"Mark S. Holden" wrote:

Dennis Hassert and John Warner
have both publicly said the information
about his attendance can be released
if Sen. Kerry gives permission. (Warner
said it on Meet the Press)

So far, the Kerry campaign doesn't
seem to have offered a response.


Can you blame him, Mark? This is clearly a one sided deal. Are Dennis
Hassert and John Warner going to release their committee attendance history?
Are the other Intelligence Committee members? Is Bush going to account for
his Intelligence briefings and activities? Of course not. It's all on Kerry
instead. As such, the only thing Kerry has done wrong, in my opinion, is not
telling all those asking for this information to go to hell.

Stewart

Dwight Stewart wrote:
"Mark S. Holden" wrote:

Dennis Hassert and John Warner
have both publicly said the information
about his attendance can be released
if Sen. Kerry gives permission. (Warner
said it on Meet the Press)

So far, the Kerry campaign doesn't
seem to have offered a response.



Can you blame him, Mark? This is clearly a one sided deal. Are Dennis
Hassert and John Warner going to release their committee attendance history?
Are the other Intelligence Committee members? Is Bush going to account for
his Intelligence briefings and activities? Of course not. It's all on Kerry
instead. As such, the only thing Kerry has done wrong, in my opinion, is not
telling all those asking for this information to go to hell.

Stewart



You'd think if his attendance at the closed meetings was good, he'd be
anxious to take away the argument.

My guess is way back when, John Kerry underestimated how much of an
issue national security and defense would be when he ran for President.

"Mark S. Holden" wrote:

You'd think if his attendance at
the closed meetings was good,
he'd be anxious to take away
the argument. (snip)


No, I think he is just darn tired of being asked to provide information
which nobody else involved in all this is providing.

Stewart

Dwight Stewart wrote:

"Mark S. Holden" wrote:

You'd think if his attendance at
the closed meetings was good,
he'd be anxious to take away
the argument. (snip)

No, I think he is just darn tired of being asked to provide information
which nobody else involved in all this is providing.

But wouldn't stepping forward and providing the info be a coup for him.
Showing leadership and all?

dxAce

"dxAce" wrote:

But wouldn't stepping forward
and providing the info be a
coup for him. (snip)


Nope. The information released so far has either been picked apart for
anything, no matter how vague, to support conspiracy theories or entirely
ignored when nothing to support a conspiracy theory could be found.
Therefore, the release of any more information, assuming it exists (and I'm
not sure it does), is a complete waste of time and even downright
counter-productive.

Stewart

In article . net,
"Dwight Stewart" wrote:

"dxAce" wrote:

But wouldn't stepping forward
and providing the info be a
coup for him. (snip)


Nope. The information released so far has either been picked apart for
anything, no matter how vague, to support conspiracy theories or entirely
ignored when nothing to support a conspiracy theory could be found.
Therefore, the release of any more information, assuming it exists (and I'm
not sure it does), is a complete waste of time and even downright
counter-productive.

That right Dwight, Kerry is the disparager and not the subject of
anyones scrutiny.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article et,
"Dwight Stewart" wrote:

"Mark S. Holden" wrote:

You'd think if his attendance at
the closed meetings was good,
he'd be anxious to take away
the argument. (snip)


No, I think he is just darn tired of being asked to provide information
which nobody else involved in all this is providing.

You wrote that sentence wrong. Let me fix it for you.

"No, I think he is just darn tired of being asked to provide information
where everyone else involved in this has already provided it."

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Dwight Stewart wrote:

"Mark S. Holden" wrote:

You'd think if his attendance at
the closed meetings was good,
he'd be anxious to take away
the argument. (snip)

No, I think he is just darn tired of being asked to provide information
which nobody else involved in all this is providing.

Stewart

I think if he had a good answer, he'd be giving it.

If you're applying for a job, you don't duck a question unless the answer will hurt you.

In article . net,
"Dwight Stewart" wrote:

"Mark S. Holden" wrote:

Dennis Hassert and John Warner
have both publicly said the information
about his attendance can be released
if Sen. Kerry gives permission. (Warner
said it on Meet the Press)

So far, the Kerry campaign doesn't
seem to have offered a response.


Can you blame him, Mark? This is clearly a one sided deal. Are Dennis
Hassert and John Warner going to release their committee attendance history?
Are the other Intelligence Committee members? Is Bush going to account for
his Intelligence briefings and activities? Of course not. It's all on Kerry
instead. As such, the only thing Kerry has done wrong, in my opinion, is not
telling all those asking for this information to go to hell.

Well he is asking for my vote so Kerry can go to hell as far as I'm
concerned.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" wrote:
(snip) As such, the only thing Kerry
has done wrong, in my opinion, is not
telling all those asking for this
information to go to hell.


Well he is asking for my vote so
Kerry can go to hell as far as I'm
concerned.


Well, that is hardly a surprise. Based on your prior messages in this
newsgroup, you wouldn't vote for Kerry even if God came down tonight and
told you to do so. Therefore, Kerry wouldn't get your vote if he released
more information, no matter what that information might say. The same is
probably true for most others in this newsgroup ranting about info not being
released.

Stewart