Kerry and Bush supporters. A question for y'all.

You and Peachgirl have both admitted in this thread that you hadn't heard anything about it until today

You know, I can see how statements that aren't true are turned into fact. I never, ever, not once, not even close said any such thing.

I said I was out of the loop. Out of the loop means I haven't paid attention to the details. Of course I've heard the crap about Cambodia, I simply never gave it enough of my attention to learn a great many details. I knew Kerry claimed he was in Cambodia, I knew the swiftboat liars say he wasn't and I simply did not know what the hell the big deal about it is.

I still don't.

Really, I'm getting very tired of my words being changed around to suit someone else's purposes.
 
PG -

In a different thread, you said it was "irrelevant" when someone compared MM & F911 in the context of using Iraq & Afghanistan for political ads.

But when you say.................


For those who would like to see what McCain had to say about the dirty tricks that were pulled on him, take a look at the video where he confronted Bush about this in 2000.

Are not you doing the same thing????

And I don't see Michael Moore out there with a commercial blasting the air waves.

I know you don't live in Florida, but he IS featured prominently in a campaign commercial for Peter Deutsch, a democratic candidate for senate that is so far to the left he makes you look like a conservative,. ;)
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
Why don't you?

And I don't see Michael Moore out there with a commercial blasting the air waves. I don't see him getting the air time the SBVT are getting. Moveon has been condemned by Kerry, why doesn't Bush do the same?????

I can tell you why. There's a significant number of veterans who will never forgive John Kerry for speaking his mind. Some of those, for whatever reasons, despise Kerry to the point that they want to destroy him.

Bush doesn't want to piss off that voter segment so he let's this go on without saying a single word. Saying Kerry is a hero then standing silently while others say just the opposite doesn't cut it.

Kerry wasn't afraid of losing the extremists on the left, Bush should be as brave. But, it's not going to happen.

No, Moore only had a feature length film, for heaven sake.

And for the record, Moveon has NOT been condemned by Kerry. He condemned ONE commercial. He's not about to turn his back on all that money.

Every pretzel twist and turn Kerry has taken is in this campaign is all about not losing the extermists on the left.
 
Originally posted by JimB.




I know you don't live in Florida, but he IS featured prominently in a campaign commercial for Peter Deutsch, a democratic candidate for senate that is so far to the left he makes you look like a conservative,. ;)

Jim, I hope you'll consider voting for Mel Martinez in the primary, if you're able to. (your party registration is none of my business). I've had the pleasure of working on his campaign for the last 6 months and he's an outstanding candidate!
 

Originally posted by Saffron
Does it always make breaking news though when a politican tells a lie, 20 years ago, that had no consequences attached to it except causing credibility issues? He didn't lie to cover up something, start something, accuse somebody of something. Hell, I have no idea why he did it, if he did it! :tongue: :crazy2:


Maggie, it's significant because of the context in which Kerry used the "seared in my memory" statements. On the floor of the Senate, making a speech in which he was indicting the foreign policy of the Reagan administration. He was using his Vietnam experience to explain his opposition to Reagan's policies in Central America, by claiming they were leading the US into "another Vietnam".

It wasn't just a flip, passing comment he made.
 
Originally posted by JimB.
PG -

In a different thread, you said it was "irrelevant" when someone compared MM & F911 in the context of using Iraq & Afghanistan for political ads.

But when you say.................




Are not you doing the same thing????



I know you don't live in Florida, but he IS featured prominently in a campaign commercial for Peter Deutsch, a democratic candidate for senate that is so far to the left he makes you look like a conservative,. ;)

No I'm not. And you have no idea how conservative or liberal I am, do you? Should I assume because you are for George Bush that you are a right wing extremist?

Bush's use of dirty campaigning has a history. This isn't the first time he's done it. I think that his record on how he runs his campaigns is relevent.

And you're taking my words out of context. The thread was about using the Iraqi flag in a commercial. It wasn't about MM. I was, and still am tired of the right trying to side step issues by continually using the..."you did it so we can" excuse. That's what my reference was to mm being irrelevent to the thread.

Next sidestep???

Moore only had a feature length film, for heaven sake.

