A passing thought about John Kerry and his war service

I saw him at his announcement rally tonight in Boston, and will have more on it (including direct quotes) later. But one aspect leaped out at me.

He had with him today, as he did on this whole tour, the crew from his boat in Vietnam.

The boat from which he earned his Silver Star.

The boat from which he earned his Bronze Star.

The boat from which he earned his Purple Hearts. All of them.

Now, there have been a few notable DUers who have called into question his earning of those medals. He 'went through different channels,' or whatever. Basically, the accusation is that he didn't desrerve the medals.

The men I saw standing with Kerry tonight, the men from his boat crew, were very regular people. They were not operatives, they were not BFEE.

Explain to me why they would stand with him if he were a fraud.

If anyone on the planet knew Kerry's war service was fraudulent, if Kerry himself was a fraud, these people would know.

Yet they stood with him.

Explain it.

And make sense.

I dare you.

I question his motives for "throwing" them...then later claiming they weren't his. That has never really been adequately explained to me. Did he not admit it...then later recant? Enquiring minds want to know.

He was there.

But lost the thread when I had to go to work...Did he expound on that incident further? I do remember him saying he was 15 yards away. But after that...like I said...the thread was lost into the archive.

thanks....

You getting rested? You have another trip coming up...don't wear yourself out beforehand.

different things. Sleep does not fit into the equation. But rest friend....we need you on fire in the field. Not hang-dogin.

are you sure that Kerry's medals were all earned while he served on that boat? i mean do you know it the same way you knew he served three tours or do you actually have proof of this assertion?

no offense Will but 'fool me once'..yada yada yada..

http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/08/10/kerry/index2.html

<edit>

"There's Robert Muller," Kerry says, pointing at scrapbook photos in the back of the book showing a high-school era Muller pole vaulting before he went abroad and lost the use of his legs. "Gold Star Mothers," he says, pointing to a photo of an older woman wrapped in a flag, clutching the medals that are all that's left of her son. "There's Rusty Sachs," Kerry says. "Look at his face." Sachs is throwing one of his medals back on the steps of Congress; he's fighting back tears.

The moment has political ramifications, and not just because some -- like McCain -- found the spectacle of veterans tossing their medals distasteful and inappropriate. In 1984, the Wall Street Journal revealed that -- despite a speech Kerry gave in which he angrily claimed that "This administration forced us to return our medals ... These leaders denied us the integrity those symbols supposedly gave our lives" -- Kerry had actually kept his medals. The medals he threw that day belonged to others, it turned out. It was an example, the media alleged, of Kerry the phony.

From Kerry's perspective, of course, it was all pretty complicated and he never really understood what the brouhaha was all about. The medals were, after all, a highly personal matter. He'd ultimately decided to throw his also-important ribbons, and the medals he tossed were on behalf of some disabled vets. He never claimed to have thrown his own medals, and certainly the more important matter was that he had enlisted and fought bravely in the war, and had then come back to protest the atrocities he had participated in. And, it should be noted, in the "60 Minutes" interview with Kerry, which ran a mere four weeks after the 1971 demonstration on the Mall, Kerry refers to the "the emotion in the faces of those men who threw their medals back ... if you watch their faces, there was agony in them as they threw those things back," and so on, continuously referring to the medal-throwers in the third person, never including himself.

A couple pages after the photo of Sachs and others throwing their medals back are two different close-ups of the piles the vets left in their wake. "Look at that," Kerry says. "You see? A big deal was made about whether I threw back my medals or ribbons or whatever, but look. People threw everything. Ribbons. Discharge papers. Photographs. Certificates ..."

Indeed, that's what the photos show. In one photo, a veteran is throwing his cane. Kerry swallows. Slightly shakes his head.

more...

the early BFEE, and became a part of many GOP generated antiKerry stories ever after.

Happy to see some of you like to further the work of BFEE scum. They need you to continue their 30 year operation against John Kerry.

Great rhetorical answer! Guilt by association. If anybody questions whether Kerry's medals were truly earned, surely their motives are suspect.

How does a guy get three non-disabling purple hearts in four months? It's a couple of sigmas away from the mean, but it does happen! War hero Kerry used the cheapo purple hearts to cut his tour short.

I woulda done the same thing.

The medal issue isn't one of them.

I too would like to see certain posters try to explain this.

what else did you take from being at his announcement? Is his service in the military the only thing that Kerry plans to run on? What did you feel Will?

Did he inspire you as a potential President or was it only the backdrop of a carrier, and brave veterans that inspired you?

