« POLITICS? WHAT'S THAT? | Main | DAILY SHOW SKEWERS SWIFTIES »
DIRTY POLITICS: SWIFT BOAT VETS
John Kerry makes an awfully big deal of his Vietnam service. So it's only fair that his military record be subjected to scrutiny. But this "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" business is, without a doubt, dirty politics.
The Swifties are a vicious partisan group trying to shoot holes in John Kerry's credibility. I have no doubt Karl Rove lurks in their shadows. The group's spokesman, Kerry nemesis John O'Neill, was a tool of the Nixon administration 33 years ago. Today, he seizes on the opportunity for a rematch with Kerry, and make a few bucks on his book, Unfit for Command. After an unprecedented string of best-selling books exposing the Bush administration's single-minded incompetence, I suppose they're entitled. But at their core, these flip-floppers are still bitter that Kerry spoke out against America's most painfully misguided war:
None of the 13 men in the TV ad served on either of the two swift boats... that Kerry commanded. Of the group's 254 members — out of 3,500 swift boat sailors who served in Vietnam — only one served under Kerry. The rest who did serve on Kerry's boats back his record.Many of Kerry's critics commanded boats that went out on missions with Kerry. Others never met him. Most are still angry about Kerry's leadership of Vietnam Veterans Against the War after he returned home.
Should we know whether Kerry was really in Cambodia in Christmas, 1968? Sure. Should we also know where Bush spent 3 months in 1972? Yeah. How about whether Clinton inhaled? Who cares. To tell you the truth, all the mudslinging and lawsuits about who-did-what-where in Vietnam make me sick. It disengages me from politics. This is exactly the sort of behavior that keeps citizens away from the voting booth in droves.
What matters most is who can lead our country now.
Bush is a failure by any measure. He's given us war instead of peace, inspired hate instead of trust, tax cuts for the wealthy instead of jobs and health care for the rest of us, divided the nation instead of uniting us.
While Bush is up there watching in the corporate executive suite, laughing with his cronies, John Kerry is stepping up to the plate. I know who I'm cheering for.
August 9, 2004 at 01:38 AM in Current Affairs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341d0f1153ef00d83421008353ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference DIRTY POLITICS: SWIFT BOAT VETS:
» Success vs. Failure, War vs. Peace from Musings of a Techno-Geek
Ultimately, what it comes down to is who you believe. In my opinion, Swiftboat Veterans for Truth has made its case and I give their arguments the greater weight. I plan on sending a trackback ping to the article on Blogumentary and I invite the auth... [Read More]
Tracked on Aug 10, 2004 11:42:08 PM
» Swift Kick in the Butt from Eat Your Vegetables
MoveOn.org has struck back with an ad condemning the ironically named Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and their recent. [Read More]
Tracked on Aug 17, 2004 4:41:49 PM
» Swift Kick in the Butt from Eat Your Vegetables
MoveOn.org has struck back with an ad condemning the ironically named Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and their recent. [Read More]
Tracked on Aug 18, 2004 12:44:58 AM
Comments
"This is exactly the sort of behavior that keeps citizens away from the voting booth in droves."
Exactly what the Republicans would like. Less voters and they have a better chance. People that are so disgusted with politics that they are not going to vote will not be voting for Kerry, either. The republicans have their base who blindly follow karl and george. if they can get the people who are fed up with Bush to be fed up with politics in general than it's a victory for them.
expect lots more like this in the next few of months.
Posted by: lane at Aug 9, 2004 11:26:50 AM
I agree Lane, in fact that's exactly what I was gonna comment.
Except, I'll say that not all Republicans want people to be
disgusted and stay away from the polls, mostly just the radical
"neocons" (as in con job).
I wonder how much these swiftboat guys got paid to sell out their
country? I am so disgusted with them and those that paid them
off, that I don't even know what to call them. (Traitors doesn't
quite fit the bill.)
Posted by: Lorika at Aug 9, 2004 12:20:59 PM
Low voter turnout = victory for the Repbublicans. It's *their* values that are out of line with what the majority of Americans believe, not the Democrats'. (I'll find linkage on this later; I'm on my break at work).
Remember what Bill Clinton said at the DNC: "They need a divided America."
---
I had a dream last night that I was among thousands of people at some kind of speech or political rally, and the enthusiasm and excitement were eye-popping. People could not wait to be rid of George W. Bush. The mood of the dream was really hopeful and uplifting. I hope it is a harbinger of things to come.
Posted by: spacewaitress at Aug 9, 2004 3:48:39 PM
I wonder when the Yale Skull and Bones will get around to endorsing one of the candidates? '
Skull and Boners for Truth: "We heartily endorse John Kerry because during the hazing ritual we determined he has a bigger schlong than George W. Bush. Also he has hotter daughters. And, y'know, a potentially enormous skull."
