Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

[Utah]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

lol.

And I thought that I was straightforward.

Btw, I'm not saying that I disagree with you:

View attachment 96361

Anyhow, I'm kind of torn on this issue...especially in that I regularly work with this nation's veterans and in that I've personally met and spoken to numerous snipers.

On the one hand, although I could never kill another individual myself, I do understand the nature of war and how snipers fit in with the same. Some snipers whom I've met would rather forget their past...being tormented by their own consciences (PTSD, etc.).

On the other hand, I've personally met some of the "Kill 'Em All and Let God Sort 'Em Out!" crowd and this certainly includes some snipers. Yes, I've personally been approached by snipers who bragged that they were "widow makers".

Anyhow, God will sort it all out in the end...

Thank you for your service to our veterans. And my prayers are lifted for them and you!

 

[Nautilus]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Well I'm glad to see the evangelical rightwing nutjobs are out in force today. Don't you guys have poor people or single mothers to go spit on today? Or is it Hate the Gay Sunday in wacko Fox News-land?

 

[Sirk]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Well I'm glad to see the evangelical rightwing nutjobs are out in force today. Don't you guys have poor people or single mothers to go spit on today? Or is it Hate the Gay Sunday in wacko Fox News-land?

...said the pot to the kettle

 

[Utah]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

...said the pot to the kettle

You've got to stop that! This time I had food in my mouth!!!

 

[kennethcadwell]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. The former principle is stressed in classical liberalism while the latter is more evident in social liberalism.[SUP][1][/SUP] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as democratic elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property.

Now if any of these things have changed please let me know, because I don't consider myself republican, democrat, or liberal because they all stir up hatred toward one another. But I do respect the ability to keep our civil rights, freedom of religion, private property rights, and so on. Instead of always debating, arguing, and throwing hatred and unedifying speech and words toward one another. Work on realizing and fixing the issues that are wrong in your own parties you support.

 

[Utah]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. The former principle is stressed in classical liberalism while the latter is more evident in social liberalism.[SUP][1][/SUP] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as democratic elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property.

Now if any of these things have changed please let me know, because I don't consider myself republican, democrat, or liberal because they all stir up hatred toward one another. But I do respect the ability to keep our civil rights, freedom of religion, private property rights, and so on. Instead of always debating, arguing, and throwing hatred and unedifying speech and words toward one another. Work on realizing and fixing the issues that are wrong in your own parties you support.

Democratic elections? Then why the indignation from liberals regarding voter ID? Why so much democratic voter fraud?
Civil Rights? Conservatives embrace civil rights the same as liberals.
Freedom of the Press? From liberals? You're Joking! Right? LOL.
Freedom of Religion? More laughter!
Free Trade? Stop! You're killing me! Liberals can't tax enough.
Private Property? Embraced by liberals only when it's their private property at hand.

 

[Billyd]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Well I'm glad to see the evangelical rightwing nutjobs are out in force today. Don't you guys have poor people or single mothers to go spit on today? Or is it Hate the Gay Sunday in wacko Fox News-land?

Maybe, you should remove the board from your own eyes. The very right wing church that I attend routinely helps single mothers with children find jobs and affordable daycare to lift them out of poverty. We also provide food and clothing to those in need. We haven't had a Hate the Gay Sunday in the 70 years that I have regularly attended. In fact, I don't remember a "Hate" anyone Sunday. We do preach that God despises any and all sin, and that He can free you from that sin.

Maybe, you would lose your hatred for those who don't hold to the same philosophy that you hold to and get to know the Man who guides them.

 

[tourist]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Maybe, you should remove the board from your own eyes. The very right wing church that I attend routinely helps single mothers with children find jobs and affordable daycare to lift them out of poverty. We also provide food and clothing to those in need. We haven't had a Hate the Gay Sunday in the 70 years that I have regularly attended. In fact, I don't remember a "Hate" anyone Sunday. We do preach that God despises any and all sin, and that He can free you from that sin.

