Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

Another reason Kerry is Unfit to Command

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: MonsterMark

Bold sections added by me...

Quote:

Sleepless in Cam Rhan Bay
August 27th, 2004

The President of the United States holds the most demanding job in the world. The physical and mental fitness of a candidate are matters of legitimate concern for voters. The refusal of John F. Kerry to release his complete medical records should be disconcerting to the press and public. All the more so, given disturbing indications that there may be serious questions about Kerry’s health and his ability to perform in office, questions which could be resolved only by the full release of his medical records.

For ordinary jobs, everyone is entitled to the presumption of physical and mental fitness. The Americans with Disabilities Act forbids negative employment judgments based on all but obviously disabling conditions. But the Presidency is not an ordinary job. The welfare and very survival of all of us are at stake. This employment decision is by popular vote, and we voters are entitled to consider anything and everything.

John F. Kerry is a cancer survivor. Fortunately, his prostate cancer was detected early, and treated with a procedure which claims a 97% rate of positive outcomes. Even though prostate cancer is the second biggest cancer killer of men in the United States, his surgeon, Dr. Patrick Walsh, chief urologist at Johns Hopkins Hospital, assures us that there is a 95% chance that he will be cancer free in ten years.

John Kerry faced up to his cancer bravely. His prompt treatment of it is a model for the rest of us to emulate. He even likened it to – what else? -- his Vietnam experience:

"The cancer, frankly, was -- it's strange. I think it's a reflection of the experience that I went through in Vietnam, that I didn't feel particularly threatened. That I felt: `I'm going to conquer this.' And it's why I had a confidence that I could run for president."

So, curiously enough, one of the most serious diseases imaginable, cancer, is not really a serious concern, at least in terms of its threat to candidate Kerry’s longevity. For that, we are all thankful. But there is another curious circumstance:

Doctors found the tumor after Kerry took a series of medical tests in November and December[2002] in preparation for releasing his medical records to reporters in connection with his presidential bid.

Yet following his successful treatment, Kerry did not release his medical records, despite the fact that he had intended to do so, and despite the fact that this intention may have saved his life. To date, the national press corps has been entirely incurious as to why Kerry reversed himself, and has refused to provide information which the voters need, and which he had announced his intention to provide.

It seems reasonable to have questions about what further treatments candidate Kerry is receiving, and what their effects on his health, energy, and mental clarity might be. Is he receiving any drugs or hormones, or other substances which have the potential of impairing him, mentally, emotionally, or physically? We don’t know. He could easily reveal this information, but refuses to do so.

Much more troubling than cancer, however, are indications, from those who know him well, that John Kerry suffers from parasomnia, a sleep disorder, which can manifest in many ways, including insomnia, sleepwalking, night terrors, and restless leg syndrome, among others.

The irrepressible Teresa Thierstein Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry has provided vivid first hand testimony of her husband’s sleep disorder:

When Kerry is asked about the nightmares that haunted his sleep for years after he returned from Vietnam, he shrugs. "I don't think I've had a nightmare in a long time," he says. But then Heinz begins to mimic Kerry having a Vietnam nightmare.

"Down! Down, down!" she yells, patting her hands down on her auburn hair.

"I haven't gotten slapped yet," she says. "But there were times when I thought I might get throttled."

Kerry quivers his right foot and steers the discussion to the counseling programs he has supported for Vietnam veterans. Asked if he has been in therapy himself, he non-answers "It doesn't bother me anymore, I just go back to sleep."