A perfect example of the tactic I was talking about above. Yes, it was a movie...a movie that if you wanted to see you had to leave your home, find a theatre showing it and pay your money to see it. It wasn't flooding the screens in millions of homes in America.

Whatever Kerry did as far as Moveon...it's a hell of a lot more than Bush has done. Hypocrisy reigns among some on the right. Kerry condemns the moveon ad but he's a low life because he didn't go far enough.

Bush has not said one single, solitary word about the SBVT group and that is apparently just fine.:rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
You know, I can see how statements that aren't true are turned into fact. I never, ever, not once, not even close said any such thing.

I said I was out of the loop. Out of the loop means I haven't paid attention to the details. Of course I've heard the crap about Cambodia, I simply never gave it enough of my attention to learn a great many details. I knew Kerry claimed he was in Cambodia, I knew the swiftboat liars say he wasn't and I simply did not know what the hell the big deal about it is.

I still don't.

Really, I'm getting very tired of my words being changed around to suit someone else's purposes.

I think you're misunderstanding the point I'm trying to make. If the mainstream media was following up on this and giving it the attention they'd give if something similar happened with George W. Bush or any other conservative candidate, you'd have no choice but to give it your attention. It would be front page, 7:00 news lead story everywhere.
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
No I'm not. And you have no idea how conservative or liberal I am, do you? Should I assume because you are for George Bush that you are a right wing extremist?

Bush's use of dirty campaigning has a history. This isn't the first time he's done it. I think that his record on how he runs his campaigns is relevent.

And you're taking my words out of context. The thread was about using the Iraqi flag in a commercial. It wasn't about MM. I was, and still am tired of the right trying to side step issues by continually using the..."you did it so we can" excuse. That's what my reference was to mm being irrelevent to the thread.

Next sidestep???



A perfect example of the tactic I was talking about above. Yes, it was a movie...a movie that if you wanted to see you had to leave your home, find a theatre showing it and pay your money to see it. It wasn't flooding the screens in millions of homes in America.

Whatever Kerry did as far as Moveon...it's a hell of a lot more than Bush has done. Hypocrisy reigns among some on the right. Kerry condemns the moveon ad but he's a low life because he didn't go far enough.

Bush has not said one single, solitary word about the SBVT group and that is apparently just fine.:rolleyes:

Bush HAS made statements about the SBVT group....he has said he is against all the 527 groups and that they ought to be outlawed. And that John Kerry served honorably and heroically in Vietnam.

Come on, Peachgirl. This is getting old. I totally agree about hypocrisy reigning among some on the right. Totally. But I also think it reigns among some on the left, and you don't appear willing to recognize that.

Politics is full of hypocrisy, unfortunately. It's very bi-partisan in that respect.
 
Bush HAS made statements about the SBVT group.

Really? Could you post a link where he has condemned the commericial this group has made?

Btw, looks like there are more swift boat veterans coming out of the woodwork.

William Rood, an editor on the Chicago Tribune's metropolitan desk, said he broke 35 years of silence about the Feb. 28, 1969, mission that resulted in Kerry's receiving a Silver Star because recent portrayals of Kerry's actions published in the best-selling book "Unfit for Command" are wrong and smear the reputations of veterans who served with Kerry.

Rood, who commanded one of three swift boats during that 1969 mission, said Kerry came under rocket and automatic weapons fire from Viet Cong forces and that Kerry devised an aggressive attack strategy that was praised by their superiors. He called allegations that Kerry's accomplishments were "overblown" untrue.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...040821kerry,1,6814873.story?coll=chi-news-hed

You have to sign up, but it's free.

I suppose there's something wrong with the Chicago Tribune too? Or perhaps we could try mudslinging the guy who had the nerve to speak up for Kerry like we did to the man whose life Kerry saved?

If the mainstream media was following up on this and giving it the attention they'd give if something similar happened with George W. Bush or any other conservative candidate, you'd have no choice but to give it your attention. It would be front page, 7:00 news lead story everywhere.

Gee, just how many Kerry bashing stories would you like to see as the lead story every day?
 
