The troops have access to a lot (not all, granted) of the media we do. They can see it on CNN and Fox too. Kerry said what he said. Surely you’re not suggesting that the troops are not capable of understanding what he said themselves?
Majority leader John Boehner tells us Iraq is all the fault of the generals on the ground:
And this is the second time in as many posts that you are insinutating that I am misrepresenting my own beliefs. Not true.
Don’t such accusations belong in a different forum?
It was both an accident and an insult, an accidental insult. Which he didn’t have the fucking cherries to cop to, and instead goes on the defensive, which makes it look more like he meant to insult the troops instead of Bush.
Despite your experience DtC (which branch were you in btw? Not being a smart ass, I really don’t know) the US Armed Forces make up the best trained, best equipped fighting force in the history of the world. No, not every one of 'em is a mensa candidate, but that’s ok, they represent a good cross section of the country at large.
As far as the ‘haven for idiots and fuckups’ comment, that may have been true back when judges would sentence petty criminals to ‘jail or the army’ but that doesn’t happen anymore.
In any case, I’m grateful for the existance of the Military, and the men and women who risk what they do at the behest of their country. No matter if you agree or disagree with Iraq, if you don’t support the men and women who do the job, you’re a piece of shit of the highest order.
And by the way, I meant that last comment generally, not directed at you Diogenes
How many of us heard the speech, as such? Only those actually there in Pasadena. Point being, all of us who heard about this heard about it in a “reaction”, as in “This just in, Kerry slanders Our Heroes!”. In other words, the reaction was biased to begin with. Without the wholesale investment of innuendoe and misinterpretation, this speech is perfectly innocuous. If the joke had been delivered as written, no one would have noticed. Kerry wasn’t there to say anything he hadn’t already said, this was no press conference, it was a second-tier campaign stop, no big deal. If we are to believe some of the more cognitively constipated tighty righties, Kerry deliberately chose to insult the troops in this out of the way location, chosen to radically alter his public persona…in Pasadena. In a “stump speech”, the most “canned” form of public address.
Even those of us who are not FoxGnaws* addicts and heard about this on the liberal tedia heard it as a reaction: “People are saying that this speech insults the military, and here it is…” Which is to say that virtually everyone who heard the words in question already had a “slant” before a word was heard. Makes statements like “When I heard the speech, my first reaction was…” kind of silly, regardless of what that reaction might have been. I don’t remember, but have little doubt my first reaction was “No way, Pedro”.
Being human, we don’t remember that our first reaction was primed. We think we heard the clip without bias, that the implication of disrespect and slander was in the words themselves, but in fact, we carry the innuendo with us before we hear what its about. We’d already been told what to think. Some of us, it appears, were willing…nay, eager!..to comply.
*“I am the slime from your video…”, Frank Zappa, Freak Out!
I’m suggesting that the ones holding the sign are either under-informed about the incident or that their umbrage is a pretense.
Really, you honestly, no kidding believe that he INTENDED to call the troops stupid?
Wow.
If so, why in Pasadena? On an unimportant whistle stop? Why pick such a mediocre location to bring your plot to sabotage the Democratic Party to fruition? Why not wait for a better opportunity, maybe a chance to leap off the stage and tear out a young mother’s throat with your teeth? If you were intent on totally screwing everything you’ve worked for for forty years, why Pasadena?
Could just be an actual joke. Way I took it. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
I was in the Navy, 20 years ago now. I actually knew guys who were given the choice of the military or jail. I also knew plenty of guys who joined out of a general sense of shiftlessness and lack of direction (I was one of them), guys who had in civilian life been drug dealers and the like, guys who knew they weren’t going to college, etc. There was even one guy who washed out of my company in basic training because – get this – he was diagnosed as mentally retarded. I don’t know how he passed his ASVAB. Our CC told us he thought some recruiter must have cheated it for him.
Anyway, guys like that weren’t anything like a majority, obviously, but the military definitely was a natural place for them to end up. That wasn’t necessarily a bad thing.
That’s a possibility too, I guess. I will give them that benefit of the doubt.
What exactly is there to be “under-informed” about? Kerry’s comment is on record.
What’s also on the record is that Kerry was talking about Bush, not the military.
You mean, that’s what Kerry says he was talking about, after being called on his remarks by a bunch of people, including those in his own party.
“You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”
Since you seem to be fixated on the fact that Kerry didn’t say the word “troops” in the above statement, it’s only fair to state that he didn’t say “Bush” either.
Which leaves us with this part of it “…you get stuck in Iraq.” WHO is stuck in Iraq? Certainly not Bush, it’s the troops that are stuck in Iraq. “stuck WITH Iraq”, or “get US stuck in Iraq” would imply Bush, but if one is to go by what Kerry actually said, it’s all about the troops.
As I said earlier, the remark is too similar to “study or you’ll spend your life digging ditches”. Maybe he misspoke, maybe not. I don’t give a particular damn, but if you are going to be a stickler for absolute accuracy, Kerry was dissin’ the troops.
Several posters in this thread have stated that Kerry wouldn’t disparage the troops because he was in the military himself. That’s not a viable defense because he has a history of making derogatory statements about the troops. He did it 35 years ago. (there’s a cite up-thread somewhere) I remember it well. Those of you who don’t know that have missed a major point in your history studies.
You know John, Sir Robert Muldoon - a New Zealand Prime Minister, once said that “there are lies, damned lies and statistics” meaning that you can use statistics to prove anything if you are creative and use them out of context. THe quote, as a stand alone when in a discussion on the value of education WOULD be insulting the troops. When taken in the context of dissing Bush - it is disparaging to Bush. When speaking colloquially Bush IS stuck in Iraq (although we all know he is not literally there)
It is the same here - the quote comes in the middle of anti Bush comments, why would Kerry change topics mid rant to say something about the troops? Also, if the meaning is ambiguous (as it obviously is) why shouldn’t we take Kerry’s word as to what he meant - isn’t he the one in the best situation to judge?
Pit him for a poor choice of words if you will, but not for something that he never meant.
And it’s been noted, repeatedly, that he says he meant to say “Bush” and didn’t. So again, it’s a question of wther or not you believe him. I still don’t understand why anybody would think he would deliberately insult the troops that way.
John:
First off, Kerry referred to Bush several times in the whole speech (context, John, context!). There is, in the entire speech, not so much as one reference to the troops. Zero, zip, zilch, nada. The speech is about Bush. The theme of the speech is “GeeDubya is a dumfuk”.
According to you, suddenly the speech is about something he hasn’t even mentioned before! Something he just tacked onto the end of a speech about Bush, “Oh, by the way, the troops are all dummies, and I hate freedom.” Again, without actually specifying his subject verbally, but by some cryptic means? Was it a shrug of the soldiers that says, in body language “I am now talking about the troops in Iraq”?
On my home planet, you have to actually say something to have said it.
And yes, I got the reference to Kerry’s alleged treason. I just don’t feel like tapping that particular vein of poison again.
Um…no, that is, in fact, what he was talking about as the context and written text of his speech makes clear. It’s the wildest of right wing absurdist fantasy to suggest that he intended to insult the troops.