Posted by: desrosiers at Aug 9, 2004 6:13:23 PM
Boy, you liberal idiots can't stand the fact that some REAL Vietnam Vet hero's who were there for their whole 13 month tour and worked right next to him in the same unit exsposed kerry for the FRAUD that he is. Spent 4 months in country please what a chickenshit joke. Believe me I spent twenty years in the Army and when you are in the same unit you know whats going on in other vehicles or boats in this case, word gets around, the Navy calls in scuttle butt...So Those guys probably knew more about skerry than his own crew did. So y'all keep having those kool-aid induced dreams you're having, come November 3rd they're going to turn into NIGHTMARES. This is the begining of the end for the two johns.....Later you Liberal Losers 3IDVET
Posted by: James Bachus at Aug 9, 2004 8:42:11 PM
The mole hath spoken.
Posted by: desrosiers at Aug 9, 2004 9:01:16 PM
Hey, J.B., I'm afraid you might be the idiot for swallowing the Swift Boat Vet boondoggle hook, line and sinker. It is so obvious that the Swift Boat Vets is just a bunch of right-wing orchestrated B.S. It is far too convenient to suddenly round up 200+ vets after 35 years who fall in line and say Kerry is lying.
This news story confirms my orchestrated B.S. theory:
"AUSTIN, Texas — Opponents of Sen. John Kerry have hired a private investigator to gather information aimed at discrediting his military service, say several veterans who served with the Massachusetts Democrat in Vietnam.
Several veterans who have been contacted in recent days accused the private investigator, Tom Rupprath of Rockwall, Texas, of twisting their words to produce misleading and inaccurate accounts that call into doubt the medals Kerry received for his service.
'They're just distorting things," said Jim Wasser, who served with Kerry. "They have nothing to go after John Kerry for, so now they're trying to discredit him.'"
Now, answer me this, J.B., how come the Repubs can find 200 people who say Kerry is 'lying' but can't find anyone who can vouch where Bush was in Alabama when he was supposed to on Nat Guard duty?
Posted by: BushLied_900Died at Aug 9, 2004 9:10:34 PM
Like I said a few days ago here, the Swifties story stinks of the same shit that Bush supporters (Rove?) pulled on John McCain a few years back... dirty, misleading and dishonest.
Posted by: ryan at Aug 9, 2004 9:25:08 PM
So James - how many months would you have had to serve in Vietnam to be a REAL Vietnam Vet? Anyone that served less time than you is a "chickenshit joke" - what a slap in the face to Vietnam Veterans. You have no credibility if all you can do is childishly insult vets.
And - guys not on Kerry's boat know more about Kerry than guys on Kerry's boat. Umm... who's drinking the koolaid here?
----
Here's your post from the Bush Country Forum:
A skerry presidency would be worse than than Clinton years, total destruction of the military, Intel community's... We will be in big trouble This will be the beginning of the end for a free America, after him will come Hill and Bill again, we will gradually lose all of our rights starting with the right to keep and bear arms and then on down the line. This will also give way to the UN taking over large parts or all of our military...Its coming folks.. President Bush, Arnold, Rudy Guliani, and others like them are the only hope...I know mainstream America Supports the President, but the left is on a mission to destroy him and anyone else who gets in the way....They have almost all the media, a whole bunch of big names company's except Wal-Mart who support's the Republicans and President Bush, even they are beginning to feel the heat...Almost all the big Colleges are liberal hot beds, not to mention the idiots in liberal wood.. All these things are the liberal hammer and sickle out to destroy America as we know it...GOD knows I hope I am wrong about all of this but look what the have done to the president in just one year, yes he is holding his own, and I think he will win big, but we better be weary, all this is happening now and the left is doing all it can to speed it up.....All we can do is pray and hope everything we see even on Foxs is wrong....
----
James, I really think you are wrong about all of this. Seriously, the scenario you describe is almost as frightening to me as it is to you; it's what I like to call a "Negative Fantasy." The right is always harping on the left's blind hatred of Bush. Blind hatred doesn't get us anywhere, it isn't productive and it's based in our worst fears. I think you're letting blind hatred of Kerry and the left (maybe going back to post-Vietnam days?) paint your dark paranoid picture.
At the risk of sounding cheap and cliche - I think America is a great country. It's full of people with views like yours, and views like mine. You know, right-wing freaks and liberal losers. We all have to live here, with the same government that's supposed to represent both of us. To me, Bush has realized my nightmares. He represents the neocon agenda. He talks in a way that appeals to many Americans, but his actions are screwing most of us over rather than protecting us. Kerry may be a liberal wacko to you, but he'll actually try to represent a majority of Americans and unify us, rather than flip most of us off.
