US PRESIDENT HISTORY - Did You Know?

[Vulcanic Profile]

Did You Know?

– The 2000 election was not the first time a candidate won the popular vote but lost the election. It has happened four times in our nation's history:

– In 1824 Andrew Jackson won the popular vote but got less then 50% of the electoral votes. John Quincy Adams became the next president when he was picked by the House of Representatives.

– In 1876 Samuel Tilden won the popular vote but lost the election when Rutherford B. Hayes got 185 electoral votes to Tilden's 184.

– In 1888 Grover Cleveland won the popular vote but lost the election when Benjamin Harrison got 233 electoral votes to Cleveland's 168.

– In 2000 Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the election to George Bush. In the most highly contested election in modern history, the U.S. Supreme Court stopped the Florida recount of ballots, giving Bush the state's 25 electoral votes for a total of 271 to Gore's 255.

– Grover Cleveland was elected president (1884) then lost his re-election campaign (1888) and came back again to win the presidency for a second time. (1892)

– George W. Bush is the nation's 43rd president but in reality there have only been 42 presidents. Grover Cleveland is counted twice as our 22nd and 24th president because he was elected for two nonconsecutive terms.

– Only 12 U.S. Presidents have been elected to office for two terms and served those two terms. Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected to office four terms prior to the Twenty-second Amendment.

– Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution has only three requirements for a president. (1) Must be at least 35 years old, (2) have lived in the United States at least 14 years, and (3) be a natural-born citizen.

– John Kennedy is the youngest elected U.S. President at 43.
Ronald Reagan is the oldest elected U.S. President at 73. (second term)

– The only President and Vice President to never be elected to the office was Gerald Ford. He became vice president when Spiro Agnew resigned and became president when Nixon resigned.

– The tallest U.S. President was Abraham Lincoln at 6'4"
The shortest U.S. President was James Madison at 5'4"

– Percent wise – the 1992 election was the biggest turnout since 1972 with 61.3 percent off the voter age population heading to the polls.

– James Buchanan is the only bachelor to be elected president.
Eight presidents have died in office.
– William Harrison (pneumonia)
– Zachary Taylor (gastroenteritis)
– Abraham Lincoln (assassin)
– James Garfield (assassin)
– William McKinley (assassin)
– Warren Harding (heart attack)
– Franklin D. Roosevelt (cerebral hemorrhage)
– John F. Kennedy (assassin)
– Ronald Reagan is the only divorced man to be elected president.
– James Monroe received every electoral vote but one in the 1820 election. A New Hampshire delegate wanted George Washington to be the only president elected unanimously.
– The U.S. Marine band has played at every presidential inauguration since 1801.
– President John Tyler is believed to be the first to use "Hail to the Chief" as the official Presidential honors.
– President Bill Clinton was born William Jefferson Blythe but took his stepfather's last name when his mother remarried. He formally changed his name to William Jefferson Clinton when he was 15.
– Victoria Woodhull became the first woman to run for President in 1872.
– Jeanette Rankin of Montana became the first woman elected to Congress in 1916.
– John Mercer Langston became the first elected black politician in the United States in 1855 when he was elected Town Clerk in Brownhelm, Ohio.
– Twelve of the fifty-six signers of the Declaration of Independence were thirty-five years or younger.
– Martin Van Buren was the first natural-born American to become president in 1837. Each of the seven previous presidents were born as British subjects.
– Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution states; Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:
– "I do solemnly swear [or affirm] that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

[Clawspiracy Profile]

The U.S. Supreme Court stopped the Florida recount of ballots, giving Bush the state's 25 electoral votes for a total of 271 to Gore's 255.

The African American community was defrauded, and the that count would have had a different result. But Bush's cousin... and FOX had this all planned. Didn't they...

