Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

Sidney Schanberg can be a great investigative journalist, but in his Village Voice articles he frequently lets his dogged enthusiasm to rake muck lead him to an alarmist writing style and even outright grandstanding. Kerry “shreds documents” four times in the article before the writer points out that the documents were all copies.

-Cf

John Kerry’s war time activities and his post war time activities are rife with hypocrisy. I have no problem with his change of heart after experiencing first hand the horrors of Viet Nam, but I do find his decision making in the post Viet Nam era to be horribly flawed.

His mistake now is in trying to dodge the portions of his past that do not meet with the perceptions he is trying to present. His voting record has shown him to be on the wrong side of many issues regarding foreign and domestic policy (the Gulf War, DOMA, etc) and worse, he now tries to sit on the fence on other issues (I voted for war, but did not really want to etc.)

While I dont know that Kerry’s actions directly hurt the POW recovery efforts, I do know that his stance to show only his war time heroism, but none of the rest, is not a sign of courage, but rather a weakness that many politicians have. When trusted by the American people to make a “thumbs up or thumbs down vote”, they waver in the winds of public opinion before putting down a decisive maybe.

Trying to scrape the barrel with random “AWOL” statements just seems like a desparate mud-slinging tactic I’ve seen used lately by Republicans. There’s one thing to actually have been considered AWOL and then there’s the inappropriate misuse of the phrase used with no basis of evidence.

Anthony:

I agree wholeheartedly with your comment that random AWOL statements are simply mudslinging. However, I have to point out that the AWOL comments have mostly come from the Democratic side (Terry McAuliffe, Michael Moore etc).

The facts are these: While there is speculation about Bush’s tenure in the National Guard, there is not, and never has been, a charge of AWOL leveled against him in an official capacity. For the Democratic party to use that term would be akin to calling Bill Clinton a “rapist” for his alleged actions with Juanita Brodderick. Since there has been no proof, and for that matter, no actual criminal charge, against Clinton, I would hold tightly to the “innocent until PROVEN guilty” standard that our country is built upon.

I have yet to see any Republican in an official capacity use the AWOL term in relation to John Kerry, and I would abhor its use as a political means to an end. I abhor its use by Democrats for the exact same reasons.

How about this one:

A letter from another ‘Nam Vet to Kerry
via: Townhall (grain of salt)

It is hilarious to read the neocons scrambling to discredit John Kerry. If the parties were switched, you would all be screaming bloody murder about George Bush’s lack of patriotism. Apparently Kerry’s Silver Star, Bronze Star with V, three awards of the Purple Heart, Combat Action Ribbon, Navy Presidential Unit Citation, Navy Unit Commendation Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, and the Vietnam Campaign Medal mean absolutely nothing compared with Bush’s “heroic” Vietnam-era military “service”.

Terry: Who are the Neo Cons who are scrambling to discredit John Kerry? Certainly not the GOP. Yes, there are some Internet attackers out there like the guy who doctored the picture. But Cheney (Neo Con Czar?) was on last night saying that JFK’s service was commendable.

Look, having never served myself I can only thank JFK for his obviously heroic efforts in Viet Nam. But, do you agree that his political career over the past 30 years, including his political actions in the Anti-War movement of the 70’s, are fair game in defining him as a candidate for President? Or does he get a pass because he served and GWB was only in the guard?

“JFK’s” how many months of service in the ‘Nam? As a what rank? Thanks, and drive through twice. I won’t even bother to ask if you read my previously posted article, b/c it’s obvious you haven’t. Go read it, it’s about another Vietnam vet with strikingly difference experiences than John F. Kerry.

And to whomever was mentioning “neo-con’s bitching” - well, it probably wouldn’t be such an issue if Kerry didn’t start every.single.sentence with “As a Vietnam Veteran…” or “Back when I was in Vietnam…” or “My experiences in Vietnam…” - it’s like, “OK pal” (you can only beat a dead horse for so long), “WE GET IT”.

And Cheny isn’t a “Neo-Con Czar” - if you’re gonna start throwing labels, at least do your homework. Here is a good place to start.