I'm just riffin'. :-)
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 9, 2004 11:07:28 PM
total destruction of the military, Intel community's... We will be in big trouble This will be the beginning of the end for a free America, after him will come Hill and Bill again, we will gradually lose all of our rights starting with the right to keep and bear arms and then on down the line. This will also give way to the UN taking over large parts or all of our military
Shit... and I thought I was shrill and unbalanced.
That would be pretty cool, though... I mean if Kerry really did all that stuff. Hey, JB, I also heard Kerry wants to legalize baby rape and domestic violence (he is, of course, the "most liberal" Senator. *cough* *choke* *cough*). Care to comment?
Posted by: JasonC at Aug 10, 2004 4:49:13 AM
I also heard Kerry wants to legalize baby rape and domestic violence
This makes Chuck laugh. I just *knew* we were the party of baby rapists!
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 10, 2004 11:42:40 AM
Heh. That kind of makes the man-on-dog action Rick Santorum spoke of seem rather tame. Don't let anybody tell you that the Democrats can't party!
Posted by: ryan at Aug 10, 2004 12:39:27 PM
First off I do not support Kerry so, obviously my viewpoint is going to be skewed; however, just some minor points.
Jobs - My understanding is that Mr. Kerry will stop the flow of jobs from America, yet more than 80% of the Heinz Corp jobs have been sent outside the US, and no, not just to support the markets they are in. Of course, it really is his wife's company and he is not involved in the day to day operations/decisions?
Military - For a strong military but has voted against nearly all measures that could have benefited military personnel. I guess some of this can be attributed to fiscal responsibility; however, it doesn't wash with being strong on security. And face it terrorists have been attacking us long before Bush came into office and will continue to attack America while they have the resources to do so - no agreement will satisfy a terrorist.
Vietnam Experience - Has spoken very strongly against it and created a negative picture of those who fought in it, but now wears it as a badge of honor. Also, 4 months as an LT in combat hardly qualifies as a criteria for Commander In Chief.
Posted by: gblair at Aug 11, 2004 1:48:47 AM
gblair, thanks for the comment.
About your first two points (Jobs, Military) I'm taking your word for it since I know little of the Heinz Corp. and need to look closer at Kerry's records. However I will say that it's really easy to skew perceptions of "He voted for/against _____!" when bills often cobble together unrelated items, or both "good" and "bad" items. They're often more complicated than simply voting for/against ______.
As for Vietnam experience, this is your weakest point. Many presidents have had no military experience (Thomas Jefferson, FDR, Clinton) or were never in combat (Carter, Reagan, G.W. Bush). I could go on - but suffice to say military experience is not a prerequisite for the ability to govern. But I'd venture that someone who was in combat and earned medals is better prepared to be a Commander in Chief.
I really think it's odd that Bush supporters are making an issue of Kerry's military record when Bush's record is a complete joke in comparison.
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 11, 2004 2:57:04 AM
So truth is dirty politics. Further, and frankly, it doesn't matter if President Bush spent only 2 days or even 0 days in military duty during the 'Nam era ... he's not making that a campaign point or a way to make him sound more "worthy". Kerry is obviously confused about the facts and so are you.
Posted by: Ken at Aug 15, 2004 8:03:09 AM
All I know is what I see and read. It seems to me until Kerry can have at least half the number of vets for him as are against him, money induced or not, I am more inclined to believe the veterans than the politician.
Posted by: Greg at Aug 15, 2004 4:14:06 PM
GREG: Fortunately, Kerry has a lot of support among veterans. Although I think "equal number of veterans for/against" is an extremely odd criteria for deciding your vote, if that's what you're saying.
KEN: What facts am i confused about? The backers and motives for Swift Boat Vets are out in the open. And if you'll read elsewhere on this blog, you'll see I've acknowledged the Xmas in Cambodia issue - the main issue Kerry is "confused" about and is now (begrudgingly) admitting.
As for Bush's military record - the campaign is staying away from that, for good reason. And yet it refused to denounce or distance itself from the Swift Boat Vets, in effect "we like what they're saying."
Campaign points don't determine what's relevant to the election. *We* determine what's relevant to the election.
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 15, 2004 9:28:37 PM
If the swift vets' website is false, then, yes it is dirty politics. But if it is true, then this website is nothing but a libelous propaganda site using dirty politics of its own. Why won't Kerry and his cronies open the records? He's claiming to be brave, so prove it and disprove those that say he's telling lies. The really big difference between the charges of lies of both Kerry and Bush is that the facts disputed regarding Kerry mostly come from his own stories of events and are more difficult to investigate because few people are involved in the various incidences. Bush, however, is surrounded by whole departments and is under a much more powerful microscope because he is our President.
The economic downturn was beginning to raise its ugly head before Clinton left office. The 9/11/2001 attacks were an almost mortal blow to our downhill economy. Bush's policies are bringing it back.
Democrats remind me of kids who, when in an argument they can't win, close their eyes, cover their ears, and just make a lot of loud noise to drown out the truth.
Kerry is doing just that. Give us affordable healthcare? Come on!! Why didn't he do that while he was in the Senate? Get cooperation with rebuilding Iraq? Who's left to get cooperation from? Do we really want help from Germany, Russia, France, or Russia? They were financing Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Sadam and were owed BILLIONS, so of course they don't want to spend more after losing their "investment". And what exactly was their investment in? Torture? Genocide? September 11th?
We are safer under Mr. President Bush. If John Kerry is elected president, his presidency will have the same effect as his little trip to Hood River, Oregon to go wind surfing. NONE. There was no wind this last weekend so he could sail. He is a windless fool. He has NO track record except one of self service. He didn't "serve" this country. Four months? SOMEONE tell me what good he has done. What can he do except rally a mob of hate-mongers as he has all across the country.
When Kerry came to Portland, Oregon, I didn't see Republicans tearing up the city and blocking traffic. But when Bush has come to Portland, Oregon, Democrats caused anarchy and were destructive.
I'll take Mr. President Bush's three years of peace over the Democrats "if we don't win, then riot" any day.
John Kerry and the Democrats don't respect the office of the President now, so he shouldn't be allowed to hold it in the future.
Posted by: b ross at Aug 15, 2004 11:21:38 PM
Hello there Bob,
1) Swift Boat Vets. Yes, it's dirty politics when a few wealthy Republicans - the same ones who smeared McCain - gather together a bunch of vets 30 years after Vietnam to smear Kerry because they never got over the anti-war movement. I'm sorry, it's a slimy tactic and that's why this thing doesn't have any legs. You talk about facts, admitting most of them are hard to verify. The Xmas/Cambodia dispute is the only issue to rise to the top and have some validity.
I'm a big proponent of transparency, which means releasing records. Howard Dean sealed his records in Vermont, violating the very spirit of his campaign, and I was against that. There are of course legitimate reasons for secrecy - national security and individual privacy (e.g. health records) among them. I doubt Kerry can claim either.
2) Economic downturn. Okay, no relation to this topic, but yes 9/11 jeopardized our economy. Bush's policies are bringing it back by giving $78,000 in tax cuts to the wealthiest of the wealthy? And where does that go? Investments, which yield more returns, which are invested and hoarded. Trickle down my ass - try giant sucking sound. The Bush economy represents millions of lost jobs, out of control defecits, and robbing the middle class.
3) Health Care. Not any individual alone, be s/he Senator or President or Master of the Universe, can guarantee everyone affordable healthcare. It takes public support and public officials with the guts to take on the health care industry's entrenched interest.
4) International cooperation rebuilding Iraq: Companies Secretly Bid to Rebuild Iraq:
"All [the companies] are experienced. But in addition, all are generous political donors — principally to Republicans. [...] British troops are serving alongside U.S. troops in Iraq. But the closed process blocked British companies, as well as any foreign firm, from bidding. [...] Also left out were international development groups, which historically have been essential to nation rebuilding because they emphasize the involvement of local people."
5) Safety under the current president. "Osama bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside United States." Sure we've killed many al-Qaeda, but how many more have we bred? It's impossible to know. One thing we do know - we've diverted billions of dollars and hundreds of American lives to attacking a country that posed no threat to the United States and had negligible connections to terrorism.
6) Kerry's four months of military service. As i've said before - way to slap vets in the face.
7) "Mob of hate-mongers" ... "Democrats caused anarchy" ... "If we don't win, then riot" Whoa, let's reel in the hyperbole there Bob. By calling half of all American's hate-mongering riot-prone anarchists, you might reveal yourself to be the real hate-monger, and a stark raving anti-American lunatic.
Yes, Bush's presence causes lots of protest, and it damn well should. The country is in pain, Bob. Sure, there are always a few bad apples in those crowds that give everyone a bad name. (Incidentally, history has shown some of those bad apples have been planted by Federal or local anti-terrorism agents.) I could bring up abortion clinic bombings, but I won't. The truth is, half of the country is upset with this president, and many of those people are willing to express it. That's their American right. Get used to it.
This election won't be won on how much you think John Kerry and the Democrats respect the office of the President. It will be won on the judgement of George W. Bush's miserable record and the opportunity for safety and prosperity represented by John Kerry and the Democrats.
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 16, 2004 4:29:39 AM
P.S. - you been SERVED, son!
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 16, 2004 4:33:27 AM
You're way off. Kerry is a fraud. This story isn't going away because it is holding water. Any questions?