Maybe, you would lose your hatred for those who don't hold to the same philosophy that you hold to and get to know the Man who guides them.

Amen, brother.

 

[maxwel]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

I want to ask Moore, "If snipers are cowards, then what is the honorable way to kill another man?"

I also want to address this idea that liberals are trying to destroy America. That's absurd. No, they aren't trying to destroy America. They're trying to make America better. Just because they're wrong doesn't mean they're malicious. We need to stop with this whole, "If they don't hold my views, they must be trying to ruin everything," view. Most people have good intentions when it comes to politics (except for politicians - I'm not sure about them).

Moore is a passionate and sincere man from what I can tell. When it comes to politics and economics, I find him quite ignorant, but not necessarily malicious.

When you stop misconstruing your opposition's views, you'll be much more enlightened about the issue as a whole. When you tell yourself liberals are trying to destroy the nation, you ask "Why are they trying to destroy evertyhing?" and you'll never come up with a practical solution. All because you asked the wrong question. When you realize liberals are sincere, you begin to ask "Why do liberals think this is a good idea?" When you ask this, you're able to think of solutions that actually address the issue and not a straw man.

I think most liberals are sincere with no intent to be malicious.

However, I don't think Moore falls into this category.
He's been caught too many times fabricating things for his films.
He seems happy to lie and alter the truth to forward his agenda.

In all fairness, people do the same thing on both sides.
Humans lie.

God, in the Bible, never tells us to be stupid.
He never tells us to believe everything we're told from any particular political party.
: )
The scriptures actually tell us to be wise, and prudent, and "test" the things we hear.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Democratic elections? Then why the indignation from liberals regarding voter ID? Why so much democratic voter fraud?
Civil Rights? Conservatives embrace civil rights the same as liberals.
Freedom of the Press? From liberals? You're Joking! Right? LOL.
Freedom of Religion? More laughter!
Free Trade? Stop! You're killing me! Liberals can't tax enough.
Private Property? Embraced by liberals only when it's their private property at hand.

Democratic voter fraud ?
I don't catch what you are trying to say, as the only time there has been a discrepancy in the voting was when Bush was elected. Bush first loss, and then when he called for a recall in a state his uncle was governor of he then won. Fishy as far as I am concerned !!!
This is not me who said this Utah, this is the principles that liberalism was founded on.
Then you mention taxes, sorry but the republicans only keep wanting to lower taxes on the rich but raise them up on the middle to lower classes to. So the tax debate is useless on both sides.

Obama wanted to give free communtiy college which would give people more of an opportunity to advance. Republicans said no !!!

 

[tourist]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Democratic voter fraud ?
I don't catch what you are trying to say, as the only time there has been a discrepancy in the voting was when Bush was elected. Bush first loss, and then when he called for a recall in a state his uncle was governor of he then won. Fishy as far as I am concerned !!!
This is not me who said this Utah, this is the principles that liberalism was founded on.
Then you mention taxes, sorry but the republicans only keep wanting to lower taxes on the rich but raise them up on the middle to lower classes to. So the tax debate is useless on both sides.

Obama wanted to give free communtiy college which would give people more of an opportunity to advance. Republicans said no !!!

Actually, Bush won and Al Gore called for a recount. After the recount Bush led by an even greater margin of a couple hundred votes. Me and my family voted in that election in Florida and we probably accounted for 5% of the winning votes.

That's the problem with Obama. He wants to give away that what does not belong to him. There is no such thing as a free government give-away. The tab is put on those who pay the taxes.

It was not his uncle that was governor, it was his brother.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Actually, Bush won and Al Gore called for a recount. After the recount Bush led by an even greater margin of a couple hundred votes. Me and my family voted in that election in Florida and we probably accounted for 5% of the winning votes.

