Democrats & Liberals: Archives

He really sounds like he’s from ‘Bama.

So, I expect Kerry will be denouncing the ad sometime in the next couple of days?

(No, I don’t think he should or need to, but he’s the one who whined for weeks…)

This election is starting to seem like some sort of mock-election. I think we need to get UN observers in here not to make sure the votes are counted, but to record the unintentional comedy and irony of the way these campaigns are being run for the enjoyment of posterity.

This ad is a waste of good air time. Was Bush in Alabama? Yes, well at least he showed up from time to time. Sort of like his done for his term. What I don’t understand is why our they not attacking Bush on the real issues that even the moderate republicans say is wrong.

Or better yet, how about a real vision for America.

Henry, Pat Buchannan and the Constitution Party are out working hard to criticize Bush as no conservative. Buchannan can be found speaking multiple times a week about his new book, Why the Right is so Wrong, or something close to that.

This will not translate into votes for Kerry, obviously. But, it is very likely to leave a percent or two or three of 2000 Republican voters voting for the Constitution Party, Libertarian Party or staying home on November 2. In the same way that Nader may draw one or two percent from Kerry. That could be significant.

Henry,

They (if you mean the Kerry campaign), were trying to stick to the real issues, all during the Swift Boat slander-fest, just like you requested. They (if you mean the Kerry campaign) felt the thorough debunking from Media Matters to the NYTimes would sink the SBV boat, once and for all.

But, a pliable cable news media (fueled by the Conservative echo chamber and Fox), again fell in line behind what tune the Right was calling, because the Wolf Blitzer ‘hard news’ single, was instead charting at Number 86, with an anchor.

And, I have had just about enough of this Lyin’ Liars of Likely Voters load of Landfill, about wanting to hear about the ‘issues’. Here’s a polling question that needs to be answered before you can take the next Newsweek survey:

What will you find at www.johnkerry.com/issues, or what is the location of your polling place?

This is exactly what moved the polls against John Kerry in August, and launched a thousand entry posts in the WatchBlog Republican/Conservative Red Column.

Some say this is redundant, and that all of Bush’s Nat’l Guard Service records has been vetted. But, not so fast. There are very serious charges being leveled here, and they deserve to be looked into. Sound familiar?

Some say this is redundant, and that all of Bush’s Nat’l Guard Service records has been vetted.

They’d be wrong. The Pentagon is still meting out Bush’s Guard records a little at a time, and there’s still no documentation or eyewitness accounts to show that Bush fulfilled his commitment.

Heh. There’s so many commitments Bush made since he was appointed president that you could apply that last statement to. :)

So, I expect Kerry will be denouncing the ad sometime in the next couple of days?

Why should he? Kerry immediately produced his citations to debunk the SBVT liars. It’s been four years and Bush has yet to produce any evidence to counter AWOL the charge. Put up, or shut up.

There are very serious charges being leveled here, and they deserve to be looked into. Sound familiar?

Yep, this story needs to be in heavy rotation on CNN until we find the truth! ;)

This is a fair criticism, but I don’t think it will hurt Bush very much.

People are sick of hearing about the Vietnam War. God knows I am. The scary thing is we are probably going to hear this from my generation, too.

“I was there when they found Saddam!”

“No you weren’t, you were at Abu Ghrahib!”

“He put the cuffs on Saddam!”

“He made that guy stand on the box. I saw him!”

Bert,
If you line up all the facts since Bush got the ruling that the votes in Flordia didn’t need to be counted I think they tell it all. Common Sense should be the standard for the vote not who’s more of a girlly man.

You know the thing is, as my earlier post demonstrated, is that we know what kind of documents Bush should have, and what kind he hasn’t brought out. With Kerry, it was just a fishing expedition, a call to have his records made public, so they could crucify him over other people’s typos.

What I don’t get is why MoveON pulled their National Guard ads then funded this one? Why not just continue their previous campaign?