I'm only 42 but the Vietnam war (or American war as the Vietnamese call it) is the single most important human tragedy from which I have learned about my own species. And John Kerry's experience in this war and life choices after are at the crux of every value I hold. I don't how to put it it any less grandiously than that. I suspect, from what I've learned from his writings, William Pitt has some similar feelings. Again, I can't speak for Mr. Pitt but I sense this with every trace of humanity I have because Mr. Pitt's writing moves me in the same way. John Kerry put his life on the line in the name of virtue and discovered that he was in the blackest place a human soul can be. Everything he knew was wrong. Instead of fighting for everything a human might cherish, he was fighting for everything a human abhors. And he came back from the abyss to report what he had learned to members of the US government who were supposed to be, somehow, responsible for the situation. This was a monumental and historic act of not only perception but courage and conviction. Speaking truth to power. There is no more revolutionary act. And John Kerry did it under dire circumstances. He chose to represent humanity in the face of almost inconceivable inhumanity. How many humans have done this in the history of the species? That is why I pray that Kerry will be the one who will lead this conflicted and agonized country to be the icon of life affirming principles that a starving and tortured world population can look to for Hope, that oxygen for the soul when there are no other life sustaining resources at hand. Kerry's tears are our tears. Believe it.

So eloquently put. Thank you very, very much.

- Jennifer

it still doesn't cut it for me. It sounds more like a good movie script than a good bio for President.

Been waiting and waiting.... foot tapping.... where's Will?

of the waters of hypocrisy, are half dead from the pressure of false integrity. GN.

is not the John Kerry that is running for President.

To put it in the proper context, Jack Kennedy served during the Second World War, as did Richard Nixon and Joe McCarthy.

There is fraud, but the fraud is the claim that the same Kerry that founded the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (together with Ron Kovic), is the same man that is running for President today. There are two different people altogether!

Posting an old picture old a young Kerry with John Lennon is another fraud. John Lennon, and the young John Kerry, would have never voted for the Iraq war!

Still makes me sick,when I think of what they did to Cleland. Hope its ok to post this, I still think he's the "same" John Kerry. One thing for certain, he isn't "BRING 'EM ON" AWOL BUSH. Kerry paid his dues, bush never has. I will support any democrat that runs against bush, but I do favor Kerry& wouldnt mind seeing Max as his VP. Wish I could get the picture to come up, with the letter, but no such luck! Anyways, thought this said it all:

Max Cleland:

"What do you call a man who risked his life for his fellow servicemen and saved his crew and the men in his command?

Who won three Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star with Combat V for Valor, and a Silver Star for Gallantry in Action in wartime?

You and I call him John Kerry. But if we help him now, we will soon be calling him “Mr. President.“

Having just been through a brutal Senate campaign in Georgia, I guess I know better than most what our Democratic nominee can expect to face in 2004.

To win a Georgia Senate race, the Republicans were willing to distort my record, ignore my personal history, and run ads putting my face next to those of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. We can only imagine how far they’ll go to keep George W. Bush in the White House.

John is the only person, Republican or Democrat, running for president who has ever experienced the sting of battle in war. That’s why he isn’t cavalier about sending young Americans in harm’s way. He’s been there, done that, and gotten some holes in his T-shirt along the way.

As John says, “America should never go to war because it wants to, but only when it has to.” And he knows the importance of having a military second to none and diplomacy equally great. That’s why John Kerry is the most qualified person – Republican or Democrat – to run for president of the United States and be Commander in Chief of our armed forces.

John also understands that the trickle-down economic policy of the current administration gives the biggest tax breaks to the 1% of Americans who need them least, while leaving crumbs for the three quarters of Americans who need them most.

Three million jobs have been lost since President Bush took office. We are not only less secure in our homeland, but we are also less secure abroad. We are less sound in our economic policy. More and more Americans are finding out that trickle-down economics means being trickled on.

America is in trouble. Our citizens cry out for new direction and new leadership with courage, compassion and a sense of commitment to get this country moving again in the right direction.

Here's what I need you to do: Please donate whatever you can afford today.

I’m proud to be one of John Kerry’s oldest friends and newest campaign supporters – and hopeful that, as one of the people that knows John best, you will join me in supporting his presidential campaign at a pivotal moment in time.


Sincerely,

Max Cleland

He is on fire and will be speaking to veterans organizations in every state throughout the campaign. Bush will be exposed. Rove will rue the day they lit that fire under Cleland.

I also have never questioned John Kerry's earlier service in Viet Nam and, in fact, have been a champion of the John Kerry of yesteryear.

I will always like John, but will not support him in the Primary. He has put himself into an unwinnable position with his support of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

If Clark enters the race, he will suck up all of the oxygen from Kerry's campaign. I don't say this in malice, but am simply stating what will happen.

I watched Kerry's entire speech in South Carolina. It was a good speech and a smart move to do so there since he is in real trouble in New Hampshire.

Still, today's Zogby poll has Dean surging in South Carolina to Second Place and only 1% from being in First Place. Kerry is 12% behind Dean in South Carolina. Not very good news for Kerry's campaign.

