The Implosion of John Kerry?

[Microcell]

Originally posted by JoeThaNo1Stunna
Bill Maher is an idiot on the level of Michael Moore.

I couldn't agree more!

Aso there was the big debacle of Kerry not stopping in Lawrence KS (My alma mater- KU) where 1,000 people were waiting to see him ( he was asleep, it was 1 in the morning, and this Republican does not even blame him for not stopping there), but there are some hopping mad Dems that actually told the news here that they plan to vote Bush because they were so mad at Kerry! Bush will most probably win Kansas anyway, but to hear this kid base his decision because he was mad that a train did not make an unscheduled stop scares the life out of me!! When asked how he felt that Edwards came back the following Sunday to make ammends, his response was "That is sloppy seconds!" He won't be the PRESIDENT!" Then he went on and on about how mad he was! This was an interview with Rush Limbaugh, where he fueled the kids fire, of course, but he asked the kid about policies and he knew of none that either candidate stood for! I can only pray that these people don't actually vote.

 

[peachgirl]

Bush hasn't made his military record the cornerstone of his campaign. Kerry is playing it up big time

Well of course Bush avoids talking about his military record....he doesn't have one!

I understand completely. Apparently, according to you, it's okay to be deceptive and secretive as long as you don't talk about it.

When you choose to criticize something about the opponent, then the record of your candidate regarding the subject is open to scrutiny as well.

The man was there for 4 months.

How many more months would that be that Kerry served his country honorably than Bush?

He goes to Vietnam, is injured multiple times and you want to fault him because he didn't stay long enough?

You know, when your candidate never graced the soil of Vietnam, it takes a lot of nerve to complain about how much time Kerry was there.

But what's funny is that he HASN'T made is record in the Senate has big of a part in his campaign?

Nice attempt at sidestepping the issue at hand....

This is typical Republican behavior....when it looks like you're in trouble, drag out the henchmen to do political dirty work.
If you can't win on the issues, you do what you have to do.They did it to McCain and they're trying it with Kerry.


Have you found any of those links regarding Bush's military service?

 

[treesinger]

Bush voter here.

Before I go further, I separate what Kerry has said after returning from war and how he was in the war zone.

I went to a site that I think most of us trust.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp

Snopes, I believe, is quite NON-partisan. In it, it separates comments from soldiers in VietNam in swift boats from veterans who are much closer to Kerry in combat. Those closer to Kerry seem to have much more positive to say about Kerry's actions than SBVT has. And, importantly,

Although the men quoted above are often identified as "John Kerry's shipmates," only one of them, Steven Gardner, actually served under Lt. Kerry's command on a Swift boat. The other men who served under Kerry's command continue to speak positively of him:

That is what I believe to be the truth. So how do you like that, a CONSERVATIVE who doesn't question Kerry's swift boat conduct.

Now, the comments and statements he made after returning home about atrocities and such...well, that is truly despicable

 

[Doug123]

A few comments...

The Drudge Report: You have to be kidding. Fox news is an altra accurate left wing group compared to those guys. You might find more accuracy watching the news section of the Wiggles Show.

Democrats Trashing the Constitution By Restricting Rights: Again, are you kidding? The Bush Administration has, at certain times, totally ignored the Constitution. History will show this to be true.

Want To Move Democratic Party To The Right: Um, ok. It isn't your Party, is it? I know this may come as a shock and cause some discomfort, but some people may actually have opposing views to yours.

Kerry Is A Liberal: Really? Great!

Peaceniks Are Brainwashed: Let me get this straight. If you oppose war when it comes out that the reasons for war were exaggerated or non-existent (depending on your viewpoint), then you're brainwashed? Open your eyes.

Bill Maher And Bush Running The Country On The Word Of God: From what I saw, Maher was trying to make the point to separate church and state. If I'm not mistaken, Bush has said God has actually spoken to him. Whether you believe or not, that's a bit scary that our "elected" leader is hearing voices. Isn't it? Agree with views or not, Maher is an intelligent, well-read, well-spoken individual...not an idiot.

Bush Alienating The World: Bush's policies HAVE alienated the rest of the world. It will take decades upon decades to clean up the damage he's done to our standing in the world. I'm not saying we should simply do what the rest of the world wants, but Bush needs to recognize that WORKING WITH the rest of the world is better than not working with the rest of the world.