Parasomnia runs in families, and is suspected of being at least partially genetic in origin. It often begins in childhood. It is therefore quite interesting to note that John Kerry’s War Journal from his Vietnam service show evidence of sleep disorders:

You wake up with a start thinking that something is wrong and you grab the bars over your rack and swing down onto the metallic deck in the main cabin. Suddenly you are really awake and realize sheepishly that the startled concern that consumes you is prompted only by the conglomeration of noises that fill POF 44 and the fitful sleep that has characterized the nights on patrol. This is the fourth time during the night that sleep has been startled into movement - and each time the boat was riding smoothly and quietly. Once you were so sure of danger that you ran up into the pilot house and grabbed the throttles only to laugh with your men at your over-concern and reaction but deep inside you know and understand the pressures that are being brought to play with the mind and the body. And once you laughed at the Captain who talked in his sleep and who demanded that he be notified of any and all changes.

Sleep is probably one of the biggest battles of all on patrol. There is the constant temptation just to let go and relax and sleep all night -- trusting to the enth degree the young men who man your boat and who make up your watch sections. Eventually you begin to succumb and leave you life and that of the boat in your mouth and with eye lids that cascade down over dirty cheekbones, the sleep is light and restless.

Commander Robert "Friar Tuck" Brant has publicly said that he bunked with Kerry in Vietnam (when he was a Lt. and a Swiftee in 1968) and that he often had to get up in the middle of the night and put Kerry back into bed after Kerry had gotten up while still asleep and gone for a sleepwalk.

Kerry and Brant slept in the same quarters, and Brant used to put Kerry back to bed at night when Kerry was sleepwalking

Suggestive, but by no means conclusive, evidence that parasomnia may have bedeviled John Kerry when he was even younger comes from the record recorded by his high school band, The Electras. One of the tracks on the album was entitled "Sleepwalking." Could this have been the band’s little bit of fun?

It may be tempting to dismiss parasomnia as a minor affliction. But a clinical description contains the following information:

Parasomniacs may look as if they are awake, but they are clinically asleep. One of the best known parasomnias is night terrors, extreme and animated versions of nightmares. The sleeper may scream or shout, suddenly leap up from bed - it's as if they have been woken in the middle of a terrible crisis, which in a way they have. Typically, the sleeper experiences a sense of terrible danger and will twist and fight and scream in an effort to defend themselves. It's a frightening and potentially dangerous experience for bed partners, who may also find themselves attacked [see Teresa’s testimony above] in mistake for the dangerous presence. Parasomniacs may sleepwalk into other rooms, even run into walls and windows. They can wake up covered in bruises and blood but with little or no memory of their actions or details of the terror. Others recall their dreams in vivid and violent detail.[…]

Treatment is not with intensive psychotherapy but with sedatives which act as REM suppressants. 'They don't stop REM sleep,' says Ebrahim, 'but they calm it down. It's as if the REM segment has become over stimulated and medication normalises it.'
[...]

The dreams of post-traumatic stress sufferers attest to the power of the psyche to invade our sleep, while the enormous variety of our sleeping and dreaming experiences reveal that the mind, as well as the brain, guides our sleeping selves as much as our waking ones. 'We treat patients with medication, psychotherapy, CBT, acupuncture or a mixture of them all,' says Ebrahim. 'I am a doctor, but in treating sleep disorders, we have to address the physical, emotional and spiritual - our sleeping lives encompass the whole range of what makes us who we are.'

Is Kerry getting medical and or psychological treatment including drugs or counseling for parasomnia or any other sleep disorder? If he is not getting therapy for it now, did he ever get therapy for it in the past - and if so what kind of therapy?

To answer these questions, Kerry MUST release his complete medical records.

According to the New York Daily News, the Kerry campaign considers mental health to be a perfectly valid subject of controversy, at least when it concerns one of their political opponents. James Zumwalt, son of illustrious Adm. Elmo Zumwalt, is said to be the subject of a dossier compiled by campaign opposition researchers, because he testified in support of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. He is said to have attempted to kill himself with an overdose of prescription drugs," after the murder of his ex-wife's fiance, John Kowalczyk, according to the dossier.

Blogger Ed Morrisey aptly comments:

at least the Democrats have agreed in principle that medical records should be released as a basis for public debate in this presidential cycle. Bush released his, now Zumwalt's are out in the open -- so where are Kerry's?

Politics aside, sleep disorders have the potential of seriously impairing judgment. Nearly everyone has the experience of making bad decisions, losing self-control, or simply being sub-par in our job performance, when we aren’t sleeping well. A President of the United States has to be prepared to handle terror attacks, nuclear threats, and other extreme challenges. A lack of good judgment or job performance due to ongoing sleep issues could have an impact far beyond the sufferer or his family.

President Bush has been far more open about releasing important information than has Senator Kerry, who behaves as if he has secrets he wants to keep buried. President Bush has released his and his wife’s tax returns, whereas John Kerry has chosen to keep secret his wife’s tax returns, despite the fact that his lifestyle depends on her money, not his own, and the fact that his campaign was kept alive by mortgaging "his share" of the Beacon Hill mansion he could not have purchased with his own money.

To put an end to questions about his service in the Air National Guard, President Bush released his entire military record, while candidate Kerry refuses to sign Form 180, releasing all of his military records. And, of course, President Bush has released his complete medical records.

The public has a right to know if the man who may be our next president is healthy – or not. The electorate has the right to any and all relevant information about a candidate which can aid in forming an opinion as to that candidate's fitness for office. Health is certainly one of them. We are long past the time when it is or should be acceptable for a candidate to cover-up his ill-health.

It is now a matter of public record that another man with the initials JFK covered up his suffering from Addison’s Disease, and his reliance on a variety of drugs to alleviate his chronic back pain. Most commentators have agreed that this cover-up was a shameful episode, that the public had a right to know the condition of the man who led them through perilous times. Kennedy’s Presidency may have been adversely affected by his condition and its therapies, though such opinions can only be speculative.

The American public deserves to know that there is serious reason for concern over the health of the other JFK, too, and that he should avoid emulating the first JFK’s deception of the American public about the true state of his health.

Daniel Aronstein is a screenwriter and artist who lives in Manhattan. He has been a registered Democrat since 1974.

Thomas Lifson is the editor and publisher of The American Thinker.

Daniel Aronstein and Thomas Lifson

That's all we need. Wake up a sedated Kerry in the middle of the night and ask him to make a strategic decision that might affect the future of the world. I can't wait!!! How 'bout you guys? Ready to take the chance with this nut-job???

Posted by: Joeychgo

Quote:

That's all we need. Wake up a sedated Kerry in the middle of the night and ask him to make a strategic decision that might affect the future of the world. I can't wait!!! How 'bout you guys? Ready to take the chance with this nut-job???

THe only problem is that the guy we have now gets an erection every time he sees the 'the football'

Posted by: Sifrino3

Why don't one of you start a poll. Just to see how many is for which one.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joeychgo

THe only problem is that the guy we have now gets an erection every time he sees the 'the football'

And that's a problem! Heck, I get an erection every time the wind blows.

Posted by: Pepsi2185

LOLOL, Monstermark you are a lucky man. Im 22 and i cant get an erection that often.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Ya, well after 4 kids, I keep having this recurring nightmare.

Something to do with my wife, my jewels, and a tin snips.

Posted by: Lincolnman

All together now...BUSH SUCKS!!!

Posted by: Kbob

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lincolnman

All together now...BUSH SUCKS!!!

bush sucks and KERRY BLOWS!!!! (this is kinda fun)

Posted by: pepperman

Check this out. www.25thaviation.org/johnkerry

Posted by: MonsterMark

Thanks for the link. Great viewing. Even this one http://www.scaryjohnkerry.com/itsgoodtobejfk.htm that lists all his properties and boats, jets, etc. I love when it shows Kerry and Heinz meeting in Rio to discuss global warming. I just love hypocrites.

Posted by: Lincolnman

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

Thanks for the link. Great viewing. Even this one http://www.scaryjohnkerry.com/itsgoodtobejfk.htm that lists all his properties and boats, jets, etc. I love when it shows Kerry and Heinz meeting in Rio to discuss global warming. I just love hypocrites.

