and change. You usurped the leadership of VVAW under false pretenses and dragged it in the direction of Jane Fonda and collaboration with the enemy. If, God forbid, you are elected president, in what awful direction will you and your foreign-born-and-raised wife drag our country?

Your deceit is an explicit slur upon my uncle Will's Purple Heart award, and you mock all other veterans who made the supreme sacrifice or suffered genuine wounds in combat throughout our nation's history. Your rise to prominence is based upon your abominably perverse desecration of our ideals; you have trivialized and demeaned the sacred and the solemn, and no amount of fluent sophistry or braggart pretense can cover it up.

Your conduct goes far beyond dereliction of duty. You betrayed your comrades in Viet Nam; you betrayed the trust of antiwar veterans, and now your self-fabricated credentials and continued lies contaminate the political process.

Remember the professor a few years ago who lied about being a Viet Nam veteran? His college reprimanded and suspended him for foisting such an abominable sham upon a few hundred students. I ask you in closing, Senator Kerry, what punishment is fitting for a man who fabricates medals as sacrosanct as the Purple Heart, and who continues to lie about his Viet Nam service to the entire world?

Yours truly,
Robert Bowie Johnson, Jr.

---

quote:

---

Kerry can't hide from liberal label
By Robert J. Caldwell October 17, 2004

"I'm a liberal and proud of it.” - Sen. John Kerry to the St. Louis Post Dispatch, 1991

"Labels don't mean anything." - Sen. John Kerry in the second debate with President Bush, 2004

Unfortunately for Democrat John Kerry, labels DO mean something. Kerry's career-long affiliation with a political ideology built on big government, high taxes and a weak record on national defense and foreign policy is the ball and chain shackled to his presidential campaign. It's George W. Bush's ace in the hole in the president's drive to persuade an evenly divided electorate that Kerry is out of step with mainstream political values and represents a risk not worth taking.

Kerry's strategy, so evident in all three presidential debates, is to disown liberalism. In its place, Kerry would have us believe that he's a centrist anchored squarely in the middle of the American political spectrum. That's not what the abundantly documented record of Kerry's 19 years in the U.S. Senate shows.

The non-partisan National Journal magazine conducted an exhaustively detailed review of all Senate votes during 2003. Its conclusion: Massachusetts Sen. John Forbes Kerry had compiled the most liberal voting record of any member of the U.S. Senate. More liberal, by several degrees, than even that of the Senate's liberal icon, Ted Kennedy. And this as Kerry prepared to run for president as a moderate centrist.

Was 2003 a Kerry aberration? Hardly.

Americans for Democratic Action has been rating every member of Congress on liberalism's key quotients since the 1940s. Its lifetime rating for the fervently liberal Ted Kennedy is 90 percent. Kerry's lifetime ADA rating is 92 percent.

The ADA's ideological opposite is the American Conservative Union. The ACU rates the votes of members of Congress on their fealty to such politically conservative principles as restraining government, resisting higher taxes and maintaining a strong national defense. Kerry's lifetime ACU rating: 5 percent.

Congressional Quarterly, the encyclopedic and non-partisan chronicler of what Congress does and how its members vote, found that Kerry voted 100 percent of the time with Ted Kennedy on major legislation in 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1998 and 1999.

On taxes and spending, Kerry has a lifetime rating of only 18.7 percent from the National Taxpayers Union. Kerry's average rating from Americans for Tax Reform from 1999-2003 is 12.5 percent. Citizens Against Government Waste gave Kerry a paltry 5 percent rating in 2001 and a 1990-2001 average of just 26 percent.

On abortion, Kerry earned a 100 percent rating from the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League for every year from 1995 through 2002. This tally includes six votes against legislation banning partial-birth abortions, a gruesome procedure denounced by the Vatican as "an incredibly brutal act of aggression against innocent human life." NARAL's opposite, the National Right to Life Committee, gives Kerry a rating of 0.

The AFL-CIO puts Kerry's big labor voting record at 100 percent for five of the last 19 years and an average of 89 percent from 1985 through 2001.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, defender of the nation's free enterprise, free market economy, records Kerry's lifetime record of support as a weak 35 percent.

