Attacking a Soldiers medals is attacking all Soldiers Medals

[shamrock]

dogs, as I've said before I have the utmost respect for all veterans, and I do remember you saying this would be a issue for Kerry some time ago. But you must agree all these negative Republican campaigns are getting ridiculous, and I voted for Bush. Also in my I've voted Republican all the way back to weld.

You know, I thought it was a republican thing, but as somebody mentioned above maybe it is a Bush thing. I mentioned above Willie Horton, Swift boats, blow jobs, McCain and actually forgot Ross Perot. I didn't realize all these also were BUSH CAMPAIGNS. it gets so ridiculous, just 10 minutes ago on the news I hear something about Kerry s wife supports Castro, wtf??

Wouldn't you agreed that Bush is running his campaign as the guy strong against terrorist? As the great protector if you will. He was doing this before Kerry was even the nominee. Hence isn't it logical even necessary that Kerry run showing strength, that he was a soldier. Listen, I totally appreciate some veterans choose not to forget what Kerry said after the war. That's their right. But I think it should be separated, these guys should come out and say "look I detest this guy for what he said following Vietnam". Not try to paint him as a cowardly shitty soldier. I don't think that's fair, because as I said I respect ALL VETERANS. Hell the guy volunteered & served 2 tours. Honestly it takes balls for anyone to get out there with bullets flying everywhere. I just wish these guys would be honest & say "we hate this guy for what he said" and this guy Elliott is being a embarrassment and disservice for all veterans with his constant story changing. Back in 96' he was here in Boston calling Kerry a absolute hero, saying he performed "above and beyond anything he had seen".

I said probably 6-8 months ago, there are plenty of reasons not to like Kerry, but attacking him regarding Vietnam is not very smart. You alluded above to reasons why Kerry is very vulnerable. Why doesn't Bush stick to these? It would be very refreshing instead of all this negative bull shitt.

 

[Turfgrass]

I can appreciate why people are turned off by dirty politics, by which I mean the unsubstantiated mudslinging against candidates designed to mislead and smear rather than inform. But I lament the level of cynicism to which we've descended that makes us turn a deaf ear to negativity that may well be true and relevant.

Some of the adverse reaction to these claims against Kerry arises from our culture's justifiable elevation of war heroes and the sacrosanct nature of one's honorable military -- especially wartime -- service. You just can't go there.

But think about it. What if the allegations are true? What if Kerry truly did self-inflict, lie about, or embellish his wounds and other aspects of his reputed heroism? What if he did videotape himself reenacting combat scenes, all with an eye toward his future in politics? What if he did actually participate in atrocities as he said he did? (He?s gotten a complete pass on this.) Would these things matter? Should they matter?

Sure, I would prefer that all elections be decided on the issues, after a thorough debate and adequate public deliberation. But have we become so jaded that a presidential candidate's character is no longer an issue -- even when it may directly bear on how he would perform in office?

Indignant Democrats can pretend otherwise, but they have been making President Bush's character an unceasing issue for the past four years. Indeed, his allegedly poor character is the main hook the Democrats are hanging their hats on in this campaign.

Despite the hype, the Democrats really don't have much else to go on this year, which is why they don't dare dissociate themselves from Michael Moore, the principal purveyor of the abominable "Bush lied" lie. So the Democrats don't have much standing to complain about "negative" campaigning.

Nor does Senator Kerry -- at least with respect to this issue. He is the one who "opened the door" by making his Vietnam service the centerpiece of his campaign. If his honorable service is relevant, so is the possibility of his dishonorable service.

This shouldn't be about "fairness" anyway, but about informing the public. If the stunning allegations in "Unfit for Command" are true, they paint a picture of a man who simply cannot be trusted to be president, much less a wartime president. So what we ought to be focused on is whether they are true.

Concerning the veracity of the charges, consider that the "Swiftees" are not GOP mouthpieces -- some are Democrats. They approached Regnery Publishing with their book proposal, not the other way around. Their account is based on their firsthand knowledge -- not hearsay -- and would be admissible in any court proceeding involving these issues.

The Swiftees didn't wait until the last minute in the campaign to raise these charges, as did those who attempted to impugn George W. Bush in 2000 the very weekend before election day. They have allowed Kerry ample time to attempt to rebut their indictment. Just release your medical records, Senator Kerry.

The Swiftees' brief against John Kerry, if true, is the opposite of dirty campaigning, because we cannot overstate its relevance to his fitness for commander in chief.

Conversely, if you want to witness a seminar in dirty campaigning, just watch as the DNC goes into action trying to suppress the story and smear those who repeat it -- anything but an airing of the merits of the charges. It's going to be ugly.

-David Limbaugh

 

[ocelot]

David Limbaugh???!!!!

"But I lament the level of cynicism to which we've descended that makes us turn a deaf ear to negativity that may well be true and relevant."