I don't know where you got your information because Bush called for the recall, not Gore.
Because Bush initially lost in the standings, he only won after the recount. I remember cause everybody around where I lived, and the news sources, and even to this day it is talked about.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

[TABLE="width: 95%"]
[TR]
[TD][SIZE=-1]The Bush Propaganda Machine Strikes Again in Florida
Bob FertikOn November 7, Al Gore defeated George W. Bush by over 540,000 votes nationally. In Florida, the results on election day were simply "too close to call." And that remains true 107 days later – regardless of the widely-publicized report that a recount in Miami-Dade would not have given Gore enough votes to win Florida.
George W. Bush occupies the White House as the result of a powerful effort to manipulate public opinion through the news media, led by chief strategist Karl Rove. This propaganda campaign continues to this day, and will not stop until it has convinced Americans that Bush "won" Florida – regardless of the facts.
Bush's propaganda campaign began at 8 p.m. on November 7, immediately after the TV networks projected Al Gore as the winner in Florida. Karl Rove's team went into action, and the networks quickly reversed themselves and put Florida in the "undecided" column. Bush himself made a few calls to his cousin John Ellis at FOX News, and within a few hours FOX and the other networks declared Bush the winner in Florida.
Since Election Day, we have learned of numerous ways in which corrupt Republican election officials prevented Democratic votes from being cast or counted, including a fraudulent "felon purge" that removed thousands of qualified black voters from the rolls. We have also learned how error-prone machines and poorly-designed ballots cost Gore tens of thousands of votes among black and elderly voters.
But the media's role in declaring Bush the winner - before all of the votes were counted - was just as important in stealing the Presidency. The main role of the TV networks was to deny Gore the opportunity for a fair and accurate recount. As soon as the networks declared Bush the winner in Florida, Gore was permanently on the defensive.
First, the projections by the networks persuaded Gore to call Bush and privately offer his concession. Gore was just about to concede publicly when he discovered that the election was much closer than the networks were reporting. So Gore did what any candidate would do - he withdrew his concession and asked his oppponent to wait until the vote count was completed and a true winner was declared.
Karl Rove's propaganda machine switched its focus from the vote count to Al Gore. Suddenly, Gore was portrayed as a "sore loser" who refused to concede even though he had lost. Day after day, the media sided with the Bush campaign in attacking Gore for asking for the most basic principle of Democracy - that every vote should be counted.
This propaganda campaign continues to this day.
On February 26, the Miami Herald declared "Undervotes Support Bush Win." USA Today said "Recount Study: Gore Still Loses." Once again, the public could hear the unmistakable sound of the corporate media slamming the steel door shut on Gore's chances of finally proving that he won Florida.
The essence of the Herald/USA Today story is that their recount of 10,644 undervotes produced a net gain of only 49 votes for Gore. So if the Gore campaign had succeeded in persuading Katherine Harris to wait for the completion of recounts of undervotes in four counties - Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Volusia - Gore would not have gained enough votes to overcome Bush's 537-vote lead, according to the Herald and USA Today.
But this is simply false. On January 27, the Palm Beach Post completed a recount of 4,513 uncounted votes in Palm Beach and reported a net gain of 682 votes for Gore. Combined with the 49 votes from Miami-Dade, Katherine Harris would have had to certify a Gore victory by 194 votes.
[/SIZE][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[kennethcadwell]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