Kerry poses today as a hunter, gun owner and defender of the Second Amendment's constitutional right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. The National Rifle Association, with its 4 million members, isn't fooled. The NRA gives Kerry a failing F on gun-rights legislation and last week endorsed Bush for president.

Kerry's convenient aversion to labels in a tight presidential election doesn't conceal his reflexive liberalism.

His health care plan would undeniably move government toward a central role as arbiter and regulator of medical care for a majority of Americans. Kerry's economic nostrums are less pro-growth than redistributionist. His spending plans would add an eye-popping $2.3 trillion to the federal budget over a decade with no convincing explanation of how this would be paid for. Kerry proposes higher taxes only for the "rich," ignoring the reality that the top 10 percent of income earners already pay two-thirds of all federal individual income taxes.

On defense and foreign policy, Kerry promises a bigger Army and a more effective war against terrorism, assuming that any U.S. military action passes his undefined "global test." But Kerry's newly acquired advocacy of a larger, stronger military clashes glaringly with his two-decade record of voting against 40 of the weapons systems that currently arm America's forces.

As for Kerry's global test, recall 1991. Saddam Hussein had invaded Kuwait and threatened to seize a quarter of the world's oil reserves. Thirty-four nations, including a half dozen Arab countries, had joined the United States in sending military forces to the Persian Gulf to liberate Kuwait. The United Nations Security Council had voted to authorize military action. Then-President George H.W. Bush asked Congress to approve the use of force. The impeccably liberal John Kerry voted no.

Referring to Kerry's liberal record, President George W. Bush quotes boxing great Joe Louis who said of challenger Billy Conn: "He can run, but he can't hide." Exactly so.

---

quote:

---

Thirty active duty years in the U.S. Army, including three years in Southeast Asia, qualify Tony Scibilia to talk about Vietnam and John Kerry.

Scibilia, retired with the rank of colonel, lives in east Cobb. He was at Marietta Square on Friday for "Operation Streetcorner," speaking out against Kerry's postwar charges that Americans committed atrocities wholesale in Vietnam.

"In the three years I was in Southeast Asia," Scibilia said Saturday, "I was able to go from one end of Vietnam to another, and I never saw any atrocities, never heard of any. I saw a lot of good things being done."

Scibilia was working at the Pentagon in 1971 when Kerry gave his atrocities testimony before a Senate committee.

Driving by himself, wearing his Army uniform, Scibilia stopped at a stop sign. A gang of antiwar thugs dragged a sidewalk mailbox into the street and started beating on his car.

"They were calling me warmonger," he said. He pulled out a tire iron, his only weapon. Police arrived before he had to use it.

"That afternoon, I was directed not to wear my uniform to work any more," he said.

"In 1966 when I got back, I was a hero. Three or four years later, I was a piece of dirt. It really gnawed on me."

What a contrast when people at Marietta Square drove by and said, "Thank you very much for what you did." Scibilia said for the first time it made him feel good about being in Vietnam.

As for John Kerry, the Army veteran said, "He hurt us. We didn't deserve that." And Kerry "never said I'm sorry. At least Jane Fonda said she was sorry."

Scibilia supports President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq, as do most American military and their families.

A poll by the National Annenberg Election Survey of the University of Pennsylvania found 67 percent of American military men and women said they approved of Bush's handling of his job. Sixty-nine percent viewed Bush favorably versus only 29 percent with a favorable opinion of Kerry. Bush was rated as a strong leader by 72 percent, Kerry by 20 percent.

Among military family members, Bush was viewed favorably by 77 percent versus Kerry's 17 percent.

Of those in uniform, 64 percent said it was worth going to war in Iraq compared to 45 percent of the general public.

Although 47 percent of the military think the president has a clear plan for success in Iraq, a scant 18 percent feel that Kerry does. Seventy-two percent say he does not.

An overwhelming 69 percent of the military men and women said they trust Bush to handle the responsibilities of commander-in-chief. Only 24 percent said that about Kerry.

Tony Scibilia wasn't in the poll, but he agrees. He keeps thinking about Kerry's antiwar activities 35 years ago.

"What's he going to do to those kids serving in Iraq?" Scibilia asks.

"What's he going to call them?"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ryan Ruck:
Just curious if anyone has noticed this oddity with Kerry…

---