Jeff
Posted by: Jeff at Aug 20, 2004 1:01:24 AM
Chuck, what makes you such a hardcore Kerry supporter (seriously)? And about the swift boat group claiming that Kerry is a liar, until all the facts are known, if ever, what's the point(although the intelligent free thinker would believe the majority over the very small minority of that said group that still support Kerry). BTW the Bush camp has asked them to stop running the AD and Pres. Bush does NOT question Kerry's service or HONOR, as stated on Fox News. SO, where's is your argument now? I don't support Bush 100%, it's very hard to agree with a candidate 100%, unless you're an average face value type of person, but I would trust Bush any day over Kerry. I am puzzled at the blatent whitewashing of the big picture of our country and freedom. Is a new president going to change any of our lives that much? More than likely not, unless, UNLESS,the president doesn't take terrorism seriously and support the military in every way possible. Terrorism is a war we can easily lose if we don't watch out, something many don't understand or want to believe. Just look at Spain. BTW, what in the world is going on with that "wife" of Kerry's? She is just plain creepy.
Posted by: Level at Aug 20, 2004 2:19:41 AM
Jeff: I do have a question - do you read the news?
Level: I haven't seen anything saying Bush asked them to stop running the ad. Do you have a link?
I don't describe myself as a hardcore Kerry supporter. It may appear that way because I've been defending him against these attacks. And I think these attacks have had the effect of galvanizing support from people like me.
I'm a progressive at heart - Kucunich most closely reflects my values, Dean won me over by speaking out against the war and the democratic/empowering way he ran his campaign. I was lukewarm on Kerry until his speech at the DNC, and now fighting back against these attacks.
Re: Bush and terrorism, and how mucht the president affects our lives... to be continued tomorrow.
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 20, 2004 3:57:08 AM
I am a Vietnam vet with two tours (Thats two years.... not four months)
The most ironic part of your blog is the part in the heading that says
"I seek the truth".
Posted by: Charles Koeller at Aug 20, 2004 1:06:14 PM
It's a triple-entendre.
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 20, 2004 1:25:27 PM
I knew it had to mean something other than seeking the truth.
Posted by: charles koeller at Aug 20, 2004 1:30:55 PM
Um, Bob, I guess you listen to Rush, and we all know what a fine truth teller he is, John Kerry's service records are open and on his own website. Did you even look for them? I guess that's why they call you guys dittoheads, you don't think for yourself.
http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_records.html
Posted by: Lorika at Aug 20, 2004 1:52:50 PM
50,000,000 Elvis fans can't be wrong!
Posted by: Mr. Pants at Aug 20, 2004 1:58:48 PM
In 1962 I was given a citation for "The Cuban Missile Crisis"
I was in San Diego...Now if I could have written my own after action reports
Like Kerry, I could have received a Silver Star. Don't get me wrong.
For several years after the war we all had photos of Kerry and Jane Fonda.
We kept them in the Urinals
Posted by: charles koeller at Aug 20, 2004 2:19:01 PM
So then you're making an informed, unbiased decision in this election, and are therefore a reliable source for criticism? I'm sorry, but if we're to believe any of this then you've clearly got a major personal problem with Kerry that has little to do with his ability to govern.
Thanks for clarifying.
Posted by: Mr. Pants at Aug 20, 2004 2:30:52 PM
You don't believe I received a Cuban Citation or
We didn't put pictures of Kerry in the urinal? If
you insist I'll email you the citation and photo.
P.S. The photo is in bad condition.
Posted by: charles koeller at Aug 20, 2004 2:44:27 PM
Piss-soaked photo exhange! You can't get this stuff on eBay, folks.
Posted by: Mr. Pants at Aug 20, 2004 3:29:58 PM
I love reading these blogs,Chuckie Baby etal.ABB right boys?I assume you're boys,"girlie boys"?Just one note boys.If you're good you don't have to tell people about it,they'll find out about it.In view of the fact that Kerry CONSTANTLY tells us how brave he is/was,it makes one wonder,at least it makes me wonder.For the record,I am a Vietnam veteran,and you know what?I know a lot of guys that received medals for heroism and valor,the only time that they talk about it is when someone asks them about it and then they speak about their awards humbly and with graciousness usually with praise for their comrades in arms.They don't refer to them as war criminals,baby killers,perpetrators of atrocities unlike Mr.Kerry.Think about it. Al Dallas,Tx.
Posted by: al at Aug 20, 2004 3:40:09 PM
The fact that Kerry received 3 purple hearts in four months (after applying for two of them himself) and then immediately came home after those four months to become a "Vietnam Veteran Against the War" tells me "everything I need to know" about him. I consider him totally transparent and obvious.