Who really earns a Purple Heart? A guy sitting in a VA hospital missing a leg. Or an eye. Or both of them. That's what a purple heart is about. Not some guy getting 3 scratches in 4 months so he can cut his tour short. What Kerry did demeans the Purple Heart.

As to his silver star, we don't really know what happened. The only one who really knows is Kerry himself. When the boat was ambushed, Kerry saw there was only one guy, not six or fifteen. This single VC, who may have been wounded, took off running, with Kerry in hot pursuit. Kerry was armed with at least a .45, but all the VC had was a malfunctioning rocket launcher. Kerry claims he doesn't know what happened, but the circumstances admit the possibility that he shot an unarmed and defenseless cripple who was running away.

It is by no means a certainty that what Kerry did was heroic. The fact that he was awarded a Silver Star does not establish that. It's not a bullshit award, but you have to be suspicious of any award based on the statements of the guy receiving it.

Kerry got the bronze star for fishing some dude out of the water. He had one of his purple heart injuries at the time, adding to the purported bravado, but the essence of the award is that he might have been shot while this happened. It certainly doesn't take a lot to puff up the citation to make it sound like a big deal.

In any war there's always an abundance of awards that really aren't earned or deserved or merited. For example, what did Jessica Lynch do to get a bronze star? She broke her leg and was taken prisoner. There's nothing heroic about that.

The citations always contain some miracle quality to them, something that suggests Gott Mitt Uns. "Oblivious to the hail of enemy fire, Soldier X single-handedly assaulted a machine gun nest ..." People want to believe it! When you get skeptical about awards, it challenges whether or not God is on our side, protecting our soldiers. In reality the award process is as corrupt and inefficient as anything else the military does, and a skilled manipulator like John Kerry would be aware of that.

I don't know what happened, really. Maybe Kerry actually earned his medals, but it doesn't sound like it. He certainly didn't earn three purple hearts in four months. That sounds like a guy who's exploiting technicalities. Actually it sounds like the sort of thing John Kerry would do.

to all who have earned it. Those folks had the guts to put their lives on the line for something very much worthwhile to them.

It seems your resentment of Kerry has spilled over into a disrespect for the sacred traditions of our armed services.

were the "sacred traditions" of the U.S military a barometer of goodness?

There are many here who see military service as some sort of fire in which the great are forged. Why is this? The U.S military in its recent history is among the most pernicious organisations ever known. Serving your country is fine, but surely those who don't wish to kill its enemies deserve at least equal respect?

... the military establishment (MIC) and its victims. Don Quixote was courageous; Superman was not. Virtuous behavior has to do with the underlying beliefs propelling one's actions. Even though the Vietnam War was a globalpolitic fraud, the motives of most of those who served were honorable and virtuous, relying perhaps misguidedly upon Disneyesque/Rockwellesque American mythologies.

As I've noted before, when one enters the military he surrenders volition (and soul) to the care of "We the People" -- his neighbors and fellow citizens. There is never anything honorable about killing. But the least honor falls at the feet of citizens in a democracy who permit the corrupt use of a military for fraudulent purposes in their name, not those who've surrendered the full exercise of their political rights in service to their fellow citizens.

That's pretty good and I understand where you are coming from. But since the purpose the military is arguably to kill, it's impossible to surrender your moral responsibility for doing so.

My point was that the military seems to get respect almost without question. Personally I don't believe that this is right.

but I somehow doubt you'll take as much responsibility for paying taxes as you assign to servicemembers who are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice.

And while some grant the military "respect almost without question", others disrespect them "almost without question"

That's why you'll find me on the streets trying not to get our servicemen killed. I know my taxes pay for them that's why I want a proper say in what they do. When they are killing people at the behest of Oligarchs they have to take some responsibility for their actions. Moral abdication is cowardice.

My point was that the military seems to get respect almost without question

My point is that military awards are taken at face value and they shouldn't be. How does somebody get three non-disabling purple hearts in four months? Was he just lucky, or did he manipulate the process?

It's easy to cheat; it doesn't take much effort. The American military hadn't gone to war for years and years before Gulf War I. Then in 1991 I started seeing Navy guys walking around with three decks of ribbons. I had to wonder what's heroic about firing missiles from 150 miles away. How can these guys call themselves combat heroes when they were never in any danger?

These are reasonable questions, IMO. But there's a real taboo against asking them. You might as well question whether God is an American.

for being shot while parachuting during WWII.

Despite what you may think you hear, many of the actions that have taken place on the battlefied are true. In fact if anything, a lot of the heroism and bravery may not always be complete-great deeds more often have gone unnoticed than otherwise.

I also have my own background in the military. I've no reason to doubt the service records of anyone who actually went into combat (as opposed to Bush). You will find however that those who would doubt Kerry's record the most are the ones who have never served.

