John Kerry--Opinion of hero/protester

Great Debates
1

To amuse myself on my commute yesterday I was listening to a particularly inane morning radio show. On the agenda were, of course, a couple of yes-man, knuckle-dragging DJs and some guy who seemed versed in the histories of the Democratic & Republican candidates for the 2004 presidential election. I can’t recall his name or credentials. Sorry. But he brought something up that confused me, and the more I think about it, the less I understand its relevance or soundness of logic.

He asserted that Kerry was slippery & self-interested (my summation) because he was a highly decorated Nam Veteran–medals for courage, proud purple heart events, etc. and then turned coat on his fellow soldiers through his anti-war protests and resulting alies & tactics.

Personally, I don’t see the contradiction–Kerry seems to have been a hell of a fighter who was interested in ending a crazy war. I don’t know many soldiers/veterans who think war (especialy one as little-understood and little-supported as Viet Nam) is a good way to spend time; and I would assert that a push to end the fighting, irrespective of tactics & bedfellows, shows compassion for all parties involved–Us and Them.

Am I missing something or is the radio guy a mud-slinging cook trying to drive a wedge between Kerry & military foax?

2

The guy is a douche. Nobody has a greater right to protest a war than one who has directly suffered its effects.

3

Do you mean he pushed to end the war after he served, or he served to help end the war (I assume to help win it)? Or maybe both?

4

From what I have learned about the ugly business of campaign funding, I have assumed that all attacks against the Democrat front-runner come from under-the-radar Republican money. There is scads, carloads, football fields full of money to be spent for the GOP cause, and it will find an outlet. Brace yourself.

5

This is asinine. A common etiquette prior to Vietnam was that a soldier put his politics aside while serving freedom so that he could practice it when he was once again a civilian. That’s what Kerry did.

6

It’s bad enough when protesting against a war is considered unpatriotic, :rolleyes: but to say that about a veteran is outright despicable.

7

Really?

The group “Americans for Jobs, Healthcare, and Progressive Values” spent $500,000 attacking Howard Dean (the then-front runner) in Deecember. The organizers of the group refused to release the names of its donors.

The ads were very negative, and slammed Dean for a variety of sins, real and imagined.

Do you believe that money came from under-the-radar Republican money?

  • Rick
8

I started a Great Debates thread about John Kerry’s medal throwing during the 1971 protest.

This incident isn’t really popular among most veterans I know. Protest we’re fine with, but throwing your medals back is essentially rejecting the thanks your country has given you for your bravery in battle. And for John Kerry to boast of those medals today in campaign literature really borders on hypocrisy.

He also made charges of rather widespread atrocities by soldiers in the Winter Soldier investigation that turned out to be wildly untrue, yet is now courting those same Vietnam veterans and hoping for their votes. Hypocrisy again.

The only other thing I have, is that a former soldier and war hero should have voted in the Senate to better our intelligence capabilities and strengthen our military. His record in this area has been dismal.

I have genuine respect for John Kerry’s heroism in the Vietnam War, but he’s not done much for the military or veterans to respect since.

9

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061503.shtml

Of the 15 members of Skull and Bones, an extraordinary bond formed between
the four on their way to Vietnam: Kerry; Thorne; Fred Smith, a Kerry flying
partner who would later found Federal Express; and, Pershing, Kerry’s close
friend since age 13.

All four could have used their connections to avoid or at least delay
military service. But Pershing set the tone. ``When a war comes along, you
go,’’ the grandson of the general of the US armies would tell the bonesmen.
If this were a movie, Pershing would be the dashing heroic figure, the
fun-loving troublemaker who always got the girl and didn’t have a care in
the world.

On Feb. 17, 1968, the telegram said, Richard Pershing had died due to
``wounds received while on a combat mission when his unit came under hostile
small-arms and rocket attack while searching for remains of a missing member
of his unit.’’

Kerry was devastated. The war was no longer an abstract policy issue. One of
his best friends, bearing one of the most famous names in US military
history, had died trying to find a fallen comrade. Kerry couldn’t attend the
funeral because he was so far at sea. Instead, he wrote to Pershing’s
parents, then to his own.

Dearest Mama and Papa,'' Kerry wrote in his stylistic script. What can I
say? I am empty, bitter, angry and desperately lost with nothing but war,
violence and more war around me. I just don’t believe it was meant to be
this cruel and senseless – that anyone could possibly get near to Persh to
take his life. What a dam total waste. Why? . . . I have never felt so void
of feeling before. . . . With the loss of Persh something has gone out of
me – he was so much a part of my life at the irreplaceable, incomparable
moments of love, concerns, anger and compassion exchanged in Bones that can
never be replaced.’’

There was no way to turn back. Pershing was heading home in a casket, Kerry
was heading to Vietnam. A war was waiting.

10

Still waiting for an answer from AskNott.

11

The dirty money and the under the rocks types are shifting from Dean to Kerry- not a surprise.

Some of the furthest extreme types in American politics finally have someone who will actively pander to them, so they are desperate to keep him in office to protect their radical anti-environment, anti-choice, anti-gay, anti-gun control positions. The ads coming our of their money tend to be pretty low. But, W’s campaign history against McCain shows he will stoop to inaccurate sleaze pretty quickly without any outside prompting.