The part I am confused and disgusted about is how that evades so many "thinking" liberals in this country. How convenient it must be to simply believe what you WANT to believe regardless of logic and reason...
Posted by: Robert Luster at Aug 20, 2004 5:09:50 PM
Invasion of the Dittoheads!
Posted by: ryan at Aug 20, 2004 6:02:39 PM
Speaking of logic and reason, sounds like this thread will be resisant to it.
Those of you coming here from Google, I'd urge you to hear what Sen. Max Cleland has to say on this issue. And if you can stand it, this article which, when it doesn't mesh with your preconceived notions, you'll easily dismiss as "Liberal media."
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 20, 2004 6:28:57 PM
Al and Charles - Thanks guys. You're heavily underscoring the point that attacks on Kerry's military service are coming up now because guys like you never got over the anti-war movement. You think he sold you out, because he spoke out about what was going on over there.
That's fine, and I can see why you'd hate him. But understand I have to put you in a little box: "Bitter vets with an old axe to grind"
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 20, 2004 6:40:46 PM
Chuck - I'm listening - Please tell us EXACTLY why you hate Bush.
But please, keep it to specific facts ONLY.
Dispense with all the adjectives and preaching. No attitudes or slander.
Otherwise, thinking rational people have to dismiss you...
Posted by: Robert Luster at Aug 20, 2004 7:38:38 PM
An ax to grind? I personally could care less about Kerry's B.S. war record. What I am disturbed about is if he becomes Commander in Chief what Moral authority will he have to send our young men and women into harms way. By his standards one must decide for themselves what is a just war. What would his response be to "Hell no we won't go" If you believe that the only wars that are just are those that young people are willing to give thier lives for you are naive. No one wants war. The very notion of an anti-war movement is laughable. For there to be an anti-war movement there must be a pro-war movement. It would be interesting to see President Kerry respond to an attack by North Korea on the South. Maybe a pre-emptive attack on our troops in Iraq by Iran. I'll tell my Grand Children tell That baby killer Kerry (by his own admission)Hell no, we won't go. I'll pay for their stay in Canada.
Posted by: charles koeller at Aug 20, 2004 7:44:53 PM
Robert: Whew, where to start? I'll come back with specifics, but generally
Iraq; Patriot Act; Economy (esp. tax cuts for the rich); attacking the Constitution; the Environment, and so on. I went into some of this in a comment above.
Charles: You probably didn't follow my Max Cleland link, so I'll post a bit of his take on that:
"John Kerry, before he went to Vietnam, was asking 'Why?' While he was there, he was asking, 'Why?' He came back from Vietnam, he continued to ask the question 'Why?' That's the kind of Commander-in-Chief I want. I want a Commander-in-Chief, before we send young Americans to war to die, I want that Commander-in-Chief to ask why. And be able to answer the American people and tell the truth."
You know what's disturbing? We have a Commander-in-Chief that sent 1,000 American kids to their death in a country that posed no threat to us, and is a bigger breeding ground for terrorists now than it ever was. Moral authority... please.
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 20, 2004 8:09:17 PM
Robert, I obviously can't/wouldn't want to speak for Chuck or anyone else, but McSweeney's has a pretty handy little list of reasons people like myself want nothing more than to send Mr. Bush home to Crawford.
Specifically, day's 92, 89, 88, 81, 77, 75, 66, 64, 63, 56, 50, 44, 41, 39, 38, 29, 26, 18, 14, and 5.
Posted by: JasonC at Aug 20, 2004 8:25:17 PM
Whaddya mean you don't speak for me?
WHAT AM I PAYING YOU FOR?!?!?!
(The McSweeny's list is terrific. Now I must retire to my quarters.)
Posted by: Chuck at Aug 20, 2004 8:36:13 PM
1. Iraq
The only mistakes I've seen in Iraq so far were not closing the borders of Iraq immediately, and being too "sensitive" in Fallujah and Najaf
2. Patriot Act
Given 9/11 and our new realities, I'm not sure the patriot act goes far enough.
3. Economy (esp. tax cuts for the rich)
The economy was heading downhill before Bush took office, and really dumped after 9/11 - why not blame Al Qaeda for the economy and Bush for the recovery? And what in the hell makes you think someone who earns more should be required to pay more? A flat rate for everybody with all paying the same rate is more like it. They penalized ambition in USSR for many years and it didn't work out very well - did you notice?
4. Attacking the Constitution
Vague. How? Where? When? I've seen no evidence of this.
5. Environment
The environment? I'm guessing you resent that human's are the dominant species on earth and ever changed anything. How, exactly, did he damage the environment? I would have thought the resources for sustaining the economy might have been important to you - they are to me. (If you spent a month on Alaska 's North Slope I'm guessing maybe even you would choose the oil over the "Pristine Environment"
I did follow the Max Cleland link. I wasn't impressed. It was thick on attitudes and thin on facts.
