Typical for him, though - and so is coming back after a month or so of “recuperation” to spew the same old already-discredited garbage as if he’d never read anything he was told the first time. Count on it.
I’m not ready to conclude that it has. How many people are really looking into the lies like we are, and how many are taking the Bob Dole approach that “there must be something to it”? This is worrisome - perhaps Kerry *has * lost a few points in the polls.
I share the concern with the polls. However, I think Bush has already maxxed out any gain he was going to get from this. Bush accomplished his goal- he managed to erode Kerry’s support somewhat among veterans as well as impugn his character among those that get their information from political ads. Now the ads are at the point of diminishing returns and Bush can afford to look noble and demand that they stop. Or ask for his money back.
Worrisome, indeed. And it almost seems like complete bullshit, because some of their conclusions fly in the face of every other thing I’ve read that indicates very little crossover from Democrat to Republican, and a huge move away from Bush by registered Repubs. And interestingly enough, I had just read another headline story from that same site a few minutes ago, indicating that Bush seems to be afraid he’s losing some of his base, because he’s targeting so much money into cable advertising where the target demographic should already be in his camp.
If this son-of-a-bitch wins this election as a result of this dirty smear campaign, my rage will know no bounds.
Not true.
Dr. Dean, for one, was complaining many times on how Kerry uses his Viet Nam record against other Democrat opponents at every opportunity and almost exclusively. I believe other Democratic runners were also complaining. Why did Kerry get a pass on that from Democrats?
Sure, all the details can be explained. He might have been in Cambodia, or was slated to go, or knew many who did go. He was there somewhere close to Christmas, and all Americans love Christmas. Nixon was about to become President, and most Americans don’t like Nixon much. So by 1986 he might have come to believe that he was in Cambodia on Christmas on Nixon orders.
The main problem remains that Kerry seems to employ political theatre not just to score points against Republicans but for his own self-aggrandizement. That is beyond dispute. He was doing it in 1971 as a young man with blanket exaggerated statements, again in 1986 as a US Senator with made-up personal stories, again in 2004 as a Presidential candidate with a phony salute.
Vote Nader.
Well, now, Scooter, you’re a wee bit slippery there. You left the impression you were talking about the same “charges” all the rest of us were. Now you tell me you were talking about something else altogether: you weren’t talking about charges the Kerry was lying about his record (see previous 17 pages for verification), but charges that Kerry was overemphasizing it. A less generous soul than myself might think that disingenuous. Do be more careful, won’t you?
As to why did Kerry “get a pass from Democrats”? Boy, thats a tough one. I’m gonna guess because they want to win? Just a wild stab, mind you. The Pubbies wanted to run against Dean. And as I’ve said, I believe, but cannot prove, that Pubbie money went into the Dean campaign precisely for that reason.
Huh? What? Message scrambled in transmission, makes no sense. Americans love Christmas? He might have believed his was in Cambodia because Americans don’t like Nixon much?
“That is beyond dispute”. Oh, OK, well, I guess I won’t bother. (You know, given that so many of Kerry critics are telepathic, and can peer directly into Kerry’s mind and inventory the contents thereof, I’m surprised you don’t form your own group, like, Clairovoyants Who Would Be Against Kerry, But Already Know He’s Toast, So Why Bother…
Alert Mike Doonesburys daughter! We got one!
And this makes him different from other politicians … how? Sure he employs “political theatre” for his own benefit. Bush does it too, and so does your dear Saint Nader. They’re all going to push every button they’ve got in order to try to convince people to vote for them. This is politics, and normal, and expected.
Two words, New Iskander: Mission Accomplished.
Naturally, New Iskander. Subjective ad hominum attacks by people who are badly losing an argument are always beyond dispute.
Yes, it’s like a line from one old horror movie, “The more you struggle, Mortimer, the more you strangle yourself”.
Okay, I think everyone can agree that braintree deployed a pretty damn good zing here.
Garsh, NurseCarmen, I am now officially smitten.
And kudos from Hentor the Barbarian to boot. And nothing from Mr. Moto, either. This is indeed proving to be a stellar day.
That is beyond dispute. 
My suggestion to resident Democrats to vote Nader was made simply in recognition that they are not going to vote Bush under any circumstances, yet desperately need the way out of the present conundrum.
I must state most explicitly that I am in no way, manner or form whatsoever associated with Nader campaign.
Having said that, I solemnly promise if enough Democrats will switch to Nader to make him a viable runner-up, I will vote Nader too.
Um, kindly explain what “conundrum” you think we’re in.
Well, New Iskander, considering that the title of this thread is “John Kerry and Vietnam” and we’re discussing – strangely enough – John Kerry and Vietnam, you might get better mileage and gather better attention by starting a new thread titled something like “Nader: Better Than Those Other Guys”.
Just a suggestion. Not trying to be pushy or anything. 
