JFK quotes

[jetmex]

I have to wonder if he's somehow related to Dan Quayle:


The vast majority of our imports come from outside the
country."
- John F. Kerry


"If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure."
- John F. Kerry

"One word sums up probably the responsibility of any
Governor, and that one word is 'to be prepared'."
- John F. Kerry

"I have made good judgments in the past. I have made good
judgments in the future."
- John F. Kerry

"The future will be better tomorrow."
- John F. Kerry

"We're going to have the best educated American people in the
world."
- John F. Kerry

"I stand by all the misstatements that I've made."
- John F. Kerry

"We have a firm commitment to NATO, we are a part of NATO. We
have a firm commitment to Europe. We are a part of Europe."
- John F. Kerry

"Public speaking is very easy."
- John F. Kerry

"A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people going to
the polls."
- John F. Kerry

"We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not
occur."
- John F. Kerry

"For NASA, space is still a high priority."
- John F. Kerry

"Quite frankly, teachers are the only profession that teach
our children."
- John F. Kerry

"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the
impurities in our air and water that are doing it."
- John F. Kerry

"It's time for the human race to enter the solar system." (This was my favorite!!)
- John F. Kerry

[Britbrat]

Is Kerry a natural blonde? --- ooops, sorry blondes!

[JohnC]

Blonde? No.

Idiot? YES!

JohnC

[Grnbrt]

HHHMMMMMMMM? Last time I read those quotes they had old Bush's name after thyem!

[Galvin]

Bingo. These are the Bush quotes I posted a while ago but they now have Kerry's name after them. They are from one of several books chronicling a metric buttload of Bushisms gleaned from his speeches over the years.

But they're in print, they fit my preconceptions, they cast a bad light on the politician I think is the Anti-Christ and I want to believe them so they must be right, right?

Right.

[MrRepublican]

Galvin said:

Bingo. These are the Bush quotes I posted a while ago but they now have Kerry's name after them. They are from one of several books chronicling a metric buttload of Bushisms gleaned from his speeches over the years.

I question the veracity of this claim. Here is what Snopes has to say....

www.snopes.com/quotes/quayle.htm

It appears Galvin has attributed these quotes to the wrong person. Another liberal hoax.

[Galvin]

Yes, some of the quotes attributed to Bush are actually those of Dan Quayle. But both are so excruciatingly inarticulate as to have provided enough material to support a cottage industry, one that has sprung up and periodically releases books solely made up of their verbal spasms. So who said he isn't creating jobs?

The original point remains that these quotes have absolutely nothing to do with John Kerry. He didn't say any of them.

[stetto]

Well then, how about some quotes that have everything to do with John Kerry, whether he said them or not?

KERRY A 'LOOSE CANNON'

I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States.
This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty and trust all absolute tenets of command. His biography, Tour of Duty , by Douglas Brinkley, is replete with gross exaggerations, distortions of fact, contradictions and slanderous lies. His contempt for the military and authority is evident by even the most casual review of this biography.

He arrived in country with a strong anti-Vietnam War bias and a self-serving determination to build a foundation for his political future.

He was aggressive, but vain and prone to impulsive judgment, often with disregard for specific tactical assignments.

He was a 'loose cannon.'

In an abbreviated tour of four months and 12 days and with his specious medals secured, Lt. J.G. Kerry bugged out of Vietnam and began his infamous betrayal of all US soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen, including our POWs in the Vietnam War. His leadership in the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, his testimony before Congress in 1971, charging us with unspeakable atrocities remain as undocumented but nevertheless malicious stain on the men and women who honorably stayed the course.

Senator Kerry is not fit to command. The real 'brothers' are my shipmates and veterans who reliably and honorably stayed the course.

--Admiral Hoffman, United States Navy, retired







KERRY HAS PERSONALITY DISORDER THAT WILL ENDANGER AMERICA

I'm here representing my late father, Admiral Zumwalt and my brother, Lt. J.G. Elmo Zumwalt who was a swift boat commander in Vietnam.
If Lt. Kerry failed to heed the commandments of his military superiors 36 years ago, whom will he heed as president? It surely will not be the electorate who voted him into office.

Senator Kerry has demonstrated a dangerous propensity to slip into multiple personalities depending on the audience he is addressing. This was clear of his Vietnam service and his actions upon returning home. It has been clear as a senator in his actions on various issues related to Iraq.