Our Commander-in-Chief did not send 1,000 American kids to their death. He DID liberate a country that posed a great threat to us and many others. And this at a cost of only 1000? Unbelievable. And yes, before anyone asks, I have two children both serving in the military, one still in Kirkuk. I am extremely pound of them both.
All this means you hate me too, right?
P.S. I WILL read the list carefully to see if there is anything of substance there.
Posted by: Robert Luster at Aug 20, 2004 9:19:35 PM
Well done, Robert.
I am a democrat and never anything else, but I am ashamed that such a decietful candidate has managed to become my parties choice. I believe that Edwards would have made a much better candidate .. he may even have chosen Dean as his running mate!
I am also a vet and it bothers me tremendously to hear my parties candidate lie so blatantly. Those who have seen real action talk a certain way about it. Kerry strikes me more and more as someone who is making all this @#$% up.
Posted by: Greg at Aug 20, 2004 10:59:51 PM
JasonC:
I would like to thank you for going through the list for me, picking out the highlights, and referring me to it. I HAVE read all the points there and considered them, and here are my conclusions on the items you listed:
#92 welfare reductions….
· There is still way too much welfare
#89 homeland-security funding
· How was it allocated? How do you know it was wrong?
#88 Bush administration passed a bill...
· I thought Congress was the branch that made new laws...
· Also, a $400-per-child tax CREDIT in households earning less than $26,625 a year? At $26,625 per year with standard deductions for a family with children, are they paying ANY tax at all?
#81 EPA water standards rescinded
· As stated, decision was "based upon sound science and what's realistic." Regardless of what would be nice, someone somewhere must maintain something practical. (I'm concerned about my water quality too - so I bought and drink from a R/O system that makes my own pure water instead of expecting someone to take care of it for me...)
#77 Cheney, Enron, energy policy
· I thought we were talking about Bush. Furthermore when I read the details in the CNN link, and Cheney decision sounds correct.
#75 Afghanistan degraded into its present state of anarchy?
· NOT. 26 million just had the chance to vote there for the first time. Does not sound like failure to me.
#66 47 species are now at high risk of local extinction.
· Please! Get a grip! 99.99% of all species that ever existed on earth are already extinct. Most of the rest have already adapted to man. You would rather have thousands of people out of work in the timber industry and export those jobs to Canada? Not me. Trees grow back - we are not running out of them. If we run out of spotted owls, so be it. There plenty of others still left over.
#64 IRS obtained convictions in only one-half of one percent of its cases against corporate officers/$12 million needed to investigate
· Only .5% conviction. Hmmm. Maybe they aren't guilty!! Corporations are NOT criminals by definition - they are job providers. And $12 million just to investigate? Sounds a little steep to me too.
#63 Cheney denied participation in any oil between Halliburton and Iraq.
· Again, I thought we were talking about Bush. But you are right - as CEO of one of the largest Corporations in the world, Cheney had no right to be unaware of anything any of it's subsidiaries was doing.
#56 27 retired diplomats and military commanders demanding that Bush be replaced
· WMD WERE present and were USED in Iraq. All of the best intel from around the world expected to find them. And if the borders had been immediately closed to Iran and Syria as we went in we would have found them - DUH! What do you think were in the conveys of trucks (seen daily in satellite pics) crossing those borders? And there were no al Qaeda that Saddam Hussein knew of? Please...
#50 Dick Cheney was a Wyoming congressman from 1978 to 1989, and secretary of defense from 1989 to 1993, he voted...
· Again, I thought we were talking about Bush. But, he voted on controversial bills before him. Great. More than I can say for Kerry over the past year...
#44 George W. Bush and his father have long held a close relationship to the Saudi Arabian royal family.
· Perhaps. but relationships with any country not obviously evil is a good thing, and I don't know that it has hampered anything.
#41 Bush withdrew U.S. participation in the Kyoto Protocol on global warming.
· I am not willing to allow Europe to dictate our policy, either. Bush rejected the Kyoto agreement, which 178 other nations accepted last year, because it exempted developing nations and large polluters such as India. Bush also charged it would harm the U.S. economy -- the White House said Kyoto would ultimately result in the loss of $400 billion to the U.S. economy and a loss of 4.9 million jobs. I reject it too.
Bush's alternate plan equates to a cut of emissions in the U.S. of roughly 4.5 percent over 10 years, which is "on par" with what other countries are required to do under Kyoto
#39 Bush: I'm a white Republican guy who doesn't get it, but I'd like to.
· Me too. That's why I'm reading, thinking, and responding. It's more of a "open mind" attitude than I've seen in any of the liberal media.