Praying To God That Certain People Don't Vote: You're praying to God, asking him to intervene and prevent certain people from voting? Like it or not, as long as you meet all the qualifications, anyone can vote...even if they differ from your point of view or if they vote on the color of suit the politician is wearing. Calling your God in to help in your cause of preventing people to vote is a bit extreme, don't you think?

Is Kerry faultless? Who isn't? He's CERTAINLY the better choice between the two.

 

[minniepumpernickel]

Originally posted by CEDmom
Funny, I'd like to see the same thing for the Republican party. Maybe that will happen once Bush is out of office.

I totally agree with you as usual on here!

Whats going on, on here? Is this place turning into idiotspeak central?

Sometimes I'm shocked at the level of stupidity that people descend to on here.

 

[caitycaity]

hey willy!

 

[peachgirl]

Originally posted by treesinger
Bush voter here.

Before I go further, I separate what Kerry has said after returning from war and how he was in the war zone.

I went to a site that I think most of us trust.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp

Snopes, I believe, is quite NON-partisan. In it, it separates comments from soldiers in VietNam in swift boats from veterans who are much closer to Kerry in combat. Those closer to Kerry seem to have much more positive to say about Kerry's actions than SBVT has. And, importantly,



That is what I believe to be the truth. So how do you like that, a CONSERVATIVE who doesn't question Kerry's swift boat conduct.

Now, the comments and statements he made after returning home about atrocities and such...well, that is truly despicable

I like it just fine. It's nice to see a reasonable point of view now and then.

We can honestly disagree about his activities when he returned home or how important they are today. But, to use what he said and did as an excuse to trash his service record all in an attempt to de-rail his campaign is dispicable as well.

If they disagree with his comments and statements....make THAT an issue. Otherwise it comes off as just what it is....dirty politics.

 

[jrydberg]

Again, I revert to... Kerry obviously served quite well in Vietnam. End of story as far as I'm concerned.

 

[treesinger]

Originally posted by peachgirl
Well of course Bush avoids talking about his military record....he doesn't have one!

True to a point. He did serve, but he was nowhere near the actual danger of the war. Are you saying that those that served at home are NOT honorable, though?

I understand completely. Apparently, according to you, it's okay to be deceptive and secretive as long as you don't talk about it.

When you choose to criticize something about the opponent, then the record of your candidate regarding the subject is open to scrutiny as well.

I would agree. But Bush and Kerry's experience back then are apples and oranges. Yes, they are both fruits, but they are not similar at all.

How many more months would that be that Kerry served his country honorably than Bush?

He goes to Vietnam, is injured multiple times and you want to fault him because he didn't stay long enough?

You know, when your candidate never graced the soil of Vietnam, it takes a lot of nerve to complain about how much time Kerry was there.

Umm, I haven't seen anywhere where Bush has criticized Kerry on time served. I think Bush has gone out of his way NOT to bring it up.

Nice attempt at sidestepping the issue at hand....

This is typical Republican behavior....when it looks like you're in trouble, drag out the henchmen to do political dirty work.
If you can't win on the issues, you do what you have to do.They did it to McCain and they're trying it with Kerry.

Unlike you, I discriminate between what Bush wants to be said and what the GOP does. Just becase the GOP pedals out their viepont doesn't mean that Bush endorsed it.

Have you found any of those links regarding Bush's military service?

Isn't everything about Bush's record (that still exists) already released?

 

[treesinger]

Originally posted by jrydberg
Again, I revert to... Kerry obviously served quite well in Vietnam. End of story as far as I'm concerned.

But it is not the end of the story! He admitted to committing atrocities and war crimes! So he is either telling the truth, which is terrible, or he was lyingto support ulterior motives. Either way, Kerry does not come out smelling like a rose.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by peachgirl
Well of course Bush avoids talking about his military record....he doesn't have one!

Right back attcha. So when are YOU going to start touting anything BUT Kerry's military record? Why is that?? Because he doesn't have one worth talking about in a positive manner.

I understand completely. Apparently, according to you, it's okay to be deceptive and secretive as long as you don't talk about it.

Hmmm..... Seems to me that Kerry is refusing to release records of some sort. Can't remember what it was. Care to help a poor soul out?

When you choose to criticize something about the opponent, then the record of your candidate regarding the subject is open to scrutiny as well.

I agree. And Bush's stint in the NG has been pretty much talked about and documented to death.

How many more months would that be that Kerry served his country honorably than Bush?