Simple: We can’t stand the thought of voting for Bush, but it would be unpatriotic to do anything that might result in the President of the United States of America actually losing the election! If we vote for Nader, we can rest assured that the properly anointed Commander in Chief will remain in power! Especially now that we know that American veterans are willing to lie their hearts out about Kerry just to make sure Bush stays in office!
The Pubbies have gotten all the juice out of this rotten lemon that they are going to. Today, or tomorrow, GeeDubya (Praise the Leader) will come out with a slightly stronger knock against the Swifties: not enough to alienate them and thier sympathisizers, but enough to look like he is listening to McCain and being persuaded, because he’s such a great guy.
He will call upon Kerry to join him in a clean, above-board campaign about the issues (as though that’s where he was all along, and Kerry was elsewhere).
Then, he will lie. He will, of course, continue to pray to his Dark Lord that Iraq doesn’t totally blow up in his face until November 4th.
The only conundrum I’m in is in your fantasy world.
I happen to really like John Kerry. In fact, I actually developed my strong like of Kerry (as opposed to ABB) as a result of studying his TRUE war record when the Slow Boat Liars tried to malign his character.
That is EXACTLY the kind of man I want running my country. Decisive, mature, capable, contagiously enthusiastic, able to inspire the support of those around him, a dynamic leader, a polished diplomat, a commander, possessive of bearing beyond reproach, imaginative, a planner, effective, competent & courageous.
I’ve read through his stand on the issues that are on his website and I like his ideas. I think it’s the right thing to do to “invest in new technologies and alternative fuels, create tax incentives that help automakers produce more fuel efficient cars, and reward the consumers who buy them.” I think it’s right that we give companies tax incentives for creating jobs at home instead of outsourcing them to other countries. I think it’s right that we pay more attention to our borders and seaports – an area where “homeland security” is grossly unsecure at the moment. Living in a coastal state, this is really important to me.
I think it’s right that we guard our liberty while we guard our borders. I’m not willing to sacrifice civil rights for the sake of keeping the bad guys out. I think that’s the wrong solution and I want to reverse the trend that George Bush has started. I think it’s right that we have a prescription drug plan that actually gets affordable medicine into the hands of people who need it (and a president who won’t LIE to Congress to try to sneak in over a hundred BILLION dollars in undisclosed costs). I think it’s right that a woman retain the legal right to perform whatever medical procedure she wishes on her own body.
I want a president who can be respected in the world community. I want a president who will engender cooperation from other governments. I want a president who will make and enforce policies that will protect our planet now and for future generations. I want a president who will work with other heads of state towards world peace, not bulldoze sovereign nations to force our form of government on them. I want a president I can respect; who I don’t believe will lie to me, to congress or to the rest of the world for personal gain or satisfaction. I want a man of moral fortitude and integrity in the White House.
George W. Bush has had 3½ years to prove to me that he is not that man.
I believe John F. Kerry is.
There is no conundrum.
Well your psychic abilities are off somewhat. The Swiftboat Vets just started their 3rd commercial, and President Bush has called upon John McCain to bury all the 527 groups which is consistent with his original position against the Swiftboat Vets (shut them all down).
Unfortunately, I agree, he’s shooting himself in the foot, but then at least he’s not using 1000 lb. bombs, like Bush.
Hey folks, get real.
Kerry was in VietNam, he did what he believed was right under those circumstances. He may not have been General Westmoreland, but he was sure no slacker, either.
He gets home, he’s disillusioned with the war (as many of us were at the time), he grows himself an afro and again – does what he thinks is right – he protests the war.
Now, he sees an opportunity to use his service as a positive force in getting elected. He does what he thinks is right!
maybe you call it flip-flopping, I call it growing, learning and caring.
All of those who protested the war, marched for peace, testified to the atrocities they had witnessed and demanded accountability – veterans included – helped to end the war that we shouldn’t have been involved in anyway. And by bringing an end to the war, they save countless lives. Johnson lied. Nixon lied. McNamara lied. Kissinger lied. Vietnam vets formed opinions probably based largely upon their own experiences and standards.
Those who have died in service to this country did so, in part, because they believed they were protecting our freedoms, including the freedom to express our opinions and to offer facts in support of those opinions.
My friend Bill is buried at West Point. He was on his second tour of duty in Vietnam when he was killed. We disagreed about the war. But we never argued about it. And he is no less a hero to me. He would have taken pleasure in my taking advantage of one of the freedoms that he believed he was protecting.
No one died believing that she or he was protecting the right to libel or slander. That is not freedom of speech.
We are not here to debate just opinions. We are here to try to get at the facts. That’s why we provide cites and consider sources.
(aside)
Then would you mind using your excellent powers of persuasion to get me back in good with elucidator? You see, he’s creative and can get away with a lot of things that retired English teachers can’t. I think he misunderstood something I said about a split infinitive and he said something thrilling but vile about my horse and me. My horse can’t quit grinning, but I’ve been a little glum ever since.
Mr. Kerry is a man of considerable intellect, ability, and character. Nonetheless, there are some things he simply cannot do.
Probably dances like a white guy too.