Hmmm. Well ... if he lied about it, he lied about it. I guess as the story breaks the net, more and more information will come out from both sides, the Left and the Right, Kerry and the SBVT, then we can all try to figure out what he was talking about! :confused:
 
Originally posted by Saffron
Hmmm. Well ... if he lied about it, he lied about it. I guess as the story breaks the net, more and more information will come out from both sides, the Left and the Right, Kerry and the SBVT, then we can all try to figure out what he was talking about! :confused:

The real reason behind all of this is to sidestep the issues. Bush can't win if he allows this campaign to focus on important things such as the economy, education, taxes etc.

So, if he can sidetrack Kerry into spending enough time on these types of things, he thinks it will at least divert attention enough that no one will pay attention to the important issues.

Hopefully the dis is the only place that is succeeding.
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
Really? Could you post a link where he has condemned the commericial this group has made?

Btw, looks like there are more swift boat veterans coming out of the woodwork.



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...040821kerry,1,6814873.story?coll=chi-news-hed

You have to sign up, but it's free.

I suppose there's something wrong with the Chicago Tribune too? Or perhaps we could try mudslinging the guy who had the nerve to speak up for Kerry like we did to the man whose life Kerry saved?



Gee, just how many Kerry bashing stories would you like to see as the lead story every day?

I already read it, and I've been signed up their website for a long time.

I dont' want to see any Kerry bashing stories. I want to see the mainstream media applying the same standards to all the candidates, when it comes to investigative reporting.


And I'm wondering if you didn't see this part of my post, or if you're just choosing to ignore it.

Come on, Peachgirl. This is getting old. I totally agree about hypocrisy reigning among some on the right. Totally. But I also think it reigns among some on the left, and you don't appear willing to recognize that.

Politics is full of hypocrisy, unfortunately. It's very bi-partisan in that respect.
 
Another thought....(gosh, I'm just full of abstract thoughts today)....as we all know, Kerry was awarded medals for honorable service in Viet Nam. He was discharged, with honor, by our military.

Now, many here and elsewhere have made several claims that A. his service was not honorable and B. After that service, he admitted in a public forum that he commited crimes. However, to this day, the military has not stripped him of his medals, nor have they attempted to prosecute him for the alleged crimes.

What I am wondering is this: Why aren't these very same people who are on the warpath for Kerry's head also on the warpath against our military? If the military made such grevious errors, and are willing to ignore the alleged admission of crimes, why are we not hearing as loud--and should it not be louder?--a war cry against our military? Assuming the allegations are true, did they not commit a grevious error? Are they not errant by not pursuing a criminal? Why aren't these very same people absolutely screaming for reform? Wouldn't that seem to be the greater issue? And since it apparently is not--have they asked themselves why?
 
Ok, bsnyder...as soon as the ball gets here, I'll bounce it back.

As it is, the problem with your post is your definition of

applying the same standards to all the candidates,

Apparently, you're still not satisfied that there is enough coverage of the negative Kerry stories. You want more. You want them to blast the airwaves with stories on whether or not Kerry was in Cambodia on Dec. 23 of Jan2..3. You want them to devote hours of research and manpower into trying to find out if he, many years later might have been 10 days off on exactly when he was in Cambodia.

You complain when Kerry asks the publisher to remove a book, he's trying to supress free speech. When you discover that Bush did the same thing, it was justified.

You complain when Kerry files an FEC complaint, but say nothing about when Bush did the exact same thing. Don't talk to me about being fair and no one tossed any ball into my court.

I post a link to a story that broke today saying that another man, very close to the situation backs Kerry's story and his documentation is exactly what Kerry says. Your response? "I read that"...

I don't see a ball to toss back....
 
Not that those who wish the lie was true will care, but this is a signficant story regarding what really happened....

Swift boat skipper: Kerry critics wrong
Tribune editor breaks long silence on Kerry record; fought in disputed battle

By Tim Jones
Tribune national correspondent
Published August 21, 2004

The commander of a Navy swift boat who served alongside Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry during the Vietnam War stepped forward Saturday to dispute attacks challenging Kerry's integrity and war record.

William Rood, an editor on the Chicago Tribune's metropolitan desk, said he broke 35 years of silence about the Feb. 28, 1969, mission that resulted in Kerry's receiving a Silver Star because recent portrayals of Kerry's actions published in the best-selling book "Unfit for Command" are wrong and smear the reputations of veterans who served with Kerry.

Rood, who commanded one of three swift boats during that 1969 mission, said Kerry came under rocket and automatic weapons fire from Viet Cong forces and that Kerry devised an aggressive attack strategy that was praised by their superiors. He called allegations that Kerry's accomplishments were "overblown" untrue.

"The critics have taken pains to say they're not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us. It's gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there," Rood said in a 1,700-word first-person account published in Sunday's Tribune.

Rood's recollection of what happened on that day at the southern tip of South Vietnam was backed by key military documents, including his citation for a Bronze Star he earned in the battle and a glowing after-action report written by the Navy captain who commanded his and Kerry's task force, who is now a critic of the Democratic candidate.

Rood's previously untold story and the documents shed new light on a key historical event that has taken center stage in an extraordinary political and media firestorm generated by a group calling itself the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Allegations in the book, co-authored by one of the leaders of the group, accuse Kerry of being a coward who fabricated wartime events and used comrades for his "insatiable appetite for medals." The allegations have fueled a nearly two-week-long TV ad campaign against the Democratic nominee. Talk radio and cable news channels have feasted on the story.

Animosity from some veterans toward Kerry goes back more than 30 years, when Kerry returned from Vietnam to take a leadership role in the anti-war group Vietnam Veterans Against the War. Anger reached a boiling point with Kerry's presidential nomination and his own highlighting of his service during the war, a centerpiece of his campaign strategy against President Bush, who spent the war stateside in the Air National Guard in Texas and Alabama.

Many know of ads

A poll released Friday by the National Annenberg Election Survey reported that more than half the country has heard about or seen TV ads attacking Kerry's war record, a remarkable impact for ads that have appeared in only a handful of states.

Kerry strongly disputes the allegations. Last week he called on the White House to denounce the TV ads and accused Bush of relying on the Vietnam veterans "to do his dirty work." On Thursday, Kerry challenged Bush to a debate on their respective war records. Democrats point to unresolved questions about whether Bush in fact served all the time he was credited with serving in Alabama.

The Bush campaign has denied any association with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth but so far has refused to condemn the book and the group's TV ads. A report in Friday's New York Times disclosed connections between the anti-Kerry vets and the Bush family, Bush's chief political aide Karl Rove and several high-ranking Texas Republicans. Some of the recent accounts from veterans critical of Kerry have been contradicted by their own earlier statements, the Times reported.

Rood's account also sharply contradicts the version currently put forth by the anti-Kerry veterans. Rood, 61, wrote that Kerry had personally contacted him and other crew members in recent days asking that they go public with their accounts of what happened on that day.

Rood said that, ever since the war, he had "wanted to put it all behind us—the rivers, the ambushes, the killing. … I have refused all requests for interviews about Kerry's service—even those from reporters at the Chicago Tribune."

"I can't pretend those calls [from Kerry] had no effect on me, but that is not why I am writing this," Rood said. "What matters most to me is that this is hurting crewmen who are not public figures and who deserved to be honored for what they did. My intent is to tell the story here and to never again talk publicly about it."

Rood declined requests from a Tribune reporter to be interviewed for this article. Rood wrote that he could testify only to the February 1969 mission and not to any of the other battlefield decorations challenged by Kerry's critics—a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts—because Rood was not an eyewitness to those engagements.

Ambush scenario

In February 1969, Rood was a lieutenant junior grade commanding PCF-23, one of the three 50-foot aluminum swift boats that carried troops up the Dong Cung, a tributary of the Bay Hap River. Kerry commanded another boat, PCF-94 and Lt. j.g. Donald Droz, who was killed in action six weeks later, commanded PCF-43. Ambushes from Viet Cong fighters were common because the noise from boats, powered by twin diesel engines, practically invited gunfire. Ambushes, Rood said, "were a virtual certainty."