Like most Americans, I believe that the most important thing we need to know about any candidate is what they did during the Vietnam war.

I wasn’t even born yet, but knowing how important it is for baby-boombers to eternally relive their youth, I believe that anyone who mentions 9-11 or the war on terrorism is playing on my fears for unfair political gain and should go immediately back to talking about Vietnam.

Like Kerry, George Bush has campaigned on nothing but his service record during Vietnam and reminds us about it any every speech. And that’s why these attacks on his National Guard service are so devestating.

Bush has foolishly walked right into this trap by basing his whole candidacy on his National Guard Record, which is the only basis we have for judging what kind of president he would make. He has only himself to blame as the entire rationale for his candidacy unravels before our eyes.

Bert, I’ve searched Kerry’s site and can’t find out if he believes in the Second Amendment or not. Have you seen it anywhere on his site? Your help is appreciated.

I’ve seen the guy shooting skeet on television, accepting a gun as a gift. Kerry is not a rabid 2nd Amendment hater.

Bush fell short on duty at Guard
Records show pledges unmet:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/08/bush_fell_short_on_duty_at_guard/

Thanks Stephen, I have seen him shooting skeet and have seen his photo ops showing him hunting but that does not mean he supports the Second Amendment. As you know, what a politician says and actually does are two different things.
I just need to know if he really believes in and supports the Second Amendment or is actually pro registration, pro confiscation, pro waiting periods and for the anti-assualt weapons bill.
I know liberals hate the Second Amendment but I will not judge Kerry on it until I find out where he really stands.

I’ve seen the guy shooting skeet on television, accepting a gun as a gift. Kerry is not a rabid 2nd Amendment hater. Posted by Stephen Daugherty at September 8, 2004 04:57 PM

I always thought he was assassinating that skeet — killing it for political purposes.

One of the charges I have heard from this group is the bush should have joined a guard unit in Mass while he was at Harvard.

Wasn’t the Vietnam war officially overwith on Jan 1st that year, the last prisoner home by July and the draft recinded in August, all before Bush attended Harvard in September?

Wow…Bush and the National Guard? What a scoop! I sure hope I hear more about this story! I’d like to thank CBS and Boston Globe for devoting so much (all?) of their resources to digging up this story! Again…WOW! So that was the NATIONAL Guard…and only 30 years ago? Golly, why haven’t I heard of this before?

This is all old stuff that was dug up in 2000 when the Democrats tried to get dirty the first time. Is this all you guys have? Pretty sad if you ask me…now, about those drunk driving convictions…Susan “Estrogen” is all over TV talking about how Bush/Cheney are a couple of drunks AGAIN. This campaign is over if that is all you liberals can come up with. This POTUS has been accused of treason and that did not work. The Kerry campaign train is sliding off the rails and this is virtual proof. When a campaign is as desperate as this, you have a major landslide on your hands. Pathetic.

I’m glad the Dems are finally fighting fire with fire. For the past two elections they’ve stood idly by while the Rove Spin Machine leveled attacks at them.

It’s sad that political discourse has sunk to this level, but you simply can’t go down without a fight. If Bush wants to attack Kerry’s service — something Kerry clearly holds over Bush — then the least they can do is level charges at Bush on the same matter. Bush’s service has always been more questionable than Kerry’s but somehow Rove’s mudslinging had the country thinking the opposite. I guess the Kerry camp finally got their wake-up call and realized it was time to play ball.

Personally, I could care less if there’s even a shred of truth to the new reports on Bush’s service — I just want the image of Bush as deserter to stick in the minds of the public. Politics is no longer about truth. It’s about marketing. It’s about image. It’s about advertising. The hell with the truth.

The Kerry campaign has let Bush define him as an unheroic, treacherous, unpatriotic flip-flopper. It’s time we define Bush as a drunk-driving, coke-snorting, incompetent mis-leader who abandoned his duties in time of war. Yep, that sounds about right. Now who would want to vote for that?