... that you take advantage of so many opportunities to malign, deride, and besmirch the sacrifices and tribulations of individuals who've served in the military? It seems condescendingly obsessive and not at all sanely balanced with postures regarding national militarism. :shrug:

I don't know if you've read the citation for Jessica's bronze star. It doesn't make any substantive claims at all! It says she maintained courage and heart in the hospital at Al-Nasiriyah.

Excuse me. We're talking about a Bronze Star, not a get-well card. She didn't earn it!

What do you propose we do for the injured soldiers to honor their sacrifice for this country when they are injured, or when they perform their duties with exceptional courage, other than awarding them the Purple Heart, or the Silver or Bronze Star?

What do you think they deserve from our nation?

What do you propose we do for the injured soldiers

I don't believe that trivial injuries merit the purple heart. But guys take advantage of the regulations; it's no big deal. Who can blame somebody who gets hit with a piece of shrapnel from accepting an award?

But Kerry did it three times, and he was an officer! He used the three cheapo's to get himself reassigned away from the war. This is not heroic behavior, it's the kind of thing Maxwell Klinger does.


Maxwell Klinger and Valentine Heart

Have you the guts? I can arrange it, if you wish.

Can it be that the famously articulate Will Pitt is reduced to making veiled threats of violence? Shut up or we'll kick your ass. I like it! It's so ... manly.

Focus in on the accusation that was actually made, not the one that lends itself to thuggish rhetoric. I acknowledged that Kerry was awarded three purple hearts, but I also say I'm skeptical whether he actually earned all three. Two of them were totally non-disabling; the third one saw him out of action for only two days. These are trivial wounds. A couple of scratches don't make a man a war hero.

Kerry's silver star is tainted. He's the only one who really knows whether the Viet Cong he shot was armed or healthy or even facing him. The available documentation does not seem to support such a high award.

I don't know about Kerry's bronze star. Originally I thought it was the one that officers get for showing up, but he has a "V" device. He fished some guy out of the water, and the essence of the award is that he might have been shot while doing that. On the face of it, it sounds kinda flimsy, but I'd have to look at the documentation. I suspect it's bullshit like Kerry's other awards.

I'm asking if you have the simple courage to say these things while actually looking a vet in the eye...or if you're one of those people who gets brave when they have a keyboard and screen name to hide behind.

Tell me why a combat veteran - or any other veteran - would be surprised that political connections affect things like military assignments, efficiency reports, awards and promotions. Anybody who is surprised - or annoyed - about it is naive. Favoritism in the military has been going on since Alexander the Great.

It doesn't take courage to state this truism to a veteran, why should it? The well-connected John Kerry appears to have been a fair-haired boy. Veterans know the deal. Don't you?

to a veteran. I'd pay to see it.

Kerry got three cheapo Purple Hearts. Count 'em: 1 ... 2 ... 3. He used them to get an early return date from overseas. If an Army officer did that, we'd call that chickenshit. It's a word you might want to look up, Will. Or ask a veteran to explain it to you.

It's a matter of record that Kerry used his cheapo purple hearts as the basis for his request for transfer out of country. Weld made a big deal of it in his unsuccessful run for Kerry's senate seat. Perhaps you read the story yourself and missed its significance.

Grunts know chickenshit, and what Kerry did was chickenshit. Not small time chickenshit, either. Big time chickenshit!

1. He was wounded three times and was transferred out because of said wounds;

2. He didn't earn the medals, got them on the sly, and then used them to rotate out.

The crux of the matter is the idea that he did not earn the medals by being wounded, that he sneaked into them. That is what I want proof of. I've lived in massachusetts most of my life, And Kerry has been a Senator here for 19 years. He's run many campaigns, many of them brawls. I've never once heard this, so proove it to me.

A grunt would know that Kerry's non-disabling injuries were trivial. But Kerry put three of these trivial injuries together as the basis of his request for transfer back to the states. Nobody really objects if a guy gets a purple heart for a trivial injury, big deal. Only a lowlife would put three of them together as his ticket out of combat. But guys do bullshit things, it's understood. However, when an officer does it, it's chickenshit.

I'll dig up the URL of the article I read. Very cleverly written, it makes the complete case between the lines. Any grunt reading it would know what's really being said. You don't need to paint a picture for these guys, they know the deal.

No data on the severity of the wounds.

No understanding that getting wounded three times in combat is enough service for a troop.

No proof.

I got it.

and that should be good enough for all of us.I mean next you're gonna ask for actual facts or something.

The 'Sniff Test Proof' does not pass the sniff test.

Alas.

Kerry's trying to redeem himself for his Iraq war vote but it won't work. Vietnam doesn't mean anything to people who weren't born till it was over. That's half the population.