It is a personality disorder that will endanger America in the event that he is elected president.

-- Lt. Col. Jim Zumwalt, U.S. Marine Corps, retired







KERRY'S INDECISIVENESS PUT BOATS AND CREW IN JEOPARDY

I served in '66 and '67 on my first tour of duty in Vietnam on swift boats and I did my second tour in '68 and '69, involved with John Kerry in the last 2 1/2 months of my tour.
The John Kerry that I know is not the John Kerry that everybody else is portraying..

I served alongside him and behind him, five feet away from him as third class gunner's mate, and watched as he made indecisive moves with our boat, put our boats in jeopardy, put our crews in jeopardy.

If a man like that can't handle a 6-man crew boat, how can you expect him to be our commander in chief?

I left the Navy, lived in Clover, South Carolina and managed boat dealerships. I'm an ordinary guy with no political agenda and no party affiliation.

--Steve Gardner







'FIELD GENERAL' KERRY PRIME MOVER IN AMERICA'S DEFEAT

I served in Vietnam from September 1968 to September 1969, six months of which was with this honored bunch of people, many of whom are here today.
I signed that letter because I, too, felt a deep sense of betrayal: Someone who took the same oath of loyalty as I did as an officer for the US Navy would abandon his group here to join this group here and come home and attempt to rally the American public against the effort that this group was so valiantly pursuing.

You know, it is a fact that in the entire Vietnam war, we did not lose one major battle. We lost the war at home. And at home, John Kerry was the field general.

Only last week--or two weeks ago--I saw on television where, when asked to respond for his support for the Iraq war, he said, "I cannot imagine going to war without the support of the American people." The same man who joined this group to rally the American people against our effort.

This is not the making of a commander in chief.

--Bob Elder









KERRY--OPPORTUNIST OF THE WORST KIND

I served as an officer in charge of swift boats in Vietnam from June 1969 to June 1970. I think it's extremely important that all of his records be released so that the American people can judge for themselves. That's in part why I'm here today.
My greater concern is for his shameful behavior after returning from only four months in Vietnam to condemn and malign the hundred of thousands of men and women who served their country honorably and that he, by his actions, aided and abetted the very enemy we were sent to Vietnam to defeat.

In my specific experience in both coastal and river patrols over a 12-month period, I never once saw or heard anything remotely resembling the atrocities described by Sen. Kerry.

If I had, then my obligation was to report them in writing to a higher authority and I would certainly have done that. If Sen. Kerry actually witnessed or participated in these atrocities, or as he described them, "war crimes," he was obligated to report them. That he did not until later, when it suited his political purposes strikes me as opportunism of the worst kind.

That he would malign my service and that of his fellow sailors, with no regard to the truth, makes him totally unqualified to serve as commander in chief.

--Jeff Wainscot







KERRY ENGINEERED EARLY VIETNAM EXIT WITH FRAUDULENT PURPLE HEART

I served as commander, coastal division 14-4 early days of 1968 til the first week of 1969. Lt. J.G. Kerry reported in mid-November to that division.
While in Cam Rahn Bay, he turned in -- he trained on several 24-hour indoctrination missions. On one specific skimmer operation with my most senior and trusted lieutenant, the briefing from some members of that crew the morning after revealed that they had not received any enemy fire, and yet Lt. J.G. Kerry informed me of a wound and showed me a scratch on his arm and a piece of shrapnel in his hand that appeared to be from one of our own M-79s.

It was later reported to me that Lt. J.G. Kerry had fired an M-79 and it had exploded off the adjacent shoreline. I do not recalling being advised of any medical treatment and probably said something like, "Forget it."

He later received a purple heart for that scratch and I have no information as to how or whom.

Lt. J.G. Kerry was allowed to return to the good ol' USA after four months and a few days in country; and then he proceeded to betray his former shipmates, calling them criminals and [accusing them of] committing atrocities.

Today we are here to tell you just the opposite is true.

Republican or Democrat, it doesn't matter. I for one, could not support and do not want Senator Kerry to be commander in chief of our brave and honorable men.

--Commander Grant Everett, United States Navy, retired

Interestingly, these are all documented as having been said by the people quoted...and there is a lot more of it...Kerry wants to make Viet Nam the centerpiece of his campaign (as opposed to actual solutions to issues), that's fine. America can then do the same...

