John Kerry: The closer we get, the more bullshit there is.

Pick a card, any card.

Published on August 16, 2004 By adnauseam In Politics

I note in the South African press that Kerry is being keelhauled again. I mean there is an election in just over two months so there have to be accusations in the Great American Political Game! So pick a card from the following:
* He went into Cambodia and committed atrocities.
* He was too scared to go into Cambodia.
* He went into Cambodia to visit Angkor Wat.
* He bribed people for his medals.
* His medals are fake.
* He let George Bush down while defending Hill 17.
* He let LBJ down by joining the army.
* He was at My Lai.
* He was near My Lai.
* He ran a drug ring in Saigon.
* He pretended to be in Nam.

See what I mean? Pick one and send it to CBS.

Fact is, John Kerrey went to Nam along with John McCain and Bob Kerrey and thousands of others. And some did bad things. On the positive side, many more were just fighting for their country. Period. They deserved their medals because they went into one very sick war--and didn't flee to Canada.

Give us a break Bushites! The problem with American politics is that if a guy is going ahead the opposition invents some bullshit to slow the support.

I think Bush is going to win for all the wrong reasons but I think too that John Kerry could do without all the inventors who rush to make up a new story.

A lot of Americans (not all), need to grow up!

Comments (Page 1)

JKH_1

on Aug 16, 2004

People sure do get carried away don't they.

Part of the problem is that when you follow the trail of BS you get close to the bull. Senator Kerry has chosen to run on his Viet Nam record. Why?

I'm a conservative Christian so I wouldn't vote for the Senator any way, but I have a problem with his use of hero status after what he did upon return to the US. My brother and step brother were serving their third tours in Nam when Kerry went before the Senate and claimed that he and ALL US soldiers committed attrocities. My brother, Cpl. Charles E. Hendon, was a Marine recon. When I asked why a second and third term, he replied: "I'm making a difference. I've helped villagers improve the sanitation of the village, I've delivered babies and taught them methods of safely delivering babies, I've taught the people how to defend themselves." Yes, he saw a lot of action, and yes, he got his medals, but he never talked about it.
When he and his friend visited me a Penn State they were insluted and spat upon.

55,000 US soldiers died in Nam. 59,000 committed suicide after the war. John Kerry and his band of brothers contributed to that with their UNPROVEN and loudly proclaimed allegations. Of the 50 "vets" who spoke to the senate with Kerry many were never in Nam and ten were never in the military! When the Senate sent the FBI to investigate their stories not one would sign an affidavid. Why?

Senator Kerry is free to run any way he chooses, but I would have some respect for him if he would run as the liberal icon that he is. To run as an American Hero is to spit on my brother's grave.

Deference

on Aug 16, 2004

So let me get this straight; atrocities weren't committed in Vietnam, Kerry wasn't a war hero because he earned a Purple Heart and other medals, and Bush, whose record of service was recently "found" after there was a question of where he was for over a year during his tour of duty is a better candidate? Just making sure I'm following you. Respect for your brother's and step-brother's service, however.

Deference

on Aug 16, 2004

I'll tie up one more loose end, here. I am also a Christian and a conservative. I don't care for Kerry's pro-abortion stance ( though he personally doesn't believe in the actual act ) or his toeing the party line of gun control, but let's look at Bush's stance. He has pushed for the Laci Peterson law ( he gains a point there ) and he has come out against abortion, but I can't vote for a candidate strictly on one issue. His gun control stance seems firm, but he has yet to rollback any gun control legislation. He has also made a half-hearted dig to keep our traditional marriage stance with his Federal Marriage Amendment, but it is an unrealistic proposal ( sure, try getting a favorable vote on that ) and poorly planned as it is very much a "dead on arrival" plan, more engineered to solidify the base than actually accomplish solid policy. Now let us look at how unconservative he has actually acted. I recently had a birthday, and my father, a minister, sent me a handsome journal and a spiritual book on knowing God more personally. On the outside of the box, there were the usual postmarkings and addresses, but also a big red stamp reading, "media inside, subject to check by postal employee", one of the effects of the invasive Patriot Act the current administration has shoved down our throats. I tell you, friend, big or bigger government is not an earmark of a true conservative. G. Dub is a fraud. He and Ashcroft have betrayed us with their policy. Big brother is bigger than ever now and it was no liberal that has placed this yoke upon us. Bush's tax cuts have become a small bribe ridding poor conservative families of aid they sometimes need ( head start, s.s., overtime pay, etc. ) because the large corporations have outsourced our jobs while this administration turns a blind eye. I do not want Kerry in, I want a lesser evil in the hopes that the NOW will be improved to some degree.

JURookie

on Aug 16, 2004

I just think Kerry is too double minded to be president. His policies state that outsourcing should end yet he and his wife profit from several dozen factories of the Heinz corporation that are conveniently located outside of the US because of cheaper labor. I believe that Kerry went to Vietnam like many others and faced the demons that they faced but you can tell a lot about a person's character based on their response. His devisive, derisive, and hateful tirades after his return were tied into his hope for political gain. I know a lot of war heroes, including in my own families. Real heroes rarely talk or want to talk about how great they were in war.

Daiwa

on Aug 16, 2004

Gee, it's hard enough for us to keep up with the blather in our own press, let alone South Africa's. But I appreciate that you've let us know it can be just as bizarre elsewhere. Unfortunately, there are a lot of so-called "news" organizations with the work ethic of the National Enquirer ("Clinton fathered alien! Being raised at exclusive private school!") both here in the States and around the world. Does make it tough to get things straight when every outfit is working an angle. But it's out of that chaos that more or less the truth eventually emerges.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Daiwa

on Aug 16, 2004

Daiwa

on Aug 16, 2004

Sorry about that double post - not sure how that happened.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Covin3

on Aug 16, 2004

I am by no means a blind follower of the Democratic Party, but I have a few things to say about the lack of respect going on in this thread--not just for Kerry, but for all Vietnam veterans who chose to publicize their hatred for war.

John Kerry had the right to protest a war he fought in. None of you fought in the Vietnam War, so what privilege did you earn to criticize him for standing up against something that he believed, like many of his fellow soldiers, was a fundamentally wrong war?

Kerry is a hero because not only did he fight courageously in Vietnam, as his bronze and silver stars prove, but because he had the bravery to return to his own nation and cry out against that same fallacious war.

John Kerry knew what he saw, and said something about it. None of you know what he saw, so before you cry out against his lack of respect for his fellow soldiers, perhaps you should consider something. Preventing the pointless deaths of thousands of American young men and millions of Vietnamese civilians was obviously, in his eyes, a more important goal than being nice to the American people. Show some respect for that.

terpfan1980

on Aug 16, 2004

I'm having a difficult time figuring out a few things as I try to respond to this post.

First, You say:

Reply #8 By: Covin3 - 8/16/2004 6:30:26 PM
I am by no means a blind follower of the Democratic Party, but I have a few things to say about the lack of respect going on in this thread--not just for Kerry, but for all Vietnam veterans who chose to publicize their hatred for war.

John Kerry had the right to protest a war he fought in. None of you fought in the Vietnam War, so what privilege did you earn to criticize him for standing up against something that he believed, like many of his fellow soldiers, was a fundamentally wrong war?

I read that to imply that unless one is a veteran of Vietnam, one doesn't have a right to speak about it (Vietnam and/or Vietnam service) at all? If that is the case, you are discussing your opinion about Kerry's service why?

For the record, I have served in the military. Does that mean I'm more entitled to criticize the military than anyone else is?

Now, ignoring those comments, which don't really relate to your points (at least I don't think they do), you seem to be disappointed in a possible lack of respect for Kerry (and, you mention all Vietnam vets that spoke out against the war).
On those issues, a few things can be said.
First, I don't think anyone has said that Kerry, nor anyone else, have no rights, nor any more rights, to speak out against what they feel or felt was an unjust war.
Soldiers/Sailors/Marines/Airmen lose some rights to comment (actually, you lose a lot of rights) while you are contracted to Uncle Sam, but that's a point for discussion later. Kerry came home after serving in the military, and he voiced his comments and opinions. That's fine, even if his comments were completely opposite anything that really happened in Vietnam, he was welcome, and is welcome to voice his opinions. It's a right of all U.S. citizens (except for those that are contracted to the government, who lose some of those rights while serving out that contract) to be able to speak freely, with a few caveats about not being able to slander or libel others.
The problem for Kerry is that his comments were made in front of congress, while under oath, and his comments described his own actions as being potentially criminal, and worse, described the actions of those that had served with and around him as also being potentially criminal. Kerry told the world that he had commited atrocities and had seen others commit them as well. That broad brush statement left many people who may have done absolutely nothing wrong colored as criminals. Many of those people are represented today in a group called Swiftboat Veterans for Truth. http://www.swiftvets.com It is that group that has stirred up a lot of the discussion (such as above) about Kerry and his record.

You see, even though you say:

Reply #8 By: Covin3 - 8/16/2004 6:30:26 PM
Kerry is a hero because not only did he fight courageously in Vietnam, as his bronze and silver stars prove, but because he had the bravery to return to his own nation and cry out against that same fallacious war.

John Kerry knew what he saw, and said something about it. None of you know what he saw, so before you cry out against his lack of respect for his fellow soldiers, perhaps you should consider something. Preventing the pointless deaths of thousands of American young men and millions of Vietnamese civilians was obviously, in his eyes, a more important goal than being nice to the American people. Show some respect for that.

... your last paragraph has been disputed very strongly by many of the members of the Swift Boat Veterans group, who were there, and are able to confirm what Kerry saw and what Kerry did, and were inflamed when Kerry came home as a decorated veteran, with some of the decorations being questionable, and stated to Congress that criminal actions had taken place and were taking place in Vietnam.

The Swiftboat group has done an excellent job of researching the issues, and documenting in a very legalistic manner, their issues with Kerry and his statements.

Using your own argument alluded to in my first line above, these folks certainly have a right to comment and criticize Kerry.

Now, with that said, I have a load of respect for anyone that has served in the military for this country, or any other for that matter.
I also have a lot of respect for those that speak out about atrocities (such as the Abu Graib prison scandal) and help prevent them. And a load of respect for those that do question what is gong on with our military and how it will be used.
I temper that respect though with questions about what are the motives for speaking out, and what will be accomplished in doing so.
In the case of John Kerry, it seems that perhaps his outspokeness may have been an effort to garner publicity and notoriety, and that is something that leaves me scrathing my head. More so as I read at least the Swiftvet's version of the truth as they see it.

Lee1776

on Aug 16, 2004

First thing. I have been in the U.S. Army for 17 years and have served through both Iraq wars. I have worked with all type and consider myself a good judge of all the different types of citizen soldier characters. I respect all men who volunteered themselves for military service and have HONORABLY completed their contracts.

John Kerry in my opinion never honorably completed his service. He is what many in service call a medal hunter and cut & runner.

Medal hunter: Of the four months of service in Vietnam about two months are spent just impressing or outprossing. So in just two (many by three at the most) John Kerry was able to receive three purple hearts, one Silver Star and one Bronze Star. John Kerry is right by saying that know one really submits paperwork for a Purple Heart. You receive them by just going to the aid station and receive medic treatment. That means that even if you get aspirin for a bad headache from wearing your helmet to long, you could technically receive a Purple Heart. I know of three soldiers (not very well liked or respected in my units) that did just that type of thing so they could have one more ribbon on their chest (officers are the worse offenders of this practice). He received two stars for actions taken during combat. When John Kerry pulled a man from the water and received his star, the poor guy on the other side (the side actually under fire) of the boat pulled two men from the water received a lesser Meritory Service Medal (MSM). One guess who submitted the awards recommendation? If you say that boat commander you are right (that would be John himself). Many men of infantry and special ops spent two or three years in Vietnam in the thick of action and never received so many awards and this guy received them in two or three months. I smell a medal hunter here.

Cut and Runner: I have seen units mobilize for war and usually there is one chicken that claims a medical problem at the last minute or suddenly becomes gay. For females the pregnancy rate jumps for some reason. You usually can guess who they are in the unit before the alert is called. John Kerry fits that bill to the T. I have to give him credit for getting into country. While all the other members of his boat were in the same firefights and stayed to complete they’re contracted one year, he split as soon as he could. He knew that if you received three purple hearts you had the OPTION of returning home. See the medal hunting section above. Just because a person served does not mean he did HONORABLY. I have to say that I have not jumped up and down and yelled take me, take me when a war started. But I was the first one on the plane when the orders came down and never even thought about leaving my duties and fellow soldiers behind.

The above character types fit John Kerry perfectly (You could also add glory hound too).

But the true reason for him not getting my vote is not for what he did during the war but what he had done sense.

1. For the first Gulf war he would have preferred that a sovereign Nation of eight million be conquered and raped by Iraq, then to send one American to help them. (He voted against military action).

2. During the Florida national election confusion four years ago, he stated that he was there to make sure the military men and women’s vote got counted. In reality his staffers went to each county and handed out flyers on how to discount any absentee vote with an APO address. Over 75% of all military votes are sent in through absentee vote and a large portion from overseas APO addresses.

That is my two cents.

PS: I myself also have received Medals and have had a bullet removed from my leg during service, but a true soldier doesn’t need medals to know he is honorable.

messybuu

on Aug 17, 2004

Aren't true soldiers supposed to throw fake medals into fires as a protest but pretend they're the real medals as John Kerry did, which is why people like him so much? Because while those posers out there were throwing their real medals into the fire, John Kerry was throwing his fake ones showing that he's insincere about it?

adnauseam

on Aug 17, 2004

Thanks for the comments guys but the point is: Is the muckraking necessary? Is that just American politics? Do we have to hang a guy before the scaffold's readY? This whole propaganda issue is aimed at moving attention away from Dubya so that Kerry's weaknesses are highlighted. What about Dubya's weaknesses? I guess that's politics but from my South African point of view it seems pretty dirty.

jdjefferson

on Aug 17, 2004

Swift Boat Veterans have attacked Kerry for his actions, others that have served with him have commended him, and still others are debating the legitimacy of his medals and awards. Hundreds of people have come forward to characterize Kerry's service positively or negatively. Where are all the vets who saw G.W. Bush during the Vietnam War? Can't he come up with a few dozen people who can definitively attest to him being where he was supposed to be? A few medical records and some pay stubs simply aren't enough proof for me. The Bush machine is deflecting attention away from real issues and trying to knock Kerry down in the only place Bush can claim to go toe-to-toe with him.
Maybe the two of them should have a medals throwing contest?
Thanks for listening

kingbee

on Aug 17, 2004

The Swiftboat group has done an excellent job of researching the issues, and documenting in a very legalistic manner, their issues with Kerry and his statements.

if that were the case, there wouldnt be so many inconsistencies or contradictions with previous statements about kerry. john o'neill--who is one of the three prime movers behind the group--once claimed to have been on the same boat with kerry even though he arrived well after kerry's departure. admiral hoffman--another of the group's organizers--has admitted he didnt know kerry well enough to comment on him firsthand. the one swiftboat vet who now asserts kerry's boat wasnt taking fire when kerry rescued the special forces gunner didnt dispute the after action report that states clearly the boat was under attack...and in fact both kerry and his accuser were awarded medals on the basis of that report.

adnauseam

on Aug 17, 2004

The Bush machine is deflecting attention away from real issues and trying to knock Kerry down in the only place Bush can claim to go toe-to-toe with him.

Thanks for that. Mc Carthy proved that dirty tricks (many unproven), could upset the apple cart. Eisenhower sat quietly and let that asshole hold sway. No election was in contention but times have not changed much. Muckraking and accusations seem to be a part of American politics. Let's see what happens in November.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!