[Truthseeker Profile]

is he black white slave or slave trader well his he or what his he
.Dr. Jack Wheeler On Barack Obama

Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler – August 21, 2008

The O-man, Barack Hussein Obama, is an eloquently tailored empty suit. No resume, no accomplishments, no experience, no original ideas, no understanding of how the economy works, no understanding of how the world works, no balls, nothing but abstract empty rhetoric devoid of real substance.

He has no real identity. He is half-white, which he rejects. The rest of him is mostly Arab, which he hides but is disclosed by his non-African Arabic surname and his Arabic first and middle names as a way to triply proclaim his Arabic parentage to people in Kenya . Only a small part of him is African Black from his Luo grandmother, which he pretends he is exclusively.

What he isn't, not a genetic drop of, is 'African-American,' the descendant of enslaved Africans brought to America chained in slave ships. He hasn't a single ancestor who was a slave. Instead, his Arab ancestors were slave owners. Slave-trading was the main Arab business in East Africa for centuries until the British ended it.

Let that sink in: Obama is not the descendant of slaves, he is the descendant of slave owners. Thus he makes the perfect Liberal Messiah.

It's something Hillary doesn't understand how some complete neophyte came out of the blue and stole the Dem nomination from her. Obamamania is beyond politics and reason. It is a true religious cult, whose adherents reject Christianity yet still believe in Original Sin, transferring it from the evil of being human to the evil of being white.

Thus Obama has become the white liberals' Christ, offering absolution from the Sin of Being White. There is no reason or logic behind it, no faults or flaws of his can diminish it, no arguments Hillary could make of any kind can be effective against it. The absurdity of Hypocrisy Clothed In Human Flesh being their Savior is all the more cause for liberals to worship him: Credo quia absurdum, I believe it because it is absurd.

His candidacy is ridiculous and should not be taken seriously by any thinking American.
www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleI ... =Namespace

Printer friendly version Email this article to a friend

Last updated 03/09/2008

Homepage

[Vulcanic Profile]

The U.S. Supreme Court stopped the Florida recount of ballots, giving Bush the state's 25 electoral votes for a total of 271 to Gore's 255.

The African American community was defrauded, and the that count would have had a different result. But Bush's cousin... and FOX had this all planned. Didn't they...

[Vulcanic Profile]

is he black white slave or slave trader well his he or what his he
.Dr. Jack Wheeler On Barack Obama

Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler – August 21, 2008

The O-man, Barack Hussein Obama, is an eloquently tailored empty suit. No resume, no accomplishments, no experience, no original ideas, no understanding of how the economy works, no understanding of how the world works, no balls, nothing but abstract empty rhetoric devoid of real substance.

He has no real identity. He is half-white, which he rejects. The rest of him is mostly Arab, which he hides but is disclosed by his non-African Arabic surname and his Arabic first and middle names as a way to triply proclaim his Arabic parentage to people in Kenya . Only a small part of him is African Black from his Luo grandmother, which he pretends he is exclusively.

What he isn't, not a genetic drop of, is 'African-American,' the descendant of enslaved Africans brought to America chained in slave ships. He hasn't a single ancestor who was a slave. Instead, his Arab ancestors were slave owners. Slave-trading was the main Arab business in East Africa for centuries until the British ended it.

Let that sink in: Obama is not the descendant of slaves, he is the descendant of slave owners. Thus he makes the perfect Liberal Messiah.

It's something Hillary doesn't understand how some complete neophyte came out of the blue and stole the Dem nomination from her. Obamamania is beyond politics and reason. It is a true religious cult, whose adherents reject Christianity yet still believe in Original Sin, transferring it from the evil of being human to the evil of being white.

Thus Obama has become the white liberals' Christ, offering absolution from the Sin of Being White. There is no reason or logic behind it, no faults or flaws of his can diminish it, no arguments Hillary could make of any kind can be effective against it. The absurdity of Hypocrisy Clothed In Human Flesh being their Savior is all the more cause for liberals to worship him: Credo quia absurdum, I believe it because it is absurd.