STOP HATING MAN!!!

Posted by: MonsterMark

When guys like Kerry and Edwards sit there and tell people how they are like the ordinary folk, I go insane.

Kerry, (born with a silver spoon) and Edwards (never met an ambulance I didn't chase) are the two most liberal, farthest-left candidates the Democratic party have ever offered up. When people say even Dukakis looks good compared to Kerry, Uggghh.

There are several million of us that believe this election is ABK. Anyone But Kerry.

I originally thought he would lose by 4 points, I now up that to 5 points.

Posted by: Lincolnman

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

When guys like Kerry and Edwards sit there and tell people how they are like the ordinary folk, I go insane.

Kerry, (born with a silver spoon) and Edwards (never met an ambulance I didn't chase) are the two most liberal, farthest-left candidates the Democratic party have ever offered up. When people say even Dukakis looks good compared to Kerry, Uggghh.

There are several million of us that believe this election is ABK. Anyone But Kerry.

I originally thought he would lose by 4 points, I now up that to 5 points.

If you go insane behind that, you musta busted a gasket when Bush and Cheney said there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

Posted by: redman

Posted by: Kbob

Now that one is funny, Redman, lol!

Posted by: redman

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lincolnman

If you go insane behind that, you musta busted a gasket when Bush and Cheney said there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

TEXT FROM THE SPEECH JOHN KERRY MADE ON THE SENATE FLOOR
October 9, 2002

[snip]
With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question: Why? Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?
[snip]

It would be naive to the point of grave danger not to believe that, left to his own devices, Saddam Hussein will provoke, misjudge, or stumble into a future, more dangerous confrontation with the civilized world. He has as much as promised it. He has already created a stunning track record of miscalculation. He miscalculated an 8-year war with Iran. He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait. He miscalculated America's responses to it. He miscalculated the result of setting oil rigs on fire. He miscalculated the impact of sending Scuds into Israel. He miscalculated his own military might. He miscalculated the Arab world's response to his plight. He miscalculated in attempting an assassination of a former President of the United States. And he is miscalculating now America's judgments about his miscalculations.

All those miscalculations are compounded by the rest of history. A brutal, oppressive dictator, guilty of personally murdering and condoning murder and torture, grotesque violence against women, execution of political opponents, a war criminal who used chemical weapons against another nation and, of course, as we know, against his own people, the Kurds. He has diverted funds from the Oil-for-Food program, intended by the international community to go to his own people. He has supported and harbored terrorist groups, particularly radical Palestinian groups such as Abu Nidal, and he has given money to families of suicide murderers in Israel.
[snip]

I believe the record of Saddam Hussein's ruthless, reckless breach of international values and standards of behavior which is at the core of the cease-fire agreement, with no reach, no stretch, is cause enough for the world community to hold him accountable by use of force, if necessary. The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons.
[snip]

The Senate worked to urge action in early 1998. I joined with Senator McCain, Senator Hagel, and other Senators, in a resolution urging the President to "take all necessary and appropriate actions to respond to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end his weapons of mass destruction program." That was 1998 that we thought we needed a more serious response.
[snip]

I am pleased that the Bush administration has recognized the wisdom of shifting its approach on Iraq. That shift has made it possible, in my judgment, for the Senate to move forward with greater unity, having asked and begun to answer the questions that best defend our troops and protect our national security. The Senate can now make a determination about this resolution and, in this historic vote, help put our country and the world on a course to begin to answer one fundamental question--not whether to hold Saddam Hussein accountable, but how.