Before this day's mission, though, Kerry, the tactical commander of the mission, discussed with Rood and Droz a change in response to the anticipated ambushes: If possible, turn into the fire once it is identified and attack the ambushers, Rood recalled Kerry saying. The boats followed that new tactic with great success, Rood said, and the mission was highly praised.

In the book "Unfit for Command," Kerry's critics maintained otherwise. The book's authors, John O'Neill and Jerome Corsi, wrote that Kerry's attack on the Viet Cong ambush displayed "stupidity, not courage." The book was published by Regnery, a conservative publisher that has brought into print many books critical of Democratic politicians and policies.

"The only explanation for what Kerry did is the same justification that characterizes his entire short Vietnam adventure: the pursuit of medals and ribbons," wrote Corsi and O'Neill. Later in the war, O'Neill commanded the same Swift boat Kerry had led. O'Neill is now a leader of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

In the book, O'Neill and Corsi said Kerry chased down a "young Viet Cong in a loincloth … clutching a grenade launcher which may or may not have been loaded."

Rood recalled the fleeing Viet Cong was "a grown man, dressed in the kind of garb the VC usually wore." There were other attackers as well, he said, and his boat and Kerry's boat took significant fire.

After the attack, the task force commanding officer, then-Capt. Roy Hoffmann, sent a message of congratulations to the three swift boats, saying their charge of the ambushers was a "shining example of completely overwhelming the enemy" and that it "may be the most efficacious [method] of dealing with small numbers of ambushers," Rood said.

In the official after-action message, obtained by the Tribune, Hoffmann wrote that the tactics developed and executed by Kerry, Rood and Droz were "immensely effictive [sic]" and that "this operation did unreparable [sic] damage to the enemy in this area."

"Well done," Hoffmann concluded in his message.

Change of story

But more than three decades later, Hoffmann, now a retired rear admiral, has changed his story. Today he is one of Kerry's most vocal critics, saying the attacks against the ambushers 35 years ago call into question Kerry's judgment and show his tendency to be impulsive.

Rood challenges that criticism, recalling that the direction for the actions they took on the river that day came from the highest ranks of the Navy command in Vietnam.

"What we did on Feb. 28, 1969, was well in line with the tone set by our top commanders," Rood said.

Asked for his response to Rood's account, O'Neill argued that the former swift boat skipper's version of events is not substantially different from what appeared in his book. The account of the Feb. 28 attack draws heavily on reporting from The Boston Globe, O'Neill said.

He said the congratulatory note from Hoffmann was based on the belief that Kerry was under heavy fire from the Viet Cong. But O'Neill claimed that "didn't happen." Had Hoffmann known the true circumstances of events that day, O'Neill said, he would not have issued the congratulatory note. Attempts to reach Hoffmann for comment were unsuccessful.

In his eyewitness account, Rood describes coming under rocket and automatic weapons fire from Viet Cong on the riverbank during two separate ambushes of his boat and Kerry's boat.

Praise for the mission led by Kerry came from Navy commanders who far outranked Hoffmann. Rood won a Bronze Star for his actions on that day. The Bronze Star citation from the late Adm. Elmo Zumwalt, then commander of U.S. Naval Forces, Vietnam, singled out the tactic used by the boats and said the Viet Cong were "caught completely off guard."

Longtime debate

The war about the war between O'Neill and Kerry has raged for more than three decades. O'Neill, who became a lawyer in Houston after returning from Vietnam, was recruited by the Nixon administration in 1971 to serve as a political counterweight to Kerry, who by then had left the military and was a vocal critic of the war.

The two debated the war on the Dick Cavett television show in 1971, with O'Neill accusing Kerry of the "attempted murder of the reputations of 2½ million" Vietnam veterans.

Rood acknowledged in his first-person account that there could always be errors in recollection, especially with the passage of more than three decades. His Bronze Star citation, he said, misidentifies the river where the main action occurred.

That mistake, he said, is a "cautionary note for those trying to piece it all together. There's no final authority on something that happened so long ago—not the documents and not even the strained recollections of those of us who were there.