He doesn't have any appeal. No issues, no personality, no reputation for integrity ...

He's dead in the water. At the rate he's going, he'll be ambassador to Uruguay.

This article deals with some issues implicit in the irregular and unusual circumstances of Kerry's early departure from Vietnam. Kerry's wounds were "not serious" and it was really unusual for an officer to exploit a technicality the way Kerry did.

The author invites comments from people who are friendly to Kerry or who made decisions in his favor. Commodore Horne, for example, sounds well aware of Kerry's political connections and granted Kerry's almost unheard of request for transfer after only four months of his tour.

The article doesn't address the questions about Kerry's valor awards but other articles do. Purple Hearts are often awarded for non-disabling injuries, but it's rare that anybody would have three of them.

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061603.shtml

"There were an awful lot of Purple Hearts -- from shrapnel, some of those might have been M-40 grenades," said Elliott, Kerry's commanding officer. "The Purple Hearts were coming down in boxes. Kerry, he had three Purple Hearts. None of them took him off duty. Not to belittle it, that was more the rule than the exception."

But Kerry thought he had seen and done enough. The rules, he said, allowed a thrice-wounded soldier to return to the United States immediately. So Kerry went to talk to Commodore Charles F. Horne, an administrative official and commander of the coastal squadron in which Kerry served. Horne filled out a document on March 17, 1969, that said Kerry "has been thrice wounded in action while on duty incountry Vietnam. Reassignment is requested ... as a personal aide in Boston, New York, or Wash., D.C. area."

The document notes that Kerry was "presently on full-duty status and available for reassignment."

Horne, in a telephone interview, said the transfer request was allowed under then-existing naval instructions and was "above board and proper." Transfer was not automatic and was subject to approval by the Bureau of Naval Personnel, he said.

"I never once in any way thought my decision was wrong," Horne said. "To get three Purple Hearts and not be killed is awesome."

Kerry, asked whether he is certain a rule enabled him to leave Vietnam after three Purple Hearts, responded: "Yep. Three and you're out."

For the past several weeks, Kerry's staff said it has been unable to come up with a Navy document to explain that assertion. On Friday, however, the National Archives provided the Globe with a Navy "instruction" document that formed the basis for Kerry's request. The instruction, titled 1300.39, says that a Naval officer who requires hospitalization on two separate occasions, or who receives three wounds "regardless of the nature of the wounds," can ask a superior officer to request a reassignment. The instruction makes clear the reassignment is not automatic. It says that the reassignment "will be determined after consideration of his physical classification for duty and on an individual basis." Because Kerry's wounds were not considered serious, his reassignment appears to have been made on an individual basis.

Moreover, the instruction makes clear that Kerry could have asked that any reassignment be waived.

The bottom line is that Kerry could have remained but he chose to seek an early transfer. He met with Horne, who agreed to forward the request, which Horne said probably ensured final approval. The Navy could not say how many other officers or sailors got a similar early release from combat, but it was unusual for anyone to have three Purple Hearts.

Kerry's early departure meant that he was leaving behind a crew that had suffered through many bloody battles with him. Worried that crew members would be killed, he arranged for them to receive a safer assignment. When one crew member, Medeiros, tried to stay, Kerry "came and talked to me and said, `I really would like you to go. ... I'd like to know you are safe, or safer."'

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Might want to get the ole sniffer checked then OrTa :eyes:

Horne, in a telephone interview, said the transfer request was allowed under then-existing naval instructions and was "above board and proper." Transfer was not automatic and was subject to approval by the Bureau of Naval Personnel, he said.

"I never once in any way thought my decision was wrong," Horne said. "To get three Purple Hearts and not be killed is awesome."

You're not helping your case in the slightest...just making yourself look crazier and crazier.

"The article doesn't address the questions about Kerry's valor awards but other articles do"

I'll wait for those articles....hurry along now.

Why would Horne need to defend himself if his actions were regular and proper? The fact that he justifies approving an unusual personnel action suggests that the decision raised some questions. I would do it again! he says. Who is that answer directed to?

At this point, primary voters aren't aware that War Hero Kerry was only in Vietnam for four months. In that time he collected three cheapo purple hearts, and questions have been raised about his two other awards.

I quoted an article that was actually friendly to Kerry, but unfriendly articles are all over the Internet. Kerry's exaggerated war record was an issue in the last senatorial election, which was unexpectedly close for Kerry. He won't be able to duck legitimate questions in a national election.

made by OrdinaryTa, ...lousy, hate-filled, and hurtful.

hurtful

Kerry is claiming to be a war hero despite using a technicality to cut his combat tour down to four months. I don't know what the Navy term is to describe that kind of behavior, but in the Army it would be chickenshit.