[MrRepublican]

I do not think these quotes by stetto were contrived (as was the case with Galvin's so-called Bush quotes). After reading stetto's quotes, it appears that in addition to having a plethora of contradictory positions on a number of vital issues (which we already know), that what Kerry has demonstrated to his peers and colleagues above all else is that he is excruciatingly indecisive...not the kind of individual that I would trust with the lives of the American people and those in the military who have volunteered with their lives to defend our liberties and to liberate the oppressed abroad.

[Grug - American Neanderthal]

I am a little more concerned with what these guys actually do than what they say, after all them both being politicians I can start to distrust their statements when their lips start to move.

Actions should speak louder than words when it comes to elections, especially when both of them have records to look back on. It should be a simple choice of picking who you think has done a better at their job.

[Galvin]

I expect nothing less than these statements from a highly polarized and partisan electorate. I have seen some of these statements and some much worse on conservative websites.

Guess we'll find out in November who comes off as the most believable, won't we? Meanwhile, expect ontinuation of the present attempts to minimize Kerry's actual combat experience, which though short does indeed exist, and the attempts to maximize GWBs desultory military experience, which does not include getting shot at and which, though provable, doesn't amount to a hell of a lot either. His records clearly show that his interests were focused elsewhere at the time.

And if one is to go by their records, I would point you to the video of GWB receiving word that the second airplane had just hit the tower. I will never forget the deer in the headlights look of that man when actually faced with making a decision in real time. He "didn't want to cause panic " and so he continued reading. Yeah, right.

As far as Kerry's "ratting out" the military by saying they commited what are considered war crimes, the fact is that they did, and did so with regularlity.

I myself have listened to a former high school classmate of mine describe flying a Huey over the Mekong delta while those in the back "interrogated" prisoners. There were usually three prisoners and a number of interrogators, usually ARVN. Questions were asked and if no reply was made then one was thrown over the side. This continued until someone broke and they got their information. Those remaining were usually then thrown over the side to get rid of the evidence. He said he was telling me about it because of the trouble the memory of his involvement in it was causing in his personal life and his need to tell someone about it. I had asked him why he wasn't planning going into flying as a career and got the above story as an answer. He told me that as a result of his experiences, he never wanted to set foot in an airplane or helicopter again.

My first wife's cousin Alex was a SEAL. I actually flew him to San Diego in 1969 for his second deployment to Viet Nam. Prior to that he told me very directly and without emotion how things were done on his first deployment. He also told me that he and his buddies spent a good deal of their time both on and off duty stoned as a result.

Ask someone who was there, like Art for instance. See if he says none of it ever happened. Kerry's main claim to fame is being one of the first who had actually been there to actually state the obvious; what every one else actually getting their hands dirty and getting shot at already knew. His big sin, like those police that finally come forward about abuses, was that he broke the unwritten vow of silence on the subject and stated what those involved never wanted to come to light.

[stetto]

So then Dave, if we take your argument as valid and Kerry told the truth, then why has he not been up on charges for the atrocities he admits to committing? To neglect to report a crime, wartime or not, IS A CRIME, yet you seem to have pulled your blinders as far out in front of you as you can...

I am of the belief that Kerry's candidacy, the absolute moron that he is, is an intentional move by the Clintonese to insure that Bush is re-elected so that Hilbillery has no obstacles to the candidacy in '08. The fact that otherwise even-keeled and even intelligent people are so rabid in their "anyone but Bush" lunacy are congealing in the election ferver is likely an eventuality the Clinton camp didn't bank on. This could even explain a Clinton-based release of the Berger situation...

If the Dems really wanted anyone but Bush, don't you think they'd have given us someone better than the wishy-washy dullard Kerry?

[stetto]

Ya know, I've gone to Swiftvets.com, wintersoldier.com and read Mr. Rassmann's statements, and for the life of me Dave, I can't figure out how you magically cull the truth out of all of these first-hand accounts to arbitrarily condemn the word of many more men than are cemented to Kerry's jackboot...Rassmann obviously has a political agenda, ferchrissake he's delivering a speech at the convention--nuff sed. But these other fellas repeatedly deny any affiliation with any party, which you must infer is a lie, though I see you present absolutely no proof besides "I have a cousin who..." and "My high school buddy was..." John Kerry blanket-accused every soldier in VietNam, including our beloved Art, of criminal atrocities. I know better; common sense dictates that there were no more and no less incidents per capita of military personnel than there were in our glorified and revered alumni of WWII or Korea OR ANY WAR. It is war and it happens, regrettable, detestable, but happens.