[SIZE=-1]But this argument is largely pointless, because Katherine Harris refused to wait for those recounts. As a result, the election ended up in the hands of the Florida Supreme Court. And after listening carefully to the arguments from both sides, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the only fair and accurate way to determine the winner was to recount the votes in EVERY county.
The Florida Supreme Court did two things: first, they ordered Harris to include the partial recounts in Miami-Dade and Palm Beach, which added 383 votes to Gore's total and reduced Bush's lead to 154. Then they ordered all of Florida's counties to start counting. And as the nation watched, election workers in all of Florida's counties began reviewing every uncounted vote.
This was the moment when the U.S. Supreme Court threw a thunderbolt from the sky. Violating every principle of Anglo-American law, a narrow partisan Republican majority declared that a fair and accurate recount would cause "irreparable harm" to George W. Bush. They overruled the Florida Supreme Court and ordered a halt to Florida's recount. As the nation watched in shock, election workers throughout Florida stopped counting and went home.
This injunction by the U.S. Supreme Court has been universally denounced. A group of law professors from across the country - now numbering 637 - ran an ad in the New York Times declaring: "By stopping the vote count in Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court used its power to act as political partisans, not as judges of a court of law."
Two days later, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its final ruling in Bush v. Gore. Once again, a narrow Republican majority ruled in favor of Bush. Many judicial scholars believe this was the Supreme Court's most lawless and outrageous ruling since Plessy v. Ferguson.
Because the U.S. Supreme Court stopped the recount, Americans still do not know who really won Florida. But we at Democrats.com have been carefully tracking the partial results reported by news organizations throughout Florida. We even hired a team of our own to count the votes in Gadsden County.
As of today, Gore leads Bush in Florida by 1,017. This tally includes recounts conducted by the Miami Herald, the Palm Beach Post, the Orlando Sentinel, the Tampa Tribune, the Naples Daily News, and Democrats.com. It includes a gain of 682 votes for Gore in Palm Beach - which was more than enough to erase the 537 Bush lead certified by Katherine Harris. It also includes unexpected gains for Gore in Republican counties like Lake (130) Hillsborough (120), and Gadsden (40).
Still, these recounts vastly understate Gore's victory because they focus on undervotes, rather than overvotes. According to a study by the Washington Post, Gore would have gained 28,510 votes if all of Florida's counties used an "instant-check" voting machine that detected overvotes and gave voters an opportunity to fix their ballots. These more expensive machines were used to a greater extent in Republican counties, a critical "equal protection" issue that was ignored by the U.S. Supreme Court.
In the coming weeks, the recount of Florida's 67 counties will be completed. Then - and only then - will the American people know who really won Florida. Given Gore's current lead, we fully expect Gore to be declared the winner. And then Americans will have to confront the fundamental question: how did George W. Bush steal the Presidency?
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]When the Republican propaganda machine tells us to "get over it," we quote Florida Congresswoman Corrine Brown, who said: "We will NEVER get over it. We will take this to our graves!" This country spent $70 million to investigate Bill Clinton's sex life - and continues to pursue Clinton long after his departure from office. But this country cannot find a penny to investigate the biggest crime against democracy in our nation's history. We will not rest until the truth is known - and until the thieves who stole the Presidency are removed from office and brought to justice for their crimes.[/SIZE]

 

[JesusLives]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Actually, Bush won and Al Gore called for a recount. After the recount Bush led by an even greater margin of a couple hundred votes. Me and my family voted in that election in Florida and we probably accounted for 5% of the winning votes.

That's the problem with Obama. He wants to give away that what does not belong to him. There is no such thing as a free government give-away. The tab is put on those who pay the taxes.

It was not his uncle that was governor, it was his brother.

This is the problem when there is a Democrat and a Republican living in the same house. we cancelled each others vote out although at that election we weren't husband and wife yet....lol We now agree to disagree. Al Gore did win the popular vote but it doesn't count when it is the electoral vote that is the one that counts.... Now I want to be one of those votes how do I become and electoral vote? P.S. I learned living in Florida that they don't know how to count votes and they didn't ask the Blond to help in the recount or things might have turned out a lot different.......

 

[tourist]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

I don't know where you got your information because Bush called for the recall, not Gore.
Because Bush initially lost in the standings, he only won after the recount. I remember cause everybody around where I lived, and the news sources, and even to this day it is talked about.

From the NY Times
Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote
By FORD FESSENDEN and JOHN M. BRODER
Published: November 12, 2001
Acomprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year's presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.

Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court.

Even under the strategy that Mr. Gore pursued at the beginning of the Florida standoff — filing suit to force hand recounts in four predominantly Democratic counties — Mr. Bush would have kept his lead, according to the ballot review conducted for a consortium of news organizations.