Vietnam guys used to talk about a "million-dollar wound" as one that required reassignment to the states. Such wounds were usually very painful, and were often permanently disabling or scarring. Kerry seems to have come up with a million dollar wound in the form of three harmless flesh wounds that caused him no disability, no lengthy rehabilitation, and hardly any pain. Thirty years later, the commanders who approved Kerry's easy return from overseas are still embarrassed about it. But apparently not Kerry. Three and you're out! he crows.

I am absolutely fucking sick of people demeaning veterans and their sacrifices, and people bitching about how veterans suck up public resources. Veterans deserve full, free health care for the rest of their lives.

Your point was about veterans' health care. Mine was about John Kerry's exploitation of a loophole to get out Vietnam early. The circumstances suggest some string-pulling on the other end, too.

Rich, connected officer serves only four months of his combat tour. How does this connect to your point about veteran's health care? Was Kerry turned away from some VA clinic?

Does someone seeking to get his ass out of the line of fire VOLUNTEER for EVERY mission to rescue others?

I can't imagine even implying his medals were acquired in any way other than earning them.

Gotta problem with his Iraq stance? Fine, have at it! But to throw mud like "how'd he get those medals" should be beneath each and every one of us here.

The man is a war hero, plain and simple. Give credit where it is due. To not do so is neo-con-like.

Julie-Dean supporter who thinks we need to set all sights on the fraud in the WH

"war hero, plain and simple" is an oxymoron to some. Personally I don't doubt the veracity of his medals or his tales of daring do. What I do doubt is whether a service record immediately means you out rank someone who has not served in terms of foreign policy. Clinto acheived more good with no experince than many who have killed for their country. Service may be good, maybe bad. If it's central to a candidacy there's something lacking.

because Kerry earned medals that he is instantly the right man for the job. You may note my reference to the fact that I am a Dean supporter. With your reference to Clinton's ability in spite of his lack of military experience I suspect you may have missed my mention of Dean--as he is in the same boat as Clinton in the military experience regard.

I don't have a problem with the stance that past military service (with medals even!) necessarily equals the best choice for President.

Instead of questioning how Kerry achieved his medals (the more underhanded method IMO) I think it would be a more legitimate point to provide reasons as to why you think that doesn't make him more qualified. And I don't necessarily mean you specifically, anyone thinking along those lines.

I really just want to improve the level of dialogue, not stifle discussion. I don't like the cannabilistic behavior within my own party. It can come to no good end.

Julie

why is it beneath each and every one of us here to ask for proof of truth? i thought that was what we did here. ferret out the truth .

'bush served during vietnam as a pilot' is a true staement but it doean't tell the whole truth.

Kerry was awarded medals but what is the whole truth?

it's no secret that people have been awarded medals under "unusual"
circumstances. THAT demeans and diminishes those who truly merit the awards. by asking for the details of Kerry's awards is no sin. the fact that the details are so hard to determine may be.

The sin is that even though Kerry's actions (as an American who answered the call of duty for his country) stand far, far above and beyond what Bush can only dream of his in his deluded, cocaine addled brain- that "progressive" voters such as you need to attack, question, generate innuendo, and otherwise malign one of our greatest assets in the fight against the proven evil that is the VRWC.

that "progressive" voters such as you need to attack, question, generate innuendo, and otherwise malign one of our greatest assets in the fight against the proven evil that is the VRWC.

Despicable behavior, isn't it? *ahem*

Julie

in no way was i comparing Kerry's duty to bush's. it was just an example of how a simple statement may not tell the entire truth. of course you knew that didn't you? just another attempt to divert from the questions ehhh?

if there is something fishy here, it BETTER COME OUT NOW.

you think rove will ignore anything? any wiff of discrepancy?

all i'm asking for is the details of the incidents. why can't they be told.

i'm not talking about the allegations that he shot an unarmed man in the back as he was trying to run away. i'm talking about the three purple hearts. what were the wounds? how did he get hurt?

try and find out...just the notations from the awards would be something. a year ago i asked these questions and was attacked and dismissed for asking.

since then, i've googled my way thru all the pages on Kerry and there are questions out there.

IF THERE IS NOTHING TO HIDE, WHY HIDE IT?

rove won't ignore it so we'd better not either. Kerry has chosen to feature the war hero aspect in his campaign. HIS CHOICE. so now we need to know the details before rove tells the country his version.

rememvber, a lie (rove's version) travels around the world before the truth gets past the gate.

We know beyond a shadow of doubt he was awarded these honors. It is your duty to prove they are unwarranted not ours. It is very easy for someone to say they aren't warranted without any evidence to back up their assertions. GOP proved this time and time again with Clinton. You seem to want to follow their lead and cast unsubstantiated claims of fraud. I say prove the medals were not warranted or shut up the lying.

Good thing you are concerned about unsubstantiated claims; so am I. How does a guy get three non-disabling purple hearts in four months? It doesn't pass the sniff test.