...I'm developing a long list of situations in which I'd love to know how you'd react, Dave. You aren't any more or less human than GW or Kerry or me or Eddie Slovak for that matter. You throw a pretty arrogant ridicule of select others, but all I read is another voice in the "anyone but Bush" herd...

[Cablemender]

I believe atrocities did happen in Viet Nam. I don't believe everyone was involved in them, and I'm sure there were plenty who saw them and didn't rat their buddies out. So what?

All Massachusetts Senators have committed atrocities; one in Viet Nam, the other in Martha's Vineyard. So what? You just shrug them off and act apologetically and that makes it okay. Worked for Kennedy, Kerry, Clinton, what's a few more?

I don't think the atrocities are even the issue. The issue is about a person with two faces, in many different examples from military service to anti-wr protests to a p-poor voting record on any program that wasn't some kind of government handout.

It's apparently some sort of leadership gap to sit in a classroom reading during the WTC attacks, before any real information was known other than planes hit them. I remember my first report of it was on the local radio, and they reported "a small plane, like a Cessna, apparently hit a tower." They even went on to speculate that some nitwit played too much on Microsoft's Airplane Sim and tried to go between the towers in a real plane (something that used to be featured by MS as a "feat" to try your hand at. So a report comes in of the second hit..then what? If continuing to read was way screwed up, than what WAS the proper thing to do? Excuse himself and go sit in AF-1 and wait around for more intel? It's anyone's guess as to what he was thinking. Certainly if there was something specific he should have done and didn't, I'd view that differently - but to just say he sat immobile by itself isn't anything terrible. I sat immobile when I saw the videos (the ones the press decided we aren't stable enough to handle seeing anymore).

I have no issue with Kerry's service, except that he can't be both ends of the same candle. If the war, in his eyes, was truly wrong and one big atrocity, he shouldn't go strutting around proud of it in an effort to win votes. If he is proud of it, fine, then offer an apology for slapping all those other guys in the face by smearing them with accusations he's never backed up.

To butcher a famous Dem line, "What did he atrocitize, and when did he atrocitize them?" The Senate record only gives the account of others experiences, not Kerry's own. What's he afraid of? He published a book about it, and won't allow it to be reprinted; again, it begs the question, why? He makes a good deal of hay over Bush's NG service records, every one of which has been consistent with his account, even ones he didn't know existed (and were released). Yet his own record is chock full of inconsistencies.. he did, then he didn't. He was a warrior, then he wasn't, yet we aren't allowed to see it for ourselves. Unverifiable facts are pretty much useless, and he has to know that.

Beyond these petty issues is the hard fact that we are going to have to base an important decision on them, or the lack of factual information about them. Already we have military veterans who were all in the same place at the same time, and they offer widely varying accounts. When you couple that with refusal to open the records, it seems to say he is content to let people divide among partisan lines rather than try to settle the issue with documentation. That says to me he's fine with all of us speculating on what the real truth is, and he's hoping it won't hurt him while knowing it won't help him either.

I'm more concerned that he intends to raise taxes through the roof, and not to do anythign with that money but hand it out to the same institutions who have failed us in the past. Does he have a plan for Social Security? What's his take on health care costs? Is it as hosed up as the Bush administrations, or more so? What initiatives will he set as his goals, and how will we achieve them? He claims we are out of synch with the world (Europe he means), how will he remedy that other than talking about it? Who is he going to have in his Cabinet? What kind of judges will he appoint? Those are what I want to know from him, and haven't yet.

[Galvin]

Eric R.:
I find it interesting that you call Kerry a "moron". By what standard do you make this statement. Just because there has been so much talk of Bush being a moron? JFK can at least take words of more than one syllable and string them into a coherent sentence. That to me is a major upgrade from the present incumbent. If I am to be given my choice of "morons" to run this country, I'll take Kerry over Bush and his gang any day.

And as far as someone being prosected for war crimes they have admitted to then I suppose that the time for someone to jump up and yell "prosecute him" would have happened back when he testified. Nobody did then or since so is it now my reponsibility?