There are some serious questions Bush needs to answer about whether he fulfilled his obligations with the Guard. This is a serious issue, and I can’t believe you Republicans are whining about it. Don’t you want to know the truth?

AP- I agree, this question should be answered. The American people deserve the truth. I do find the parallels with clinton quit amusing though.
Bush got out of guard duty so he wouldn’t have to go to Nam. Liberals want the truth, Conservatives say no big deal.
Clinton dodged the draft and went overseas so he wouldn’t have to go to Nam. Conservatives wanted the truth, liberals said no big deal.
Why does either side think it is ok to have said what they did then but think they are right today? It’s said really. Who cares about the person as long as my “PARTY” wins. Sound familiar? The “Party” over the good of our nation. Think early and mid-1900’s.

This is funny.

SBVFT = Bush

Therefore Bush questioned Kerry’s patriotism.

Moveon.org and Al Gore does not equal Kerry

Therefore Kerry folks never compared Bush to Hitler or conservatives to ‘digital Brown Shirts’.

The hypocrisy of screaming about the GOP going negative while Kerry stayed above the fray is blinding.

As for me I agree with theory that whatever side of a debate pulls the Hitler/Nazi comparison out first automatically looses.

Ap and Tim- Who’s whining on this one? The only thing I’ve seen is that the Swiftee’s think one of the memos is a fake (it has a superscript font in it). But for the most part the partisans I’ve seen look like they are treating it as “been there, done that” based upon 2000 and earlier this year.

My take is that Bush probably had help getting into the guard, although I believe 41 when he says he didn’t do it. GW could have asked that family friend instead of Dad. I also think that for the first 3-4 years he was probably a good guardsman and dedicated pilot. It is also clear that during his last year he was looking to get out of his commitment or just meet the minimum requirements.

But so what? Bush isn’t running as a proven NG leader, he’s running as the incumbent commander in chief. This stuff might have mattered back in 2000, but today it seems too little too late.

Why are there “serious questions” to answer by Bush, who’s paperwork shows an honorable discharge, and no serious question to answer by Kerry, who’s paperworks shows that he was to be on “ready-reserve” until 1972 on one DD214 and then that he was fully discharged from service on his DD215 (no mention of reserve service)and then on his website paperwork that shows he was fully discharged from service in 1978?

When, and where, did he do his required reserve duty?

Why, when he was able to be discharged in 72, did it take until 78 for the discharge?

Why the change in his DD214?

Was he still officially in service to the US when he went to Paris and dealt with General Giap?

If so, wouldn’t that be classed as treason, as the US was officially still at war in 1970?

Serious questions, yet I hear no-one asking them.

Why?

as the US was officially still at war in 1970

Which is impressive, since the US hasn’t officially had a war since 1945.

No?

Do you know why? The War Powers Act, thats why.

Now, rather than just play semantics why don’t try either refuting one of my questions or answering one.

Because I have no idea what you’re talking about.

I’ll try again, with a bit less snippiness on my part.

Was he still officially in service to the US when he went to Paris and dealt with General Giap?

If so, wouldn’t that be classed as treason, as the US was officially still at war in 1970?

You didn’t explain or cite who General Giap was, what dealings Kerry had with him, or why such a meeting would be treasonous. You implied that it would be treason (a weighty accusation) because Kerry was still in the military and because the US was officially at war. Since we weren’t officially at war, the climax of your argument fell apart without addressing the other issues.

On the question of whether Kerry was still officially “in service to the US”, you seem to be relying on the DD214 and DD215. Since I have no idea what you’re talking about with those, and you didn’t actually explain anything about your accusation, I couldn’t respond. I didn’t feel the need to investigate because I felt your accusation wasn’t presented well enough to deserve the effort.