His candidacy is ridiculous and should not be taken seriously by any thinking American.
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?a ... =Namespace

Printer friendly version Email this article to a friend

Last updated 03/09/2008

Homepage

great info thank you

[Truthseeker Profile]

McCain Camp Ignores Questions About Candidate’s Military Record
Jeff Stein – CQ Politics Oct 10, 2008

Evidently taking a page from John Kerry ’s quest for the presidency in 2004, John McCain ’s campaign has decided — for now, anyway — not to respond to provocative attacks aimed squarely at his strong point: his reputation as a military hero.

The much talked about main broadside came in the form of a 12,000-word attack in Rolling Stone, which portrayed the hard-partying young McCain as a reckless pilot who totaled three jets, and whose career as a pilot was saved only by the pull of his father, commander of the U.S. Navy’s Pacific Fleet during the Vietnam War.

(Watch a video on the Forrestal fire here.) its on utube check it out

The piece, which Rolling Stone says has garnered 2.5 million hits on the magazine’s Web site since Oct. 6, has been the talk of the liberal blogosphere, but gotten zero attention from the mainstream media.

The Internet has also been afire with other, more vicious brickbats suggesting that a “cowboy pilot” prank by McCain might have started the July 1967 fire that destroyed the USS Forrestal aircraft carrier.




The blaze aboard the USS Forrestal

Unlike the Rolling Stone piece, however, whose negative coverage of McCain’s military years leans heavily on the recollections of John Dramesi, an Air Force pilot who was a prisoner of war with McCain, the blogs on the Forrestal incident rely almost entirely on anonymous sources.

In 2004, Kerry’s team initially decided to ignore attacks on his military record, figuring that few people would believe questions about his much-decorated performance as a Navy swift boat commander in Vietnam.

Like McCain, Kerry’s vaunted Vietnam service was a key element of his run for the presidency.

According to the conventional wisdom, the swift boaters sulphurous TV ads, which portrayed the Massachusetts senator as a resume-inflating imposter who did not deserve his medals, inflicted a fatal blow on Kerry’s campaign before he belatedly decided he had to respond.

The Rolling Stone piece, “Make Believe Maverick,” by Tim Dickinson, likewise calls into question McCain’s military legend.

It portrays him running from his burning jet on the Forrestal’s deck and virtually hiding in the carrier’s ward room while others died fighting the ferocious fire and exploding ordnance. In all, 133 sailors died in the tragedy.

Publicly, McCain’s campaign has ignored the story. It also declined to respond to my requests by phone and e-mail for a comment on the story’s accuracy.

Likewise, it has not responded to slashing blogs circulating intensely on the Web that offer an even darker view of the Forrestal incident.

According to these accounts, McCain, whose A4-E Skyhawk was queued up in a line of jets waiting to take off, “wet started” his engine, a prank designed to startle a trailing pilot with a flame of exploding kerosene.

Normally, it’s a harmless, common stunt by “cowboy pilots.” But on this occasion the exploding kerosene caused a six-foot long Zuni rocket under the trailing pilot’s wing to launch across the flight deck.

“[It] ripped through the fuel tank of McCain’s aircraft,” Dickinson writes. “Hundreds of gallons of fuel splashed onto the deck and came ablaze. Then: Clank. Clank. Two 1,000-pound bombs dropped from under the belly of McCain’s stubby A-4 . . . into the fire.”

McCain rolled out of his cockpit onto the deck and ran for his life, Dickinson writes.

“Just then, one of his bombs ‘cooked off,’ blowing a crater in the deck and incinerating the sailors who had rushed past McCain with hoses and fire extinguishers.”

But according to historian Mary Hershberger, writing on the liberal Truthdig.com site, McCain panicked.

“Some of those who were on the Forrestal and other persons familiar with the ordnance told me that because the rocket did not hit McCain’s craft, only actions by the pilot could have caused any bomb to fall from McCain’s Skyhawk,” wrote Hershberger, who in 2005 published a biography, ”Jane Fonda’s War,” advertised as “an antidote to the ‘Hanoi Jane’ myth.”