As far as the attempts to discredit Kerry's war record by an extremely partisan and politically driven group of people, I don't give their protests that much weight because of those biases. Bush has a tremendous advantage over Kerry in this regard because few in the miltary can even remember him, let alone claim he was incompetent, disloyal, or not up to the job. No one is able to fault GWB on his war record either, simply because he doesn't have one.

Go ahead and throw your hypothetical critical situations at me. I promise I will at least attempt to put down my coloring book and react to them. You defend our present incumbent by saying that the situation he faced was unprecedented in our history. That is hardly an excuse. Well, so was Pearl Harbor. So was the Oklahoma City bombing. Each was unprecedented in its time. Each situation required the person in power to get off their butt and deal with it in a timely manner, not just sit there and look confused.

I believe that up to that moment he thought he could just do the presidential image thing and just let the neocons do their thing to further their aims. This was his "come to Jesus" moment in which the reality of the grave responsibility inherent in his office hit him right between the horns and found him wanting.

We hire or rehire presidents every four years, not only for their perceived beliefs and leadership qualites but for their perceived ability to quickly assess and handle what the world has to throw at us. What I saw was a man in shock and completely paralyzed by indecision. He was totally gobsmacked and out of altitude , airspeed, and ideas. If he had been in an airplane with me and we were faced with an emergency situation requiring an immediate response as did the emergency situation he was presented with, he would have been about as useful to me as his weight in ballast.

I want someone in the White House who can not only lead but act but react when the situation requires it. Not only that but I want someone who can act and react both responsibly and appropriately to the situation. He is definitely not that man. I hope Kerry is.

[Cablemender]

You got all that from a facial expression in a Michael Moore video? Wow, pretty powerful stuff. Did the popcorn come with instructions on how to peer into minds and become aware of what appropriate expressions match national security crises, or did you have to wear those red-and-green lens paper glasses?

Just curious, do you happen to know what expression the President had on his face in December 7th, 1941? And what did FDR rush right out and do as word of the attack happened? History seems vacant on that, perhaps you can fill us in. Aside from hearing a report about the late visit from the Japanese ambassadors, he apparently did nothing to nothing until his speech the next day before Congress. But, what the hell, as long as he didn't have a funny look on his face and continue reading to some kids, he was okay.

[Grnbrt]

Ok, the 2 things in life I have learned not to debate is politics and religion but I do need to say my piece here as my name was mentioned a couple of times. I do not like Bush and never have and he scares the hell out of me big time but do I like Kerry? Well not to sure of that yet but rest assured I will not vote for Bush.
Now onto the other subject of astrocities in viet-Nam.


Did they ever happen? Yes!
Did I ever participate? No!
Did I see them first hand? Yes!
Did I report them? No!
Why? because I didn't want to get fragged and I really didn't care. I also have 3 purple hearts and could have come home but said no, why? I had no desire to come home as I had received a Dear John from my wife and she was pregnant by someone else so life for me came to a halt and I really didn't care if I got home or not, there you have the reason.
Let me give you an example of one atrocities commited by the other side and beleive me there were 100's more!
We got word of 3 POW's being held in this village so we very quietly went in to get them but were to late. the enemy had dug a pit 12"X10'X6' and filled it with hungry rats and then tied the prisoners up in barbed wire and threw them in the pit, do I need to paint a picture of what we found? So a few days later we have some POW's from that same area and we have them on a Huey and were interrogatting them and this one filthy and stinking Viet cong looked up at the Sgt and said, "Geneva convention, Geneva Convention". the Sgt hit him so hard he went out the side door and the Sgt yelled out to him, "there's your Geneva convention!" We were only human and after awhile you turn cold inside and just don't care anymore. Now in the early 70's the writing was on the wall and it wasn't good. We knew that we would never win and the guys dying over there was for nothing and most of them were more concerned about getting their dope so they could numb out what was going on around them. Now Mr Republican would you send Joe off to war that was only producing a body count and nothing more??? I saw the wall (the wandering one) a week ago and got to say goodbye to my bro's and say how sorry that their dying was for nothing and was politically motivated and I feel that's what Kerry was trying to convey back in '71 I believe, he saw the fruitality of it all and knew that it just wasn't right and didn't want to see more good people die for nothing. I don't feel in my heart that he turned against us, he was just trying to wake people up to what was going by that time. Now if you'll excuse me I am going to go sit on my front porch, have a smoke that I shouldn't and shed some more tears for my lost friends and for my country that I feel is lost right now with the current man in the White House!