Who cares what happened 35 years ago? It disturbs me that Kerry did what he did, Bush may or may not have done what he did—-Clinton did not serve———but that is not a prerequisite for being Commander In Chief. Leadership is what counts—-not following. 35 years ago is dead and gone for some of us—-let’s deal in what is today——the issues—-study them——-then decide who to vote for—-not who to snipe at with 1/2 truths and 1/2 lies. Hell, I don’t remember in detail what I did 35 years ago on a particular day—-and I don’t remember but two folks that I served with——and they are gone now.

Lawnboy,

General Giap was the N Vietnamese General Kerry went to Paris to see in 1970. Giap was there working on a peace deal, Kerry visited him while he with the Winter Soldier thing.

A DD214 is the paperwork the US Military gives a person when they leave the sevices. It details their service, their honors and any outstanding service (reserves) still owed on their contract.

A DD215 is an ammended version of the DD214, comonly used when the DD214 is either lost or incorrect.

Now, according to Kerry’s “original” DD214 he was released from active service in 1970 and had 2 years of ready-reserve service to fulfill, 1972, he had the 3 PHs, 1 Bronze Star and a Silver Star with V.

His DD215 showed his was fully discharged from service in 1970, no mention of reserve service, and he had 3 PHs 3 Bronze Stars and Silver Star with V.

On his website Kerry has pdf files of his service record that say he was discharged in 1972, was released from reserve status in 1978 (?) and has 3 PHs, 4 Bronze Stars and Silver Star with V.

If John Kerry were still on ready-reserve while he visited an enemy General that colud be considered “consipring with the enemy? at the least and treason at worst.

Now, which of Kerry’s sets of paperwork are a true depiction of his service?

Ynot, your implications are surprising.

First, though, My DD214 stipulates that I was discharged in Dec. of 1975 after 3.5 years of active duty service. It also stipulates that I had a 6 year reserve obligation. If memory serves correctly, that six years was made up of 2 years of active reserve and 4 years of inactive reserve, or perhaps it was 3 years each, I forget.

Barring any change in reserve requirements between 1972 and 1975, it would appear the 6 year reserve requirement is the correct depiction.

However, you would be wrong to conclude that inactive reserve in anyway obligated a discharged veteran to act or behave in any way other than as a civilian citizen. Reserve status only meant, that in the event of the nation’s need to increase its military force in the event of war, a vet had a contractual obligation to show up for reenlistment if called.

Finally, Kerry met with members of Congress for one purpose, to move our nation closer to ending the war and bringing our troops home to safety. And that included our POW’s and MIA’s. Had the Congress responded to Kerry’s call and forced Nixon to end the war then, our POW’s would have returned home years sooner, and avoided two more years of hell in N. Vietnamese prison camps.

A civilian, which Kerry was after being discharged, (reserve status did not retain him as a member of the military) going to Europe to speak with a delgate of our enemy for the express purpose of seeking peace and early return of our troops and POW’s can hardly be logically interpreted as an act of treason, let alone, an act against the welfare or our troops.

This is one of the most bizarre stretches of the imagination I have read recently. Let the record be set straight, inactive reserve after discharge in no way implies that one is still under military jurisdiction and UCMJ. The implications of your argument simply have no merit.

Thanks, David

It has now been more than 72 hours since I posted this entry, and now compared to the Swift Boat Vets debacle, the fallout could not have been more stark - especially here at WatchBlog.

The 60 Minutes II on the swift boat size holes in Bush’s Nat’l Guard Service record and conduct, was devastating. The Boston Globe investigation was just one of the many damning pieces that now makes the emphatic (yet, accurate) claim of Bush’s honorable discharge, not worth the paper it is written on.

Conspicuously absent from this Comment thread, are the Bush apologists who for weeks made accusations out of shredded cloth, when it came to Kerry’s war record. Ironically, documented and released info of Bush’s available record, are much more than the Swift Boat Vets provided, yet still no takers here.

