But what about his personal journal? What about his essays from high school civics?
Are you even listening to what I say anymore?
I said before (several times, I think) that I don’t think veterans ought to be obligated to release their records. That said, though, if one promises to release his and then doesn’t follow up on that completely, that becomes an issue as well.
And again, Bush could have done worse things. Probably he did. But that doesn’t lessen Kerry’s obligations as a candidate. It doesn’t let him off the hook for anything.
"Dear Diary,
Today those Swift Boat Vets were so MEAN to me again!!! <frowny face> I hate hate HATE them, they are such big POOPY HEADS.
Oh well, I guess I better go now becuz Teresa is yelling AGAIN!
JFK.
P.S. I still want a pony!!!"
I read some very detailed accounts of Kerry’s Swiftboating, and I do not believe that the Swiftboaters ever attempted to deny that Kerry saw combat as a Swift Boat veteran. They quibbled about the nature of that combat, but not the fact of the combat itself. The Swiftboaters attempted to obscure this huge gulf between Kerry and Bush by casting doubts on minor elements of Kerry’s war record. It was a disgusting and unethical thing to do, given that they were clearly motivated by outrage over Kerry’s anti-war activities and not an honest interest in the facts. The media is almost as much to blame as the Swoftboaters, because instead of giving the Swiftboat claims careful scrutiny and then making their general falsehood clear (much of the Swiftboaters’ claims were directly contradicted by the testimony of Kerry’s shipmates – now who would have known better?) the media just went with their bland, "on the one hand, many people feell that Bush used political pull to escape service in Vietnam through service in the Reserves, but on the other hand the Swift Boat Veterans challenge Kerry’s war record. So you have two balancing claims of suspicious war records, rather than combat veteran vs. politically connected jet jockey who never left the States. A neat trick. Also, a very evil one.
Yes, but you’re reduced to the level of the pettiest of misdemeanors, trying to find some charge, however puny, that will stick. And just as you’ve mentioned, his opponet in all of this was…well, lets be charitable…an overprivileged doofus who screwed up everything he ever touched, the Man Who Fell Up.
Context matters.
Well, that’s interesting. Kerry now has an “heroic” war record. I wonder what our esteemed slavering Bushbot had to say in 2004. Anyone with a stronger stomach than I have anything convenient?
-Joe
Good luck with that. I have lots of criticisms of Kerry, but I have never denigrated his genuine heroism.
Excellent post, Evil Captor.
Giving “each side” equal weight is not always the right thing to do. In this case, it was a strategem that worked brilliantly.
The swiftboaters were on a mission to discredit Kerry in any way possible. They had the same mission with McCain. Both men were veterans who had served in danger and were deep into the war. Bush had to find a way to diminish their obvious advantages. So they scraped around til they found a couple guys who would say some sour grapes stuff. Any body who jumped on that bandwagon was already there or unable to see the propaganda wheels were in motion. It was a disgusting display by Pickens and his minions.
Swift Vets and POWs for Truth - Wikipedia heres a pretty fair recap of the story.
Your repeated insinuations in this very thread notwithstanding? :dubious:
And yet your decision was not based upon his war heroism, or upon Bush’s desertion, was it?
Goes for you too, MM:
Misdirection. That guy wasn’t running for President. A guy with a Navy Cross and Silver Star was, though.
You, and Algher, were going to support the Republican no matter what. That was a given from the beginning. The fact that the candidate you thereby got stuck with was a deserter, and the opponent you auomatically had to denigrate was a war hero both before and after his service, made it necessary for you both to buy into the smear in order to ease your useless little consciences.
But you’re not still fooling anybody but yourselves. Well, maybe Scylla and Sam Stone and that sort, but that’s to be expected.
Would you please learn to FUCKING READ?
I HATE the fucking neocons. I do not find Bush compelling at all. His military record is the classic Senator’s son bit - he got a cush gig thanks to connections.
Kerry’s job as a political candidate was to convince the voters (e.g. ME) that he was the better candidate. He failed. I saw a candidate that was not that much better than the other candidate.
He NEVER got his story straight on how he cleanly transitioned from war hero to patriotic protester. His war story is full of holes, and his protesting time is full of shit. He should have known well in advance that this would be a problem, but he walked into the fight like it was an ambush.
He, and his political team, fucked up royally. The refusal to release military records, for example, only made him appear more guilty of the attacks.
Fuck off. I have NEVER supported “the Republican no matter what.” You and **Gonzomax ** keep on making that claim, and it is full of fucking shit.
Kerry’s actions AFTER the war are one small factor in my lack of support for him.
Bush never had my support.
And yet you failed to vote for the candidate you admit was superior. It does make one wonder why.
You have no factual basis for those conclusions.
Which conduct should a responsible citizen reward, then? Groundlessly attacking a hero, or heroism? You choose to reward the former. That too makes one wonder why.
Go look up “blaming the victim”.
Then go grow the fuck up. Democracy is too important to be left to those so filled with partisan hatred that they are so easily fooled as you.
Actually you have not been impugned whatsoever. I did notice you felt Bush was a better choice than Kerry. That does say something about your ability to make a reasoned decision. The repubs at any cost is Moto who slurps at the repub trough with great love and affection. I do not know how you could have made such a stupid decision. Moto is a believer. He thinks the neos and Bush are good for us. He must be rich and has interests that compel him to go for money over substance and the overall welfare of the world.
I never admitted Kerry was superior. If you inferred that, then I misspoke.
I have no problem attacking Kerry for his actions, his voting record, and anything else I choose. His purple heart is not a get out of jail free card.
I am not blaming a victim - I am pointing out political incompetency.
Your final quip sounds like projection. I have no partisan hatred - why do you keep on accusing me of it?
What did I insinuate?
I’ll make it crystal clear for you - from all appearances Kerry never fit in with his fellow Swift Boat commanders or his superior officers. He disliked the war even then, was an Ivy League grad amongst academy and ROTC types, and didn’t seem to mesh well with certain aspects of the Navy lifestyle.
That didn’t stop him from behaving well under fire when that was required.
After his release from service, he took a far more outspoken position than even the average antiwar veteran, and his actions in those protests were controversial then and remain so to a degree today. It is no wonder people have questions about certain aspects of them - from the Fulbright hearing testimony to the medal throwing incident.
None of this makes him either a hero beyond reproach nor a pariah, clearly. He’s somewhere in between, like most of us. And in a world where “60 Minutes” will examine closely the service of Bob Kerrey, a Medal of Honor recipient, we have to expect that John Kerry would be expected to answer a question or two.
Scroll up:
:dubious:
Obviously not. Is the reverse true as well? Why not?
As I said, you choose to reward the liars for their lies, not their target, and are claiming it’s the victim’s fault for, er, now it’s “political incompetency”. Ri-i-ght.
Because you continue to provide the evidence.
Really, you ought to learn to read your own material sometime.
You might scroll up as well. You’d find such gems as:
From this thread alone.
You swallowed the smear campaign so totally that *it * swallowed you, didn’t it?
Right. I have certain criticisms of Kerry, but none of them center around any of the incidents that got him decorated for bravery or for his wounds.
I have criticized him for being less than forthcoming concerning certain incident associated with his antiwar activism, especially as I don’t think they particularly squared up exactly with either his service beforehand nor his activities afterward to run on his Vietnam record. I don’t think I’m particularly alone in noticing this disconnect.
As for the revision of the Cambodia narrative, well, that’s just a matter of public record. If you have a problem with it, I think you ought to take it up with him.