Kerry's silver star relies on his own statements, a clear conflict of interest. He's the only one who can answer whether the Viet Cong sniper was facing him when Kerry shot him. We don't usually think backshooting is heroic, so we'll have to take Kerry's word that the guy was facing him and posed an imminent threat.

Imminent threat. There's that term again. It seems to be around Kerry, and some of the other people he voted with in favor of the war on Iraq. I suppose we should give Kerry the benefit of the doubt on both occasions.

It is my opinion that you know not what you are talking about. If you have Fact to tell us then go ahead otherwise I consider you nothing more than a gossip monger. The same as the GOP.

Three non-disabling purple hearts in four months sounds like manipulating the system to get an early return from overseas. You're right that there's no proof of any corner-cutting here. But it still has kind of an odor to it.

It would be different if Kerry weren't making such a big deal about his four-month tour of duty in Vietnam. The previous tour doesn't qualify as combat; he might as well have been sailing in the Gulf of Mexico.

It also would be different if Kerry hadn't been an officer. There is a higher standard of commitment expected of officers. Maybe you or I would also have collected purple hearts like S&H Green Stamps and cashed them in the way he did. But we're not posing in front of an aircraft carrier claiming the country needs heroes like us.

you're all fools for not believing OrTa's sensitive nose...he's like a freakin Toucan Sam I tell ya!

You're basically just talking shit. Fantastic. Clarity achieved.

Kerry doesn't deny exploiting a technicality to get an early out from Vietnam. In fact he chuckles over it. Three and yer out! he boasts.

We've been hearing a lot about the troops stuck in Iraq, and how they'd like to come home. People know what it means to take advantage of a loophole. It's just not presidential.

i'm not a newbee anymore.

it's Kerry's duty to prove they are warranted because he's the one who is running as a war hero.

You are the one leveling the charges. You need to offer up the evidence of your charges. You are doing nothing more than gossip mongering in the typical GOP fashion. I say again give me proof of your accusations or quit your lies.

can you read?????? have you read any of my posts??? this is not something we have a choice about, rove will not shut up and go away.
rove will not respond to any stupid little debate tricks about proving a negative.

three wounds in three months...somebody is gonna ask questions and i think we'd better have the answers when they do.

operative but you. I say again offer up proof of what you say or let it rest. I say his medals were warranted. You say they weren't. He has the medals awarded to him. My evidence is there where is yours. You say three wounds in three months is unlikely. I saw someone wounded three times in two days. Your evidence is quite lacking.

So Kerry killed someone who had just tried to kill him (and all his crew). The man he killed was not trying to surrender, even if he was running away.

But I won't waste my time. What drives me up a tree is the fact you want to cast aspersions on Kerry's motivations. And post 9/11, nearly ALL American will see Kerry's actions as right, decent, and honorable, and in STARK CONTRAST to AWOL boy from Texas.

end of story.

There is nothing to hide, but apparently, there is a lot which idle minds want to concoct.

Kerry's whole war hero thing is off kilter. The fact that he exploited some regulation to get out after only four months may cancel out the whole AWOL thing used (so far unsuccessfully) against Bush.

Kerry's awards just aren't solid. His purple hearts aren't real purple hearts, they are technical purple hearts, legitimate in a sense but not really convincing. War Hero Kerry needs a new strategy.

I'm not planning to vote for him.

to get to the bottom of this why not do a google? What good would it do us if those who have doubts just came in a dropped hints and innuendo? Um,none. That's called smear tactics. Kinda like push polling. Something like this:

Would you be more or less likely to vote for Senator Kerry if you knew he had been given his medals under questionable circumstances?

I say we avoid the mud-pit. But hey, that's me.

Julie

but i was a newbee and got skinned alive for daring to go against the PTBs here. i let it drop because at the time, Kerry was not running and i figured it would all come out from someone with more credibility that i had with my measily couple hundred posts.

but it hasn't. in fact the discussion has become more restricted not less. look at it this way. if a candidate were running and featuring his intelligence, his intelect, as a prime qualification for being president, he would have to expect to be questioned on his transcripts and grades. he'd have to back up his claims and flesh out his qualifications.

same deal if he was running based on his financial accumen. people would want to know the figures and facts to validate his claim.

if ethics were the hook from which a candidate were running he'd better be ready to have people looking at that with a fine tooth comb.

Kerry has chosen to focus on the war hero aspect. HE CHOSE. so why is it a horrible idea to want to know a little bit more that a listing of the medals? in what manner was he wounded? why is that a bad thing to ask? he brought it to the table. why is it so hard to find out exactly in what fashion he was wounded. bullets? schrapnel?
broken bones? what?

if we don't ask...rove will.

he could end this controversy in three minutes. he could nip this in the bud with a three minute statement. just give us the answers before rove does.....sometime in october of '04.....

btw...as things stand now, Kerry is my choice. i like Edwards better but uneless or until he starts getting better exposure, he has little chance. this isn't an attempt to bring Kerry down. it's attempt to keep us, the whole dam party from getting blindsided.