#38 George W. Bush spent 27 percent of his presidency on vacation.
· Get real. Regardless of his location, no American president is ever on vacation until he is out of office.
#29 Federal Communication Commission approved changes to existing laws/ the law was a threat to the First Amendment.
· The liberal controlled media presenting a consistently bias view is, by design, more of a threat.
#26 a deficit of $500 billion, because "we went through a recession, we were attacked, and we're fighting a war."/the single biggest cause of the deficit was the President's tax cuts for the wealthy.
· *Sigh* we are back on this again. The wealthy are still paying a much higher rate and MANY more dollars than the rest of us. They are NOT responsible for funding this government. A flat rate for EVERYONE would be fair, and they would STILL pay way more than the rest of us.
#18 The administration predicted 2,142,000 new jobs...
· Since last September, we’ve added 1.5 million jobs. Things ARE better. But, if you look carefully, you will find the jobless rate has been between 5 and 6 percent since the end of the depression when it was much worse. Five or Six of every one hundred have no job while millions of immigrants managed to find work here. The want-ads of any city has PAGES of jobs every Sunday. If those 5 or 6 of every one hundred WANTED to work and were willing to take what they could get, there would be no need for "wetbacks" to cross the border or other jobs to go overseas. Sad, but true.
#14 Bush administration proposed changes to the Fair Labor Standards Act
· It's a shame we have to be competitive in the job market but there is no choice. Be competitive here, or ship the jobs overseas? Which do you prefer? Something for nothing?
#5 The Bush administration states that the average tax cut for 2003 will be $1,126...
· Same tired B.S. See answer to 26 above. Sticking it too the millionaires will not fix the problems with cash flow.
You rated only one “perhaps” out of the list.
I think I will go back to dismissing the liberals. Sorry.
Posted by: Robert Luster at Aug 20, 2004 11:57:10 PM
I find it not that unusual that when looking on the swift vets website, on it there is no other way to communicate with them than through a "contribution". If they stand behind their word, why don't they open a forum on their site for discussions and questions? Just like any Bush-related ANYTHING, all about money, not about FACTS.
As a person who grew up with a Father who was a decorated Vietnam Veteran, I find it absolutely disgusting that these men would do this to a fellow veteran. I'm sure whether they now agree that their experience there was "right" or "wrong", at the time they went to SERVE THEIR COUNTRY just as are service men and women are now. Why is it necessary for George W. to start up this, excuse me, pissing contest, when he wasn't anywhere near the conflict? The Vietnam experience was a personal one what affected all who served there, and any vet has a right to their opinion. John Kerry chose to speak out about his own experiences there when he came home: addressing issues that he felt he had the right to speak about. These men in this ad are doing nothing other than attempting to smear their buddy in power's opponent, and it is just ridiculous. Why aren't they speaking on the fact that George W. has NEVER even stepped foot on to the battleground other than for infrequent photo opportunities?
Let this just be one more reason why it is time for a change in the Blight House.
Posted by: Grace at Aug 21, 2004 4:35:34 AM
50 comments on a post, Chuck (or should I start calling you Atrios?)... you certainly are moving up in the world. Don't forget about us little guys.
Posted by: JasonC at Aug 21, 2004 5:44:30 AM
If you're going to be fair about it, why doesn't the top of your blog also show a scene from Moore's 911 lie-filled movie with John Kerry's head superimposed and the following statement. "I'm "every Position on ever topic" John Kerry and I did not dissaprove of this despicable fact-challenged character assassination movie. In fact, I actually seated Moore in the Presidential box right behind "UN Rule or death" Jimmy Carter.". You libs are fraticly searching for an imagined link between Bush and the Swift Vets while Kerry proves his link to Moore by featuring him at the Convention. Sheesh, none are so blind as those who WILL NOT see!
Posted by: Former Democrat at Aug 21, 2004 11:09:17 AM
Imagined link? Imagined link? Damn, dude... you're more full of Republican talking points than a barrel full of Sean Hannity's.
Sheesh, none are so blind as those who WILL NOT see!
That's a pretty witty little line there, lemme give it a shot myself...ummm... Sheesh, none are so annoying as those who are complete douche bags. There, take that.
As far as F9/11 being "a character assassination" movie: Dubya does a fine job assassinating his character by himself. All someone like Mr. Moore had to do was glue a few pieces together.
Have a good day, Former Democrat. Your former party misses you greatly.
Posted by: JasonC at Aug 21, 2004 12:49:23 PM
...and if I remember correctly, Kerry has said that he hasn't even seen F9/11. But yeah, what Jason said, Dubya certainly didn't need any help assasinating his own character.
Posted by: ryan at Aug 21, 2004 1:02:49 PM