“These sources . . . who spoke under the condition that they not be publicly identified,” Hershberger wrote, “agree with each other that, if any bomb fell from the McCain airplane, it was because of actions that he took either in error or panic upon seeing the fire on the deck or in his hasty exit from the plane. Two switches in the cockpit of a Skyhawk need to be thrown to drop such a bomb, according to the sources.”

Truthdig lists Hershberger’s piece, posted on May 7, as its “most read” and “most e-mailed” article.

But while Truthdig and Rolling Stone have liberals clucking, it’s yet to be seen whether they will have any where near the impact of the swift boat ads — which, by the way, the mainstream media also initially ignored because of questions about their accuracy.

“I doubt it will have much of an impact.,” says New York Times media columnist David Carr.

“There is a vertical axis of information in conservative circles that the swift boat moved on that is not replicated by liberals,” Carr said “The conservative talk radio shows have an ability to metastasize and amplify negative stories, and they won’t be punching in on this one.”

Washington Post blogger Dan Froomkin, a frequent Bush critic, agreed.

“One enormous difference compared to Kerry, in my mind, is that the [mainstream media], with the exception of the LA Times, has refused to pick up any elements of this story, whereas it served (wittingly and unwittingly) as a massive echo chamber for the Swift boating,” according to Froomkin.

But Josh Marshall, founding editor of the influential liberal blog Talking Points Memo, said the attack on Kerry’s military record and McCain’s are “fundamentally different in two respects. The more important of the two is that there’s been very little questioning, as far as I’ve seen, of McCain’s actual military and POW record.”

“Second,” he added, “there’s been no organized effort, again as far as I’ve seen, to denigrate his record.”

Mark Hertsgaard, author of “On Bended Knee,” a best-selling critique of the 1980s-era White House press corps, said attacks on McCain’s war record, lacking a right-wing media accelerant, will wilt without a boost from the major newspapers and networks.

“The obvious place to start is with the former POW, Mr. Dramesi,” featured in the Rolling Stone piece, he added. “Why aren’t we seeing him on TV shows already?”

Mark Crispin Miller, author of “Loser Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy, 2000-2008,” among other books on the media, called the Rolling Stone piece “devastating” and scolded the Democrats for being “too timid” to make more of it.

“It’s sadly typical that the Republicans could mount a big campaign of lies [against Kerry] and get away with it, while the Democrats do nothing with the very damning truth about McCain’s war record,” added Miller, who maintained he is “not a Democrat or Obama supporter.”

The lone establishment voice calling for the media to dig deeper into McCain’s war record belongs to Barry Sussman, one of the famed Washington Post editors in charge of the paper’s Watergate investigations.

“McCain has made his military experience a key reason to vote for him.,” Sussman wrote on the Nieman Watchdog Web site, which he now edits following his Post retirement.

“Reporters should examine his military records, including reports on air mishaps he was involved in before he was shot down over Hanoi. And McCain should see to it that all reports are made public,” Sussman said.

So far, though, outside of the Los Angles Times, Rolling Stone and the web, no one appears to be heeding Sussman’s call, posted in early September.

Rolling Stone managing editor Will Dana said he found that curious.

“Tim Dickinson gets asked to be on MSNBC and CNN all the time,” Dana said, “but the phones haven’t been ringing this week.”

Normally, it’s a harmless, common stunt by “cowboy pilots.” But on this occasion the exploding kerosene caused a six-foot long Zuni rocket under the trailing pilot’s wing to launch across the flight deck.

“[It] ripped through the fuel tank of McCain’s aircraft,” Dickinson writes. “Hundreds of gallons of fuel splashed onto the deck and came ablaze. Then: Clank. Clank. Two 1,000-pound bombs dropped from under the belly of McCain’s stubby A-4 . . . into the fire.”

McCain rolled out of his cockpit onto the deck and ran for his life, Dickinson writes.