That's your assertion. Not mine. I think both were honorable to serve the country in the manner that each chose. The difference is the discrepancies in the events that took place. One claim is accurate, the other is not (or even a complete lie). It's your prerogative to decide if the discrepancies matter enough to question additional characteristics of your guy.

He goes to Vietnam, is injured multiple times and you want to fault him because he didn't stay long enough?

Taking lessons from wvrevy with the rolleyes smiley?

Again, that's your take on what I said. I just stated facts and didn't say exactly how I felt about it.

You know, when your candidate never graced the soil of Vietnam, it takes a lot of nerve to complain about how much time Kerry was there.

I'm not complaining, just stating facts. Why so defensive?

 

[dianeschlicht]

Originally posted by treesinger
Thanks for trying to change the subject. We're talking about KERRY in the VietNam War, not BUSH. If you want to criticise Bush, fine. But that doesn't change the fact that Kerry is getting very little support from his war buddies that he was present with those 4 months. As the OP said, that is very telling.

Criticizing Bush's military record does nothing to answer the question of why Kerry's boat-mates do not support him.

I see this as a political arguement, so bringing up Mr. Bush's experience is not changing a subject but pointing out that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Go ahead and flame away, 'cuz I won't be opening the thread again anyway.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by dianeschlicht
Go ahead and flame away, 'cuz I won't be opening the thread again anyway.

Another typical drive-by.

 

[jrydberg]

Originally posted by treesinger
But it is not the end of the story! He admitted to committing atrocities and war crimes! So he is either telling the truth, which is terrible, or he was lyingto support ulterior motives. Either way, Kerry does not come out smelling like a rose.

I didn't say he came out of it smelling like a rose. I'm no Kerry supporter. But he served his country in Vietnam. What he said afterward was clearly a mistake. He was 20-something years old. I don't particularly care.

Just as I don't think it's a particularly good strategy on the part of Kerry to place so much emphasis on his Vietnam service. That was a long time ago. He served, he came home, move on. Let's talk about what Kerry's done in the 30 years since. That's a lot more relevant.

 

[treesinger]

Originally posted by jrydberg
I didn't say he came out of it smelling like a rose. I'm no Kerry supporter. But he served his country in Vietnam. What he said afterward was clearly a mistake. He was 20-something years old. I don't particularly care.

Just as I don't think it's a particularly good strategy on the part of Kerry to place so much emphasis on his Vietnam service. That was a long time ago. He served, he came home, move on. Let's talk about what Kerry's done in the 30 years since. That's a lot more relevant.

And with that...ITA!

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by minniepumpernickel
Sometimes I'm shocked at the level of stupidity that people descend to on here.

OMG!!! That's SO funny. I was just thinking the same thing.

 

[jjskribs]

Kendra17.......... I am from Massachusetts and I DID NOT make a "bad choice" in electing John Kerry and Ted Kennedy. I am sick and tired of the voters of Massachusetts constantly being criticized. Democrats, Republicans and Independents have reelected these men because of what they have done for Massachusetts.

May I remind you that we have a Republican governor........ is it your opinion that we made a "bad choice" there too

 

[peachgirl]

Originally posted by treesinger
True to a point. He did serve, but he was nowhere near the actual danger of the war. Are you saying that those that served at home are NOT honorable, though?

I'm quite sure there are many who served honorably who didn't go to Vietnam. However, let's not pretend that the reserves then and the reserves now are the same thing. During Vietnam, those who wanted to avoid being drafted and being sent to Vietnam and couldn't get a deferment, joined the reserves. That's a simple matter of fact.

"Umm, I haven't seen anywhere where Bush has criticized Kerry on time served. I think Bush has gone out of his way NOT to bring it up."

The poster criticized, and that's what I was responding to. Yes, you can bet Bush has gone out of his way not to be the one to bring it up, BUT by not coming our firmly against this trash, he is, in effect, giving the green light for others to do his dirty work.

[Unlike you, I discriminate between what Bush wants to be said and what the GOP does. Just becase the GOP pedals out their viepont doesn't mean that Bush endorsed it.

If Bush doesn't endorse it, all he has to do is say so. He hasn't said it, so it's a reasonable assumption that he thinks it's just fine.

Isn't everything about Bush's record (that still exists) already released?

Ummmm...yeah, except for those crucial "lost" records.