I have said publicly for years that weapons of mass destruction in the hands of Saddam Hussein pose a real and grave threat to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. Saddam Hussein's record bears this out.
[snip]

He has continually failed to meet the obligations imposed by the international community on Iraq at the end of the Persian Gulf the Iraqi regime provide credible proof war to declare and destroy its weapons of mass destruction and delivery systems and to forego the development of nuclear weapons. during the 7 years of weapons inspections, the Iraqi regime repeatedly frustrated the work of the UNSCOM--Special
[snip]

It is clear that in the 4 years since the UNSCOM inspectors were forced out, Saddam Hussein has continued his quest for weapons of mass destruction. According to intelligence, Iraq has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of the 150 kilometer restriction imposed by the United Nations in the ceasefire resolution. Although Iraq's chemical weapons capability was reduced during the UNSCOM inspections, Iraq has maintained its chemical weapons effort over the last 4 years. Evidence suggests that it has begun renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard gas, sarin, cyclosarin, and VX. Intelligence reports show that Iraq has invested more heavily in its biological weapons programs over the 4 years, with the result that all key aspects of this program--R&D, production and weaponization--are active.
[snip]

Prior to the gulf war, Iraq had an advance nuclear weapons development program.
[snip]

Iraq has maintained its nuclear scientists and technicians as well as sufficient dual-use manufacturing capability to support a reconstituted nuclear weapons program. Iraqi defectors who once worked for Iraq's nuclear weapons establishment have reportedly told American officials that acquiring nuclear weapons is a top priority for Saddam Hussein's regime.

According to the CIA's report, all U.S. intelligence experts agree that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons. There is little question that Saddam Hussein wants to develop nuclear weapons. The more difficult question to answer is when Iraq could actually achieve this goal. That depends on is its ability to acquire weapons-grade fissile material. If Iraq could acquire this material from abroad, the CIA estimates that it could have a nuclear weapon within 1 year.
[snip]

Regime change has been an American policy under the Clinton administration, and it is the current policy. I support the policy.
[snip]

As bad as he is, Saddam Hussein, the dictator, is not the cause of war. Saddam Hussein sitting in Baghdad with an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction is a different matter. In the wake of September 11, who among us can say, with any certainty, to anybody, that those weapons might not be used against our troops or against allies in the region? Who can say that this master of miscalculation will not develop a weapon of mass destruction even greater--a nuclear weapon--then reinvade Kuwait, push the Kurds out, attack Israel, any number of scenarios to try to further his ambitions to be the pan-Arab leader or simply to confront in the region, and once again miscalculate the response, to believe he is stronger because he has those weapons?

And while the administration has failed to provide any direct link between Iraq and the events of September 11, can we afford to ignore the possibility that Saddam Hussein might accidentally, as well as purposely, allow those weapons to slide off to one group or other in a region where weapons are the currency of trade? How do we leave that to chance?
[snip]

The Iraqi regime's record over the decade leaves little doubt that Saddam Hussein wants to retain his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and, obviously, as we have said, grow it. These weapons represent an unacceptable threat.
[snip]

When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region.
[snip]

Every nation has the right to act preemptively, if it faces an imminent and grave threat, for its self-defense under the standards of law. The threat we face today with Iraq does not meet that test yet. I emphasize "yet." Yes, it is grave because of the deadliness of Saddam Hussein's arsenal and the very high probability that he might use these weapons one day if not disarmed.
[snip]

He is the dictator who can end the stalemate simply by following the terms of the agreement which left him in power.
[snip]

So I believe the Senate will make it clear, and the country will make it clear, that we will not be blackmailed or extorted by these weapons, and we will not permit the United Nations--an institution we have worked hard to nurture and create--to simply be ignored by this dictator.

I yield the floor.

I put lots of snips in there because it is painfully long. Who would have thought this was Senator Kerry speaking. No wonder he says he would have gone into Iraq even with what we know now. Interesting, hey.

Posted by: Lincolnman

Yes a lot of people were convinced of WMD and such. But it is what the President did about it that irks me and other civil minded people. All he had to do was get UN sanction and then send in the troops. Not use 911 as an excuse to say F--k the world we're going in.

Posted by: redman