MAY be true?

Moore does not work for Kerry last I heard. No more than RUSH works for Bush.

What If? What If? What If? What If all those things in Moore's movie are close to true? What if frogs had wings and pigs could fly? Good grief. Hopeless case.

 

[shamrock]

turf, with all due respect you have got to be kidding. You know, when it gets right down to it Kerry bottom line went to Vietnam. Bush conversely avoided a physical & refused, why wasn't he jailed like Ali?? At least Ali had his religion as a excuse, Bush simply couldn't pass a drug test.

Kills me how people say character is such a issue, they forget Bush was basically a drunk with a drug problem at the time of Kerry s service. And go ahead give me the old "prove it", everybody knows his records have been destroyed and altered, but gw himself has admitted as much in the past.

Give me a break, how many of these Swiftees slanders are Democrats? And oh ya they sure didn't wait long, only 35 years.

Just curious, what negative campaigning has Kerry did thus far?

It kills me, Kerry could be doing a hatchet job on Bush/Cheney, and hasn't said shitt. Their biggest supporter Enron, wtf! How about Halliburton SEC just nailed them last week, and that's only the start. O'Reilly actually admitted last night how unbelievable this Halliburton abuse is, and it has only just started. Cheney right there with the French & Russia taking cash from Saddam.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Shamrock I am not saying Kerry is a coward by any means--I am saying he was an opportunist and his military stats stats are extremely inflated. My issue with him is not is not his stance on Viet Nam but his stance on vets that served there.

Remember at the Democratic convention when he Kerry(so proudly) showed pic of 20 or so commanders he served with in nam--only one from pic supports him.You have smoke and mirrors.
Here is O'neils take per Hannity and Combs interview--You decide
P.S. Book will have an impact-----
"And in a year in which the publishing world has been bombarded with politically-geared books ? mostly anti-Bush material ? this book may stand out from the masses. It is already No. 1 on Amazon.com's best-seller list."

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,128701,00.html

 

[ocelot]

And Dogs just refuses to defend Bush's record...because he can't.

 

[djv]

USNavy states Kerry record is as written. What ever the hell that means. And his awards are as earned. What ever that means. Is every government dept playing with words. If I understand what they are saying he won some medals he had coming. One saving a fellow soldier. One pursuing the enemy while under fire from the shore. Purple hearts for arm wound. One for thigh wound with metal left in leg to prevent making wound any wider then necessary. One for eye and ear and arm wounds. Something to do with mind going off under the boat that threw it into the air. All this form PBS news. And I understand Cris Mathews had a report also on this tonight. that show is repeated most night at 10 central. I'll have to watch and see what was said. I also start with as I said many times before. The first act of courage is for a man to go and sign up when he knows where he will be sent. Then when serving on a ship off the cost of Nam he volunteered to go on shore for duty. I'll give him credit once again for that.

 

[Chanman]

Kerry Web Site Can't Get His Story Straight

I'm so confused...

Whose boat were you on Jim?
From the press release: Des Moines, IA - Former Lieutenant John Kerry was reunited today with fellow Vietnam veteran Jim Rassmann, who says Kerry saved his life during combat.
On March 13, 1969, Rassmann, a Green Beret, was traveling down the Bay Hap river in a boat behind Kerry’s when both were ambushed by exploding land mines and enemy fire coming from the shore. Kerry was hit in the arm, while a mine blew Rassmann’s boat out of the water. With enemy fire coming from both sides of the river and swift boats evacuating from the area, Kerry’s crew chose to turn their boat toward the ambush to save Rassmann.
From Rassmann's Op-Ed: While returning from a SEA LORDS operation along the Bay Hap River, a mine detonated under another swift boat. Machine-gun fire erupted from both banks of the river, and a second explosion followed moments later. The second blast blew me off John's swift boat, PCF-94, throwing me into the river. Fearing that the other boats would run me over, I swam to the bottom of the river and stayed there as long as I could hold my breath."
UPDATE: Kerry disagrees with himself. From the After-Action reports on Kerry's site:

13 MAR 1969 Bay Hap River; Dong Cung Canal Four swiftboats were engaged in moving Mobile Strike Force troops on the Bay Hap River and the Dong Cung Canal. Moving down the river in the afternoon following a day of heavy fighting, a mine detonated underneath PCF 3, lifting it 2-3 feet out of the water and, at the same time, a second mine detonated near PCF94, wounding Kerry and knocking an Army advisor on PCF94 into the water. Meanwhile the boats began receiving heavy fire from both sides of the river. Kerry, who had received shrapnel wounds and hurt his right arm, directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire while he pulled the Army advisor back into his boat. PCF 94 then returned to aid PCF 3 and towed the boat down the river to safety. Kerry received the Bronze Star for this action.

UPDATE II: Well no wonder they're confused... apparently Rassmann can't decide which boat he was on, either:

On March 13, 1969, Rassman, a Green Beret, was traveling down the Bay Hap river in a boat behind Kerry’s when both were ambushed by exploding land mines and enemy fire coming from the shore. Kerry was hit in the arm, while a mine blew Rassman’s boat out of the water. With enemy fire coming from both sides of the river and swift boats evacuating from the area, Kerry’s crew chose to turn their boat toward the ambush to save Rassman.
“We were still under fire, and he was wounded at the time…,” recalled Rassman. And with his boat’s gunners providing suppressing fire, Kerry extended his wounded arm into the water and the two lieutenants locked arms.
Note: this doesn't appear to be a direct quote from Rassmann - I believe it was lifted from the Kerry site. But it sure is confusicating.

UPDATE III: Beldar asks why, if the boats were under heavy fire, there were no bullet holes. And in a CNN interview, the "which boat?" kerfuffle continues:

Jim Rassmann, what -- what do you say happened that day in March, 1969?
JIM RASSMANN, KERRY SUPPORTER: Well, first, I was not part of John Kerry's command. I was a Special Forces officer who happened to be on his boat at that time.
Mr. Thurlow's recollection of what occurred is not accurate. We had the boat hit the mine to our left. And John immediately had his driver, Del Sandusky (ph), turn to the left and head towards it. And it was at that time that our gunner on the bow got his gun knocked out and he started screaming for another weapon. I ran another weapon up to me, and we hit something or something hit us. There was an explosion, and I was blown off the boat to the right.
And the Swift Vets aren't credible? Rassmann/Rassmann and Kerry/Kerry can't even agree about which boat Rassmann was on.

UPDATE IV: McQ of QandO wrote about this yesterday:

One problem .... no one else who was there seems to remember it that way. In fact, not even Kerry or his crew remember it that way. [EDITOR'S NOTE: well, actually it depends on which version of Kerry's you quote. There are so many.] Kerry's account in Douglas Brinkley's "Tour of Duty," places Jim Rassmann on the PCF-3 and not his PCF-94 boat.
Neither Kerry nor his crewmembers have ever claimed their boat, the PCF-94, had ever struck a mine and blown out of the water. The only boat that hit a mine and was lifted 2-3 feet out of the water was the PCF-3 on March 13, 1969. In fact, Kerry's PCF-94 had to tow the PCF-3 after it had hit the mine because it was so badly damaged from the explosion
Note: this contradicts the CNN interview I quote later, in which Rassmann says he "happened to be on his [Kerry's] boat at that time", but later claims to have been knocked off the boat by a mine. Got confusion?

By now I've had enough experience with things mysteriously disappearing from the Kerry web site, so I took a screen snap to preserve this little bit of history before the site Botox-and-airbrush crew pretties it up for general consumption.

Previous errata/revisionism on the Kerry site:

Boston Globe catches Kerry taking credit for combat incident that occurred before he joined Swift Crew.

Power Line catches Kerry campaign removing this statement from his site:

The phrase "he has been consistent about the facts and the symbolism of the medal-returning ceremony" was removed in between the two screenshots.
This occurred after the Senator was caught in a lie: he said he had never thrown his medals but ABC News obtained a video of Kerry stating in 1971 that he had thrown them away. He then tried to say he threw his ribbons because he "didn't have time to go home" and get his medals. Kerry then said "he didn't make any distinction between ribbons and medals."

Captain Ed points out that Kerry lied three times: once about having thrown the medals, once when he denied ever saying (or even implying) he's thrown them, and once when he accused the RNC of manufacturing the medal-throwing story.

Kerry campaign removes statements that Mickey Kaus quoted here regarding "Benedict Arnold CEO's" after this:

"Kerry campaign officials" are quoted in an article in today's Washington Post claiming that "Kerry's use of Benedict Arnold designation had to do only with firms that incorporated overseas to avoid U.S. tax liabilities, not firms that have engaged in 'outsourcing.'"
Again, the Kerry campaign is lying about what he said in the past and then has to go back and clean up Kerry's own website to remove the evidence. But then I predicted this move back on May 4th.

http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/ma.../07/wkerr07.xml&zx=aefb8c5a0f0323461910153492

 

[SALTY DOG]

I loves Aunt Jemima syrup on my waffles... :142lmao:

 

[djv]

After watch the rerun of the Mathews show I saw nothing to change my mind. Kerry volunteered for service. he volunteered to do swift boat duty. He earned some medals and he went home.
Bush ducked in the NG. Did not even finish his time. Cheney got 5 deferments due to schooling were told. And Duck Nam completely. 5 how the hell he get 5 deferments. Most guys were lucky to get 2.
It looks like he had more balls then either Bush or Cheney.