I’m very happy to state, that there is no need to claim media bias on my part, as this story has gotten it’s proper coverage (from what I’ve seen), from the front page of the Chicago Tribune to Scarborough Country, from Don Imus and Doris Kearns Goodwin, and even CNN!

And, it seems the White House and the Bush campaign are out there on the front line, all alone. Thank god they’ll never heed my words, so I’ll disingenuously endorse the great job Scott McClellan and Dan Bartlett are doing, at the moment.

Again, it is now 5 days into this growing storm, and Robert Mintz’s character, story and/or claims, have been impugned or questioned. So far, the Bush folks have managed to challenge the reputation of a disputed 1970 typewriter, and it could get uglier!

The media has apparently found the same ratings juice as the SBV smear campaign, so let’s all hunker down. The Texans For Truth ad is now set to begin running in 5 Battleground Swing States, starting Monday, with more possibly planned.

Full Disclosure: I just donated $25 dollars to make that more of a reality!

David,

JF Kerry went to Paris and met with an envoy of Le Duc Tho’s in April of 1970, (I’m not talking about his speech before Congress), while still on ready, or active, reserve according to his original DD214.

I also beg to differ with you on your statement; A civilian, which Kerry was after being discharged, (reserve status did not retain him as a member of the military) going to Europe to speak with a delgate of our enemy for the express purpose of seeking peace and early return of our troops and POW’s can hardly be logically interpreted as an act of treason, let alone, an act against the welfare or our troops.[/em>

As TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 45 > Sec. 953. shows what “citizen” Kerry did was illegal and as a reserve officer could have his service re-instated to active to answer to an article 15.

One more thing while I have you, David, do you think that is why his DD215 shows no reserve status at all?

Ynot, “JF Kerry went to Paris and met with an envoy of Le Duc Tho’s in April of 1970, (I’m not talking about his speech before Congress), while still on ready, or active, reserve according to his original DD214.”

So? He was still discharged and not under UMCJ jurisdiction except for as regards to being recalled for active duty. For all other intents and purposes, he was a civilian.

Regarding your link, 1) what is the date of enactment of that code? 2) If what he did was illegal, would not the Nixon administration have acted? 3) Without a transcript of that discussion, who is to say he was not addressing greivances on the part of American POW’s which is permissable and not abridged by the code you cited?

You have no evidence here, Ynot. You don’t even have smoke. All you are putting forth is innuendo and tortured logic on the basis of a simple event which we can reasonably assume was a perfectly legal act in the absence of any government action to the contrary.

David,

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on whether what transpired legal or not, but I believe the smoke you mention was in the changes to his DD214, at least as much smoke comes from them as does from Bush’s paperwork.

I appreciate your responses, they kept my brain from atrophy.

Oh, [a ref=http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/953.notes.html>here are the dates on the USC Title 18.

I am not surprised at the Republican response to this issue. Had the roles been reversed and it was Kerry’s record riddled with so many inconsistencies, the Republican Party would have spent as much as it took to make sure it was kept in the news (front page) daily. Much like they did with Clinton, over $57 million was spent on the Clinton investigation and the only thing they were successful in was Clinton lying under oath. Incidently, Clinton would not have been in that position if the continued credibility assault had been stopped.

The Dems failed to fight fire with fire then and it seems they are not quite familiar with the process of how to shut the Repuclians down.

I have no doubt that Bush is as crooked as they come. I also feel that another 4 years of Bush will see the administration in one or two others wars by peremptive strike of a suspected enemy

I also see a strong similarity between Bush and some past european leaders that are no longer in power. Bush scares the hell out of me. This is a man capable of starting a war without notice and with no creditable evidencs to support his actions. Meanwhile, back at the ranch he sets sipping iced tea and watching the grass grow. All this while our brave men and woment are over in a god forsaken land of cutthroats, murderers and thieves trying to bring democracy to a land that does not want democracy.