 

[treesinger]

I just found a very interesting article...On May 6, 2001

http://hnn.us/articles/3552.html

MR. RUSSERT: You mentioned you're a military guy. There's been a lot of discussion about Bob Kerrey, your former Democratic colleague in the Senate, about his talking about his anguish about what happened in Vietnam . You were on this program 30 years ago as a leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. And we went back and have an audiotape of that and some still photos. And your comments are particularly timely in this overall discussion of Bob Kerrey. And I'd like for you to listen to those with our audience and then try to put that war into some context:

(Audiotape, April 18, 1971):

MR. CROSBY NOYES (Washington Evening Star): Mr. Kerry, you said at one time or another that you think our policies in Vietnam are tantamount to genocide and that the responsibility lies at all chains of command over there. Do you consider that you personally as a Naval officer committed atrocities in Vietnam or crimes punishable by law in this country?

SEN. KERRY: There are all kinds of atrocities, and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50 calibre machine guns, which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare, all of this is contrary to the Geneva Conventions and all of this is ordered as a matter of written established policy by the government of the United States from the top down. And I believe that the men who designed these, the men who designed the free fire zone, the men who ordered us, the men who signed off the air raid strike areas, I think these men, by the letter of the law, the same letter of the law that tried Lieutenant Calley, are war criminals.

(End audiotape)

MR. RUSSERT: Thirty years later, you stand by that?

SEN. KERRY: I don't stand by the genocide. I think those were the words of an angry young man. We did not try to do that. But I do stand by the description--I don't even believe there is a purpose served in the word "war criminal." I really don't. But I stand by the rest of what happened over there, Tim.

I mean, you know, we--it was--I mean, we've got to put this war in its right perspective and time helps us do that. I believe very deeply that it was a noble effort to begin with. I signed up. I volunteered. I wanted to go over there and I wanted to win. It was a noble effort to try to make a country democratic; to try to carry our principles and values to another part of the world. But we misjudged history. We misjudged our own country. We misjudged our strategy. And we fell into a dark place. All of us. And I think we learned that over time. And I hope the contribution that some of us made as veterans was to come back and help people understand that.

*snip*
I'm focusing on the bold, but wanted to include the rest for discussion too.

In the bold, Kerry is basically equating VietNam with Iraq pre-9/11. Using these same words, one would assume that Kerry would want to spread democracy to dictatorial parts of the world as long as we have a good plan.

With Iraq, he spent a lot of time haring on no WMD's. If he really wants to remain consistent, he needs to hammer what he's been touting lately. That we needed a better plan. In his statement before Congress in 1971, he mentioned the need for more guerilla warfare. So, doesx he support more special forces being used in Iraq?

 

[MICKEY88]

Originally posted by peachgirl














The men who are complaining now are still bitter over Kerry's activities when he came home. That's understandable. They have a right to disagree and to voice that disagreement. The problem is, they need to do just that instead of this cheap smear campaign.

Of course, that wouldn't have gotten them a sweet book deal that's going to make them a very lot of money. Btw, why did they wait until NOW to make this all public? Why didn't they say something when the medals were being investigated??? Can you say CASH????The military investigates every incident where a medal is to be awarded. They don't hand them out like candy. He earned them, he deserved them.

No matter what you think of John Kerry's politics, he served his country admirably. As I said in another thread, our country owes him a debt of gratitude just as we do every other person who really served in the military.


Now, anyone want to provide some links that verify Bush's so called military service??? A couple of guys that have an opinion on the quality of his service would be nice as well.

one of the other swift boat commanders was on the news this morning, they aired a segment from the old dick cavett show..30 some years ago, in which this same man confronted kerry about his service and the lies he was telling, he claimed that Kerry injured himself, applied for the purple heart and other commanders said he didn't earn it, the purple heart was denied, as soon as all the witnesses were transeferred out, he re-applied and got the purple heart that got him out of Nam he also stated that the fierce fire fight that Kerry claimed took place when he rescued the other guy, the one he says he turned back for....never happened, he said other boats were within 50 feet of Kerry's boat, had he tried to turn around he would have hit other boats I personally don't have a problem with Bush serving in the Guard, many people did, I don't see how making up stories about serving in Nam makes someone a better fit for Commander In Chief..

as for Kerry serving his country admirably, I question that, from what I've heard over the years...not just this year,,, he was more concerned about making a movie on his life, while people were dieing he was playing hollywood action hero....???