“Just then, one of his bombs ‘cooked off,’ blowing a crater in the deck and incinerating the sailors who had rushed past McCain with hoses and fire extinguishers.”

But according to historian Mary Hershberger, writing on the liberal Truthdig.com site, McCain panicked.

“Some of those who were on the Forrestal and other persons familiar with the ordnance told me that because the rocket did not hit McCain’s craft, only actions by the pilot could have caused any bomb to fall from McCain’s Skyhawk,” wrote Hershberger, who in 2005 published a biography, ”Jane Fonda’s War,” advertised as “an antidote to the ‘Hanoi Jane’ myth.”

“These sources . . . who spoke under the condition that they not be publicly identified,” Hershberger wrote, “agree with each other that, if any bomb fell from the McCain airplane, it was because of actions that he took either in error or panic upon seeing the fire on the deck or in his hasty exit from the plane. Two switches in the cockpit of a Skyhawk need to be thrown to drop such a bomb, according to the sources.”

Truthdig lists Hershberger’s piece, posted on May 7, as its “most read” and “most e-mailed” article.

But while Truthdig and Rolling Stone have liberals clucking, it’s yet to be seen whether they will have any where near the impact of the swift boat ads — which, by the way, the mainstream media also initially ignored because of questions about their accuracy.

“I doubt it will have much of an impact.,” says New York Times media columnist David Carr.

“There is a vertical axis of information in conservative circles that the swift boat moved on that is not replicated by liberals,” Carr said “The conservative talk radio shows have an ability to metastasize and amplify negative stories, and they won’t be punching in on this one.”

Washington Post blogger Dan Froomkin, a frequent Bush critic, agreed.

“One enormous difference compared to Kerry, in my mind, is that the [mainstream media], with the exception of the LA Times, has refused to pick up any elements of this story, whereas it served (wittingly and unwittingly) as a massive echo chamber for the Swift boating,” according to Froomkin.

But Josh Marshall, founding editor of the influential liberal blog Talking Points Memo, said the attack on Kerry’s military record and McCain’s are “fundamentally different in two respects. The more important of the two is that there’s been very little questioning, as far as I’ve seen, of McCain’s actual military and POW record.”

“Second,” he added, “there’s been no organized effort, again as far as I’ve seen, to denigrate his record.”

Mark Hertsgaard, author of “On Bended Knee,” a best-selling critique of the 1980s-era White House press corps, said attacks on McCain’s war record, lacking a right-wing media accelerant, will wilt without a boost from the major newspapers and networks.

“The obvious place to start is with the former POW, Mr. Dramesi,” featured in the Rolling Stone piece, he added. “Why aren’t we seeing him on TV shows already?”

Mark Crispin Miller, author of “Loser Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy, 2000-2008,” among other books on the media, called the Rolling Stone piece “devastating” and scolded the Democrats for being “too timid” to make more of it.

“It’s sadly typical that the Republicans could mount a big campaign of lies [against Kerry] and get away with it, while the Democrats do nothing with the very damning truth about McCain’s war record,” added Miller, who maintained he is “not a Democrat or Obama supporter.”

The lone establishment voice calling for the media to dig deeper into McCain’s war record belongs to Barry Sussman, one of the famed Washington Post editors in charge of the paper’s Watergate investigations.

“McCain has made his military experience a key reason to vote for him.,” Sussman wrote on the Nieman Watchdog Web site, which he now edits following his Post retirement.

“Reporters should examine his military records, including reports on air mishaps he was involved in before he was shot down over Hanoi. And McCain should see to it that all reports are made public,” Sussman said.

So far, though, outside of the Los Angles Times, Rolling Stone and the web, no one appears to be heeding Sussman’s call, posted in early September.

Rolling Stone managing editor Will Dana said he found that curious.