[MrRepublican]

Thanks Art for your service to preserve our freedoms, and for sharing your experiences. I for one am proud of you and we owe you and those who served with you a debt that we can never repay.

Anyone who is deluded enough to think that war is always avoidable needs to have a reality check and look at the videos of those planes flying into the WTC on the morning of 9/11/2001 and Pearl Harbor on the afternoon of 12/7/1941 one more time. I find it interesting that these folks tend to be the same ones that profess (in contradiction) that war can be fought in a pure and sterile way. These same folks (the left wing of the DNC) remind me of the Johnson administration...the same administration that gets the credit for the failure of the Great Society (welfare state) and the irreversible quagmire of the Vietnam war.

We are a nation at war. A nation at war that casts aspersions on those of their own who serve is a nation doomed to lose that war by its own lack of resolve. There are no half measures in war. The only option is to win. Anything less is surrender. I refer you all back to the speeches Kerry made of the Commander in Chief when the going got tough in Iraq and I remind you of what he said before congress about the atrocities of his fellow troops 3 decades prior, complete with references to the testimony of people who later were unequivocally proved to be imposters, never having served in the military themselves. Like Kerry, these imposters were more interested in grandstanding to advance their own personal agendas, regardless of the consequences to this nation and the great people who served her with dignity, putting their lives on the line to that end. Kerry and his gang back then had no regard for what is best for this nation and will attempt to attain power by whatever means necessary, even at the expense of their own personal dignity and (more importantly) the dignity of those whose uniforms they are not fit to wear. And, when you look at this guy's voting record in congress it is evident that nothing has changed since.

[stetto]

Art, I have no response to your recollections of the war except to say that you have my utmost respect, pride and reverence for your service and my absolute empathy for what you have been forced to deal with because of it...You are an extraordinary man.

...Concerning your disdain for our current President, I can't argue with you nearly as ardently as some here will, I have intensely serious issues with some of his decisions and policies, to the point where I would be happy to consider an alternative if the Democrats would only offer one...

Every speech, quote and blurb I've read and heard from their candidate appeals to me like opening an empty box. Just yesterday I heard a speech from him where he discussed the illegal immigration issue. His words were "When elected President I will present a bill to Congress that will effect a solution to the illegal immigration problem in this country." Nothing more. Nothing. He had no explanation of this "bill" to offer, no outline of the process he proposed to "effect" a solution. But the crowd went crazy, obviously content with the emptiest offering a running candidate could possibly present. I was dumbfounded. This is but one example of many from him that to me were identical. He offers nothing, but promises everything. I find absolutely nothing in this candidate that remotely resembles an alternative, except for a party change in the Presidency. That combined with his insufferable habit of doing the 180 with the issues convinces me that the Democrats are offering a sacrifice in order to get Clinton on the ticket in '08.

There are a number of Democrat politicians I would have given credence to, as I vote for the man, not the party. But my main concern in this day and age is National security, without which nothing else matters. The closest thing to a specific policy that Kerry has offered up to the American people is that he wants to turn our (and the world's) security over to the most inept and corrupt multinational organization this planet has ever known. I am insulted by that mentality. I hope to God that the American people are more sensible than to whisk this empty shell claiming to be a leader into the highest office in the land simply out of hatred...

[Galvin]

Art, you didn't have to answer. My question was meant to be rhetorical. I hope I didn't dredge up something you'd rather not remember.

And Tom, yes, I did get a great deal of information from that facial expression and the fidgeting. In assessing those around you when you are merely going to play poker or engage in something that might get you killed, like say, flying an airplane or, even much more important, going off to war, you study the faces and physical reactions of those who will enter into the event with you.

If its poker, you are looking for an advantage. If its flying an airplane you try to determine from knowledge of and experience with the person if they are someone you want to back you up when your life is on the line. The assessment is even more critical when thousands of lives are on the line. What I saw was in no way reassuring that I would want this guy making the decisions that affect my life.

It was obvious to me that during those critical moments caught on that tape that GWB was coming to Jesus about just what he had gotten himself into when he ran for president. I think the reality of it scared the hell out of him. What I saw was total paralysis when the only acceptable action was immediate action itself. He was being given the test and was being found wanting. His actions were the exact antithesis of decisive and therefore he is not who I'd chose to be with me when the chips are down.