?

The guy flip-flops all over the place about issues that are so close to him that he weeps when he contemplates them. First he's gung-ho; then he's fiercely anti-war. When war is back in, so is Kerry!

I look for more substance in a presidential candidate. He voted for the war! That's when he lost my vote.

being exposed to war is one of the most common ways people become un-gung-ho. there is nothing odd about that. growing and seeing that there are no absolutes is no sin either.

if you're a one issue voter than you are making a foolish descision.

i'm for Kerry. he has a lifetime of service backing him. liberal service. but i need to know that there is nothing we are going to get sandbaged with. that's the purpose of the primaries.

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

How do you know that these guys care whether Kerry's medals were truly earned or not? Over the years he's treated them very well. When Kerry's cheapo purple hearts allowed him to get out early, he pulled strings to get his crew reassigned to soft jobs. They have no reason to resent him, and why would they?

was taken in Viet Nam. That is how uninformed our nation is, in my opinion. War record will be irrelevant for Democratic candidate. Maybe I am too cyncial but I don't have a whole lot of faith or confidence in the intelligence of the American people...

If he buried them in the graves of Vietnamese children I would be impressed.

This rapt adulation of war heros without recognising the horror that is war is what is so disgusting about pundits like Tweety (who seem embarrassed that he was in the Peace Corps in Africa rather than burning down villages in 'Nam).

My guess is that it has to do with your father. Well, it has to do with my father too, and the brutal lessons he learned about the truth of war in Korea. He would never want me to believe it was anything to be awarded a prize (medal) for.

Ralph: concerning plans for the local march,
the following:

1. Saw the weary demonstration in Washington,
the burning faces of our sad boy warriors
throwing their medals at the president.

2. Think we should emulate but not copy, so:
when the delegation arrives at the state capitol
first read the petition:

"We are not afraid to kill. We are sorry we murdered
our souls. We did as told but we learned how to say NO!
Stop it. Or we will stop you. Don't resist. You can't stop
the ghosts you made of us."

Next, have those who lost legs crawl forward and neatly
stack them. Then bowl the skull of your best killed buddy
down the aisle.

Finally, have the blind push the quadruplegics forward
(they will have knives in their teeth to give to the legislators
to use on themselves). We leave. If they don't use them we
come back.

Horace

PS. Save the instructions for your grandkids. They'll come in handy.

Horace Coleman currently lives in Long Beach. Viet Nam Generation has published In The Grass, a volume of his collected poetry.
http://lists.village.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Book_Contents/In_The_Grass.html

I am, and I thought maybe since you were from Boston that you would be too.

Though I stand for them all. ABBA.

Keyboard Closet Queens seem to be a dime a dozen around here,now.
Some should worry about a very Hotel California-esque performance by Mr. Hot,last night in the cool New Mexico night air.:tinfoilhat:

Keyboard Closet Queens seem to be a dime a dozen around here

Surely you're not referring to me here. I'm not in the closet about Kerry. I've been very "out" about not wanting to vote for him.

Kerry exploited a loophole to cut his combat tour down to a third of what it should have been. When he boarded the plane back home, he was just as able-bodied as the day he arrived. He was just tired of the danger, and who can blame him? You or I might have done the same thing.

..take those medals and dangle them in front of the American people and see their response. pssssst---I bet it sells better than "sealed papers a la Cheney buried in Vermont". psssst....always keep in the mind the 'failings' of your candidate 'cause they will be brought up. pssssst.....by far not all Dems are anti-war. pssst...Geps Union boys wouldn't walk across to street to vote for an anti-war (to them anti-troop) candidate but show them those medals or Wes' stars and, batta-boom, watch them vote. You can't change the culture, baby, but you can use it to get the fucker out of the White House. pssssst....that's what we are trying to do----isn't it????

Why so many here fail to see it is beyond comprehension.

POST 9-11 REALITY:

The firefighters are the new heroes...Kerry will use them AGAINST Bush.

The military are seen as brave and sacrificial...Kerry will use them AGAINST Bush.

The veterans are getting renewed respect for their past sacrifices...Kerry will use them AGAINST Bush.

use the veterans and firefighters against bush. As for the current military men and women, I'm not so sure. Some of them seem to be brainwashed by Bush's swagger and machismo.

Don't think for a second that he won't get hammered for that come 2004. He will not be able to avoid that awolstick.

Besides, many in the military are NOT happy with swaggerboy as the media wants you to believe. Read Stars and Stripes and Army Times.