Recount was initiated by Al Gore.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

From the NY Times
Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote
By FORD FESSENDEN and JOHN M. BRODER
Published: November 12, 2001
Acomprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year's presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.

Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court.

Even under the strategy that Mr. Gore pursued at the beginning of the Florida standoff — filing suit to force hand recounts in four predominantly Democratic counties — Mr. Bush would have kept his lead, according to the ballot review conducted for a consortium of news organizations.

Recount was initiated by Al Gore.

Read post #33 and #34 as this article breaks it down as to what happened................

 

[tourist]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

[TABLE="width: 95%"]
[TR]
[TD][SIZE=-1]
But the media's role in declaring Bush the winner - before all of the votes were counted - was just as important in stealing the Presidency. The main role of the TV networks was to deny Gore the opportunity for a fair and accurate recount. As soon as the networks declared Bush the winner in Florida, Gore was permanently on the defensive.
First, the projections by the networks persuaded Gore to call Bush and privately offer his concession. Gore was just about to concede publicly when he discovered that the election was much closer than the networks were reporting. So Gore did what any candidate would do - he withdrew his concession and asked his oppponent to wait until the vote count was completed and a true winner was declared.
[/SIZE][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Why would the liberal left-wing news media try to throw a presidential election to a Republican? If this is true than Gore's team was incredibly inept. The writer of the article that you posted is biased and his accusations not credible.

 

[Utah]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Democratic voter fraud ?
I don't catch what you are trying to say, as the only time there has been a discrepancy in the voting was when Bush was elected. Bush first loss, and then when he called for a recall in a state his uncle was governor of he then won. Fishy as far as I am concerned !!!
This is not me who said this Utah, this is the principles that liberalism was founded on.
Then you mention taxes, sorry but the republicans only keep wanting to lower taxes on the rich but raise them up on the middle to lower classes to. So the tax debate is useless on both sides.

Obama wanted to give free communtiy college which would give people more of an opportunity to advance. Republicans said no !!!

Ken, since I joined this site I have taken an interest in reading what you share because I believe that your heart is good. Either I'm wrong, or you're very misguided. Republicans don't want to raise the taxes on the middle class, they want parasites who can work but refuse to do so to get off their lazy, parasitic humps and start earning their keep.

Free community college? Nothing's free. Someone would have to pay for it. I know, let's get the working middle class to do it. But the Republicans said no. Why? So as not to tax the working middle class that you just said the Republicans want to tax. So are you misguided or am I wrong about your heart?

 

[kennethcadwell]

Re: Michael Moore infers "snipers are cowards"; Medal of Honor recipient responds

Ken, since I joined this site I have taken an interest in reading what you share because I believe that your heart is good. Either I'm wrong, or you're very misguided. Republicans don't want to raise the taxes on the middle class, they want parasites who can work but refuse to do so to get off their lazy, parasitic humps and start earning their keep.

Free community college? Nothing's free. Someone would have to pay for it. I know, let's get the working middle class to do it. But the Republicans said no. Why? So as not to tax the working middle class that you just said the Republicans want to tax. So are you misguided or am I wrong about your heart?

That was not what McCain or Romney both said, as they both wanted to raise taxes on the middle class and Romney even wanted to lower taxes on the upper class as well. Which is why I voted against Romney because he wanted to raise taxes on middle and lower them on the upper.
I understand to get the lazy people off their butts, but you can not just do away with programs that they abuse when others who do actually need them rely on them. Taxes were going to be raised on the upper class, and not the middle class to pay for the free community college. That is what was put acrossed. I am not misguided as my family and the families around where I lived growing up struggled to live when the Bushes were in office, and lived a little better under Clinton. Obama has been worthless, but the communtiy college would not have fell on the middle class. The other things the Republicans have been against was raise in minimum wage, and paid sick leave half are for and the other half are not..