"But I know that what some people are saying now is wrong," Rood wrote. "While they mean to hurt Kerry, what they're saying impugns others who are not in the public eye."
Copyright © 2004, Chicago Tribune
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
Ok, bsnyder...as soon as the ball gets here, I'll bounce it back.

As it is, the problem with your post is your definition of



Apparently, you're still not satisfied that there is enough coverage of the negative Kerry stories. You want more. You want them to blast the airwaves with stories on whether or not Kerry was in Cambodia on Dec. 23 of Jan2..3. You want them to devote hours of research and manpower into trying to find out if he, many years later might have been 10 days off on exactly when he was in Cambodia.

You complain when Kerry asks the publisher to remove a book, he's trying to supress free speech. When you discover that Bush did the same thing, it was justified.

You complain when Kerry files an FEC complaint, but say nothing about when Bush did the exact same thing. Don't talk to me about being fair and no one tossed any ball into my court.

I post a link to a story that broke today saying that another man, very close to the situation backs Kerry's story and his documentation is exactly what Kerry says. Your response? "I read that"...

I don't see a ball to toss back....

I guess you've just completely missed the point I've been trying to make.

This would NEVER have been covered in the mainstream press at all if the internet blogosphere wasn't there to force them to cover it. It's not a matter of wanting more. I want them to be fair-handed in their treatment of all the candidates, and they most certainly haven't been.

This was the ball, very specifically:

I totally agree about hypocrisy reigning among some on the right. Totally.

Did you miss that?
 
Yes, I saw it, but I'm a stickler for including the entire thought because otherwise it can be very misleading.

I totally agree about hypocrisy reigning among some on the right. Totally. But I also think it reigns among some on the left, and you don't appear willing to recognize that.

We won't agree on this, so I didn't think it was all that important and I didn't want to start a long line of responses telling me why I was wrong and how much more hypocritical the left is than the right.

But, what the hell. It's the weekend so maybe there aren't that many people posting and it won't throw us into that old argument. Yes, I agree there are hypocrites on the left as well. However, on this board, amongst the people I see posting...the right has the left outnumbered in those who are so far off the edge that it's frightening.

The only way for the press to give more coverage to negative stories against Kerry is to create more hours in the day.
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
Yes, I saw it, but I'm a stickler for including the entire thought because otherwise it can be very misleading.



We won't agree on this, so I didn't think it was all that important and I didn't want to start a long line of responses telling me why I was wrong and how much more hypocritical the left is than the right.

But, what the hell. It's the weekend so maybe there aren't that many people posting and it won't throw us into that old argument. Yes, I agree there are hypocrites on the left as well. However, on this board, amongst the people I see posting...the right has the left outnumbered in those who are so far off the edge that it's frightening.

The only way for the press to give more coverage to negative stories against Kerry is to create more hours in the day.

I never said anything about one being more hypocritcal than the other. And I wasn't talking about anyone on the DIS. I was speaking directly about the two political parties and their campaigns. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.
 
Originally posted by bsnyder
I never said anything about one being more hypocritcal than the other. And I wasn't talking about anyone on the DIS. I was speaking directly about the two political parties and their campaigns. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.

I'm sure there's things going on in both campaigns that shouldn't.

Of course I believe it's much worse on the Bush side and I believe it's his method of operation in any campaign he runs. He's found it works well and he does it over an over again.

What he did to John McCain may not have been a crime, but it should've been. It was shameful.

Honestly, if I found out Kerry was allowing such things to go on that I believe Bush is....he would not get my vote.

I still wouldn't vote for Bush, but I wouldn't vote Kerry either.
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
I'm sure there's things going on in both campaigns that shouldn't.

Of course I believe it's much worse on the Bush side and I believe it's his method of operation in any campaign he runs. He's found it works well and he does it over an over again.

What he did to John McCain may not have been a crime, but it should've been. It was shameful.

Honestly, if I found out Kerry was allowing such things to go on that I believe Bush is....he would not get my vote.

I still wouldn't vote for Bush, but I wouldn't vote Kerry either.

I do understand where you're coming from. Maybe I just have a much more cynical view of politics, and politicians, than you do. The dirty campaigning has been going on forever, and both sides do it.
 















Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top