Not that I am a Kerry man myself, but the absurd statements coming out of the Bush contolled portions of the GOP and their related PACs is just stupid. I am sure there are plenty of actual things to ding him on with his long Senate history.

12

Bricker, if he had used the word “most” instead of “all” would you have asked that question?

13

I’d have asked a different question, or ignored it. Certainly “most” will be true after the Democratic convention; during the primaries, it’s questionable. “All” is clearly right out.

  • Rick
14

Now, I can understand why some might want a soldier to shut the hell up while on active duty.

I don’t necessarily agree with this – I don’t much care for the idea of putting “freedom of speech” aside, simply because one is on active duty – but I can understand it, at least.

…but when one has served, and one has become a civilian, “freedom of speech” is a constitutional right. If Kerry wanted to speak out against the war, I can see no good reason why he should not have done so, once out of the service.

I have a tough time understanding why some folks bash antiwar veterans for this sort of thing. I do NOT subscribe to the “shut the fuck up while WE defend America,” theory, and I’m inclined to think that those who espouse such theories are ripe for fascist rule. If one thinks that a war is wrong, why should one wait until it’s over to speak out against it? The Germans have been taking shit for fifty years now because none of THEM spoke up when THEIR “immoral war” was going on. Of course, the fact that the Gestapo would have arrested them if they had might mitigate these circumstances, but for some reason, you don’t hear a lot about that…

The way I see it, there is NO better time than the present to speak up when one percieves an injustice performed by one’s government. To cloak injustice with patriotism is to compound it, far as I can tell.

I’m not wild about Kerry. My first thought is, “Peachy, another poofy-haired, extremely-well-connected New England Democrat. Where’ve we seen this before?”

On the other hand, far as I can tell, he’s still an improvement over what we’ve got. If nothing else, he wasn’t afraid to fight for his country, he didn’t take advantage of privelige to escape this, and he wasn’t afraid to speak out against the war, once he was out of it.

There are worse things to accuse our politicians of.

15

Bricker, I have a lot of irons in the fire right now, and I didn’t see your question until just now. Yes, I do believe the group you mentioned is a duck blind for GOP money. I will poke around in the muck, and either I will provide a cite, or I will apologize. Part of the story, as I recall, is in a flaw in the regulations. A group can spew attack ads for a few months without reporting who gave what money, or who the man behind the curtain is.

16

There is a responsibility that goes with this freedom.

If what you say is used by the enemy to harm your fellow soldiers, then you have abused that freedom.

If what you say is false or misleading, then you have abused that freedom.

Kerry is now in denial of his testimony before the Senate. Soldiers who were POW’s late in the war say that his words were used to taunt them. General Giap (sp?) states in his book that the words of Kerry and others were instrumental in his ability to wage war against the US. And this is only the ‘solid’ stuff. There are others who wonder about the statistical odds of events happening as Kerry has told them. And from there it goes to the kinds of specualtions we see about the President.

The so called ‘anti-war’ types of the Vietnam era were waging war against the US. The results of their efforts were many years of opression in South Vietnam and the killing fields of Cambodia. Then, as now, there was significant abuse of the freedoms and responsibilities of citizens in the US and the proper use of procedure to change government. Such irresponsible misuse of freedoms is a danger to just those freedoms.

17

One of those responsibilities is to speak out when your country is in the wrong.

Bullshit. How is it Kerry’s fault that his testimony was twisted by the enemy? How does it show an “abuse of freedom” by Kerry?

What did Kerry say that was false or misleading? Cite?

No he isn’t, at least not that I’m aware of. I’m sure you have a cite that shows Kerry now “denying” his testiomony?

You have yet to show how any of that is Kerry’s fault or that Kerry said anything false in his testimony. Should he have remained silent about war crimes? Should he have suprressed the testimony of those he interviewed?

You’re crossing the line here, dude. Apolgize or I’ll see you in the pit.

the result of the anti-war movement was to end the war. You were whining in another thread about “ad hominems” being hurled against your own precious Shrubby boy but now you’re accusing anyone who opposed the war in Vietnam (including Vietnam vets) of “waging war on America” and “abusing their freedoms.” Are you a hypocrite much?

I’m guessing you must have some extensive combat experience of your own if you can be so judgemental of war heroes. What war did you fight in? What medals did you earn? How many times were you wounded?

18

I was mistaken. I had heard a news story saying that, long after the AFJHPV attack ads had run, the backers were finally unveiled. Former Sen. Robert Toricelli, now disgraced by a campaign funding scandal, was prominent in the mix. I mistakenly thought Toricelli was a Republican. In fact, he was a Democrat. This doesn’t make the campaign money industry any less ugly, but I was wrong.

The fact that the Dems are getting more skilled in fighting dirty is not encouraging news. Wading through the vitriol in all those articles made me glad I had my waterproof boots on. :frowning:

19

Moving this to Great Debates.

20

I would note that Toricelli was not the only player. Other huge contributers were unions that were strong Gephardt supporters, for example, and the entire group was Democratic, smearing another Democrat.

That’s politics, of course, and they have every right to spend their money in just this way… although it would have been nice if they also had the balls to voluntarily reveal their names before the law compelled them to do so.

I do think there’s a tendency amongst some posters here to automatically assume that dirty politics implies Republicans. I appreciate you, AskNott, taking the time to correct your own misapprehension.

  • Rick