“Tim Dickinson gets asked to be on MSNBC and CNN all the time,” Dana said, “but the phones haven’t been ringing this week.”
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?d ... 0002974001

Jeff Stein can be reached at jstein@cq.com

Printer friendly with pictures / without pictures Email this article to a friend

Last updated 11/10/2008

[Truthseeker Profile]

Title: John McCain And The USS Forrestal Fire
Source: judicial-inc
URL Source: http://judicial-inc.biz/82jjohn_mccain_ ... rresta.htm
Published: Mar 10, 2008
Author: judicial-inc
Post Date: 2008-03-10 01:06:57 by TwentyTwelve
Keywords: John McCain, USS Forrestal Fire
Views: 7712
Comments: 39


judicial-inc.biz/82jjohn_..._and_the_uss_forresta.htm

John McCain And The USS Forrestal Fire

USS Forrestal In 1967

132 Dead Sailors, And Countless Wounded

A Small Rocket Hit A Fuel Tank On Another Plane

Where Is The Truth Here?

I have heard five versions of the Forrestal fire, but this one makes sense.

McCain Aviation Career

McCain crashed 5 jets, plus was responsible for the Forrestal fire. Something made the plane behind McCain fired a rocket, which hit McCain's external center fuel tank, and caused a fire. McCain panicked, and dropped two bombs into the fire.

Did He Start The USS Forrestal Fire?

Surviving crewmen and those who investigated the Forrestal fire case reported that McCain deliberately 'wet-started' his A-4E Skyhawk to shake up the guy in the F-4 Phantom behind his plane.

Incompetence Or A Stunt

'Wet-starts', done either deliberately (the starter motor switch allowed kerosene to pool in the engine and give a wet start) or accidentally, shoot a large flame from the tail of the aircraft. 'Wet starting' was a common practice among young 'hot-dog' pilots.

Zuni Rockets Were Volatile Design

In McCain's case, the 'wet-start' 'cooked off' and launched the M34 Zuni rocket from the rear F-4 that punctured the Skyhawk's fueltank, knocked the M-65 1000 lb bomb off it's 500 lb rated mount, and touched off the explosions and massive fire.

The Carrier Oriskany

The USS Oriskany came along side to treat the wounded.

Wounded Flown Out

They were transferred to other ships.

McCain Left With The Wounded

When the carrier Oriskany came along side, and McCain was put in a chopper and whisked away. McCain was the only Forrestal crewman to be immediately transferred

The Forrestal Crew

I have a hunch McCain left for his own safety, because the crew wanted blood.

Source

Is There Any Truth To This?

McCain's various stories never added up. Somehow, he was at the center of the USS Forrestal fire. His father covered up the biggest war crime in American naval history, the USS Liberty attack, and saved Israel. Now, McCain is shot down over Vietnam, and the Jewish/Communists supposedly tortured him half to death? After what McCain's father did for the Communists, he could have demanded anything.

The Zionists cooked the Forrestal story for a reason. They said McCain was on the catapult, but video shows he wasn't.

Whether Obama, Clinton, or McCain get elected doesn't matter. They will all do what the Zionists tell them to do. The Americans will need a fiscal collapse to motivate them, and then they will seek a electoral impeachment/recall.

Video 1 - 2

Who Is John McCain?

Will the USS Liberty haunt McCain?

The truth on Natalee Holloway

The Truth On Wal-Mart

Columbine Massacre

Dov Zakheim

Judicial Index



Click for Full Text!



Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)

USS Forrestal In 1967



132 Dead Sailors, And Countless Wounded

[Truthseeker Profile]

mc cain and obana have ghosts in there past so can you trust them
AMERICA WAKE UP AND VOTE FOR THE THIRD PARTY
VOTE FOR FREEDOM YOUR FREEDOM .YOU ARE NOT A SHEEP

[Vulcanic Profile]

mc cain and obana have ghosts in there past so can you trust them
AMERICA WAKE UP AND VOTE FOR THE THIRD PARTY
VOTE FOR FREEDOM YOUR FREEDOM .YOU ARE NOT A SHEEP

[Boondox681 Profile]

this thread just proves my theory....mccain is an incompetent fuktard.