“If we talk for too long, I’ll forget how we started. Next time I see you, I’m not gonna remember this conversation. I don’t even know if I’ve met you before.”
2sense, it is, in many ways, a different world than it was 30 years ago.
Let me tell you about one of the ways it’s different.
I asked a question earlier in this thread that was never answered. You see, I’m a veteran of fairly recent vintage. I was discharged only six years ago. Nearly all of the men and women I served with volunteered for the Armed Forces.
The pay and benefits for a lower ranking enlisted service member are not great, by any stretch of the imagination. Consequently, these ranks are filled overwhelmingly by the American working class. This, in the early 1990’s, included me.
The military has, traditionally, been a means of upward mobility for the working class. Today, this includes many African-American and Hispanic service members, as well as working class whites. They, generally speaking, are very good soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. They also make fiercely proud veterans.
They should, for lots of reasons, be natural Democratic voters. How would the throwing of medals by a rich, white officer look to them?
I can tell you how it looks to many of them, because I work with a lot of them. While some of them are voting for Kerry, none of them respect this act of political theater.
A rich white officer who VOLUNTEERED to SERVE IN COMBAT as opposed to a rich white officer who use family connections to DUCK the war and who didn’t even bother to finish the fake duty he was given as a richboy’s refuge from the war. No matter how you slice it you’re still stuck with a war hero vs. a hypocritical chickenshit.
Kerry’s ribbon throwing was perfectly justified and righteous and moral and commendable so is the fact that he kept the hardware as personal souvenirs. John Kerry owes me nothing.
Lest there be any confusion, I do not consider avoidance of a war, in itself, to be “chickenshit.” I am reasonably sure that had I been of a draft eligible age during the Vietnam War I would have swiftly become a season ticket holder for the Toronto Mapleleafs. What I consider chickenshit is a person who is willing to support such a war, or worse yet, to foment such a war under false pretenses, yet is unwilling to place his own ass in the line of fire.
.
So you’re admitting that the course George W. Bush took, flying temperamental, 50’s-era jet fighters, was a more courageous one than the one you would have chosen, Diogenes?
If I had the option of taking some flying lessons in Texas (and showing up or not showing up whenever I felt like it) as opposed to either going to Nam or skipping to Canada, I would take it. Unfortunately that option did not exist for most guys.
I would also still have openly opposed and protested the war. I would not condone the deaths of other, less connected kids in my place.
You kidding? Doggy Knees hunts grizzly bear with a baseball bat.
And your fantasy has a certain appeal, dashing and valiant Lt. Bush striding manfully down the flight line as the sun sets gingerly in Texas.
“You can’t take her up again, Lt. Bush! She old and rusty, a 50’s era jet fighter! Its too dangerous, Lt. Bush, too much of a risk. Take the Spad two-seater, its safer, just duct-taped last week, you’d stand a better chance…”
But that would have left the skies above Amarillo unguarded, vulnerable. And so LT. Bush once again faces the demands of stern duty, while Lt. Kerry is tubing down the Mekong River drinking beer with his frat buddies…
The fact remains, though, that the Texas Air National Guard lost pilots in accidents flying the same aircraft Bush was flying, at around the same time.
I’ve said Bush was no war hero. But what he was doing had its own risks.
It’s hardly comparable. Statistically speaking, Bush put himself (and others) more at risk by driving drunk than by flying a jet.
Well, unless he was driing his jet, drunk.
Get this straight.
If someone impugns my character, it is not a sufficient defense to point to somebody else and explain what a bad person they are.
I realize there’s an election going on. However, John Kerry has had to deal with this controversy since long before this race. If he doesn’t put this fire out now, he’ll be dealing with it after this race is over, as well.
George Bush, as a separate political figure, has separate controversies and character issues associated with him. That does not mean John Kerry automatically becomes a shining angel in white.
If any of you more liberal posters were to venture past the confines of this board, or other liberal websites, or the hangouts and activities of “blue” America, you might notice that there is a lot of discomfort about Kerry’s handling of this medal controversy. It is by no means confined to the right wing.
Veterans’ groups, for instance, are quite angry over the throwing of the medals. Imagine this, rank and file members of the American Legion and VFW supporting a Guardsman over a war hero. At the very least, you can call this a missed Kerry political opportunity.
And all this stems not from the actions of a young veteran protester in 1971. The American people are much too forgiving for that. Rather, it stems from the failure of a middle aged Senator to adequately explain how he can justify displaying the medals with pride, when he rejected them years ago.
Does it strike any body else that this and other threads of the sort have long since turned into the equivalent of crowds at a football game shouting “you suck” at each other in unison to the prompting of cheer leaders.
Gimmy a WHY. Gimmy an OH. Gimmy a YOU. Gimmy an ESS. Gimmy a YOU. Gimmy a SEE. Gimmy a KAY. What’s it spell? Say it again. Go Team Go!
Well, I laid bare my biases in the OP. I’ve been clear about where I’m coming from the whole time. And I have shown genuine respect for Kerry’s heroism. It’s the least I can do, one veteran to another.
However, there has not been a similar fairness or desire to see the other side shown be many other posters in this thread.
Can’t any of you see that this is a political problem for Kerry? Why do you think this is even in the news? You can’t blame it all on a Republican smear machine. Charlie Gibson isn’t a noteworthy cog in this apparatus.
Why do you think the Moncia Lewinsky “scandal” was in the news? It was, in fact, due to the Republican smear machine and the stupidity of the media. Not everything in the news is newsworthy.
Of course, the allegations were true, but who cares? What did it have to do with Clinton’s ability to run the country? Nevertheless, the Republicans did a good job of keeping this alive in the media for loooong time, pretending to be shocked and offended by Clinton’s behavior.
The same is happening now. Pretense of being shocked and offended by Kerry’s behavior in order to damage him, but, as in the Lewinsky case, even if it is all true, who cares? What does this have to do with the issues in the campaign?
One thing I have to hand to the Republican Party: they are very good at pretending to be shocked – shocked! – by various things that shouldn’t have been shocking at all.
No, I honestly don’t see it as any sort of problem at all. It’s sad that people will grasp on to straws instead of dealing with actual important issues.
Someone earlier used the example of taping together torn up pictures of him and his father, even though he still doesn’t get along with him. It’s the same reason.
We may be through with the past, but the past is not through with us. Many people keep reminders of the past, even a past they aren’t happy about. It’s human nature. It’s the same reason why I keep old letters from my ex-girlfriends that I haven’t spoken to in years.
What is so difficult to understand about this? Kerry’s reasons are his own. Can’t you respect that?
I’m sorry, you are making a political argument? Let me assure you that Mr Kerry and his people have already done their own political calculation and their belief is that the best response is what you are seeing.
Tough titty. It happened and nothing is going to change that. If they don’t like it they are free to vote for someones =a-=sef=-\
The end of my post was cut off but does manage to convey my point. If people don’t like that Kerry threw his medals then they don’t like it. Nothing to be done about that. If this is the deciding factor for them they can vote for someone else. Whether or not he is being duplicitous over what happened is another issue.
I don’t see it affecting Senator Kerry (a Vietnam War hero) in any way. He can’t be expected to recall his every word as a young man. It’s not like he’s made a big deal over his military service.
In matters regarding security and millitary support it is his voting record that is important. This is what he should run on. This is what people want to know about. As a Senator (and a Vietnam War hero), he is qualified to speak on the subject and has certainly made many speaches in this regard. Let his political voice speak for him, not his youthful past.
It’s not? Isn’t that big focus of many of his campaign commercials? I know he has to say that he approves those messages… not to mention his speeches. Wtohat would you consider making a " big deal over" of his military service?