[hijack]
It’s not an either/or thing, though. A vote can “count” more under one system than another. For instance, under a proportional representation system, there are “winners” in differing degrees but there are no “losers”; every vote cast has some influence on public policy formation even after the election. Under a winner-take-all system, OTOH, if you vote for the losing side, you might as well have not voted at all.
[/hijack]
Just to be clear: I had no problem with Kerry’s record; I had a problem with his presenting himself one way, and then slowly a different version came out. As has been posted, Kerry partly ran on his military record, and that foundation crumbled badly. I should add that as I studied his testimony before the Senate, my opinion of him lowered even further. He described the American military as being systemically engaged in war crimes, and he made egregious mistatements about racial inequities in military service (issues which have been discussed here many times). I was waiting for him to retract his statements and correct the mistatements. He never did. The liar and opportunist badge began to fit.
Another little example: the way Kerry allowed the assumption that he was Irish (as the name Kerry would seem to imply). My grandfather actually was Kerry-man. I discovered that Kerry was actually a Kohn, if I am not mistaken. Again, all Kerry had to say at some point was, “I am not Irish; that is a changed Jewish name.” But instead he allowed himself to receive “Sons of Ireland” awards, if I am not mistkaken. When it came out, he acknowledged it, but he seemed to me to be a dissembler.
I voted for Clinton/Gore twice, and I had a bumper sticker on my car: “Veteran For Clinton/Gore”. A lot of guys I knew were trying to get out of Viet Nam by 1968, and were Clinton and including Bush. I didn’t hold it against Clinton and I didn’t hold it against Bush.
I volunteered for the Marines (post Viet Nam – I graduated H.S. in '73), but by that time military service was the exception.
No doubt. Why don’t you start a thread about that? 
But surely you’re not suggesting that the poster thought he or she was voting under such a system.
Do, you wouldn’t vote for Kerry because he’s a lying sumbitch. By inference, then, you voted for Bush because he’s more honest. That is the funniest thing I’ve heard all day.
In an earlier post you something to the effect that your democratic friends think that anyone who voted for Bush is stupid or morally reprehensible. Well I am dead solid certain that your friends regard you as having high morals.
If you are referring to WMD’s; I think Bush thought that Iraq had them. He, among others, was mistaken. We have gone over and over again on this board about “Bush lying”.
Put briefly: I think reasonable people can differ regarding that. I think that Bob Woodward’s book “Plan of Attack” shows that Bush wanted to go to war with Iraq, and that the WMD issue was buttress, but not the main reason, but even so, the administration had strong reason to believe that the weapons and/or for programs for producing them were intact. As somewhat interested in the issue of “Bush lying” I would assume you read Kenneth Pollack’s “The Threatening Storm” and his analysis of his mistakes in the Atlantic Monthly in Jan 04. Pollack is a Democrat. Bush has admitted he was mistaken.
Yes, my Democratic friends consider me a person of good moral character, and to their chagrin, usually much more informed than they are, arming myself as I do with supportable facts and rational inferences rather than angry slogans and vehement diatribes.
That’s why it’s called a hijack, dude!
But he was not wrong, when he testified in the Winter Soldier hearings. Was he?
And Kerry’s testimony was not the most damning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_Soldier#Testimony_from_veterans; http://www.wintersoldierfilm.com/
You are condemning Kerry for actions even more honorable than his combat record.
Thanks for answering the Bush military record question. This new thing you posted, though, has me scratching my head.
Am I an idiot? I never heard anything about any of this. And googling “Kerry Sons of Ireland” didn’t turn up anything like you said.
What’s the story on this?
And, though I respect what you’ve posted and that you voted in good faith, I think Bush’ honesty record is much worse than Kerry’s ‘I don’t want to release my military record.’ Here are a few things I think Bush or someone who answers directly do him have lied about:
Campaign 2000 - Bush said he hadn’t been arrested for anything since 1968. Then, Bush’ campaign, when it was revealed he had a DUI in the 70’s, said he had been pulled over for “driving too slow.” In fact, he’d driven off the road.
Campaign 2000 - In a debate, he says “by far, the vast majority of my cuts go to people at the bottom.” (paraphrase) Half his cut went to the wealthiest 1%.
“We do not torture.”
“A wiretap requires a warrant. Nothing has changed.”
He passed on “intelligence” about WMD’s that had only one person - who had failed a lie detector test about this issue - as its source.
He said he’d fire anybody who was involved in national security leaks.
He said nobody could have forseen the levee breach of Katrina (and, the White House may have heard about the levee breach before they claim).
From “The Tragic Costs of Bush’s Iraq Obsession,” by Michael Lind, Financial Times, 9/6/05 – http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=article&DocID=2542: