Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

I find this controversy over Kerry’s medals a bit disturbing. Whether he threw his or other’s medals, I think it irrelevant. Kerry volunteered for duty in Vietnam and he was awarded those medals for his actions. At the very least you can say that he served honorably and showed leadership. If he then deceided that the war was a mistake, I think he has all the right in the world to hold such an opinion. He might be trying to cover up throwing his own medals, I don’t know. All I know is that, to my knowledge, Bush received no medals and did not show up for duty for 7 months. I think Kerry’s military service shows a much better character than Bush’s.

Issue? This is your idea of an issue?

To have no plan, except to make sure you are photographed in a flight suit in front of a poster on a carrier after you have used billions of dollars and soldiers lives to depose a toothless paper tiger while killing 10,000 civilians, for the aftermath of a nation whose infrastructure you just destroyed for what most likely is largely political purposes is I think an issue.

I think it is rather weak to raise an “issue” about what was tossed over a fence some 35 years ago.

Diversionary tactics such as this are so blatantly transparent an attempt to swing the glare of daylight on the abysmal failure of the Presidency to protect our troops, and the delusional thinking that now pervades this administration.

Perhaps you did not like Mr. Kerry’s dissent of the politics of Mr Nixon and Mr McNamara. I think their presiding over the deaths of thousands is as morally bankrupt and obscene as this administrations use of 9/11 and the slaughter of thousands in a bungled attempt to portray this president as a “war president” and Rumsfeld as an efficient military executive.

The substance of this so-called scandal, as I understand it, is that Kerry told a lie 33 years ago. If that qualifies as a “-gate” these days, I guess anything does. Maybe Bush’s microphone indiscretion should be called “a%%&#^*gate”.

Dustin, I hope this really is the Republican platform. I want to see the debate where both candidates are asked about their energy policy and Kerry puts forth a concise and realistic plan for switching away from $4/gal. gas, then Bush stands there and all he can talk about is how John Kerry drives an SUV, but it’s not really his SUV. It’s his wife’s. Actually, it’s the family car. One of six. Is my time up yet?

But don’t the above posts prove the point Dustin was making about this “gate”, “scandal”, or whatever?

Frank Maker- “All I know is that, to my knowledge, Bush received no medals and did not show up for duty for 7 months.”

Greg- “To have no plan, except to make sure you are photographed in a flight suit in front of a poster on a carrier after you have used billions of dollars and soldiers lives to depose a toothless paper tiger while killing 10,000 civilians, for the aftermath of a nation whose infrastructure you just destroyed for what most likely is largely political purposes is I think an issue.

Woody Mania- “Maybe Bush’s microphone indiscretion should be called “a%%&#^*gate”.

Instead of owning up to the argument, put forth not by Carl Rove but by Peter Jennings I might add, the tactic is to throw dirt over at Bush. Is there a playbook out there somewhere?

What we know-
Kerry was asked to throw the medals he did by those who earned them.
Kerry threw the medals (what ribbons are called in the services with him.) that he had with him.
He still has those he didn’t throw.

Tell me, where has he lied?

Then tell me how important what we could possibly learn about what happened to his medals is, in comparison, say, to what Bush and his people did in the lead up to Iraq, or the months before 9/11.

You may think I’m beating a dead horse, but I assure you the old nag is still alive, and in need of a few more whacks. let’s stick to serious issues, and not little trifles like this.

>Woody Mania- “Maybe Bush’s microphone indiscretion should be called “a%%&#^*gate”.

Cute, George. I wasn’t trying to assail Bush’s character for swearing near a microphone, but using irony (to which you were apparently oblivious) to underscore the pettiness of the charge. What is it about a being a Democrat presidential candidate that every silly, random thing they say in their entire life is a campaign issue? Next thing we know we are going to hear that Kerry was caught passing gas and lying about it. (Note: Irony)

Would you like the “liberal media” to catalog every time Bush has contradicted himself?

Woody- Sorry about the last name as that was a typo….

My point to this really non-issue is that is seems that there is an almost orchestrated response, your irony not withstanding. It was led yesterday by Kerry himself and picked up on today by the NY Times. That is, whenever any criticism comes Sen. Kerry’s way, make sure you spin it towards President Bush. Dustin writes about exactly that, and the first three posts all mention GW’s and his issues.

And if Kerry does pass gas, I’m sure it will be caused by some sort of vast right wing conspiracy trumped up by Carl Rove after a secret meeting with Ken Lay and the boys.

The medal/ribbon issue is NOT really the issue. The issue is how Kerry deals with this kind of non issue. He has choices to make: 1) Own up to it 2) Get defensive about it 3) Explain it quickly and move along.

He’s giving it a life of his own, by trying to nuance his way out of it. It’s true that Kerry has bolstered himself with his Viet Nam history, and has presented it as fact at every possible opportunity. This fiasco gives the Republicans a chance to show Kerry as a flip flopper even in the area of his greatest strength.

Whether this is a serious issue, it has become THE issue of whether Kerry is believable, or whether he truly is a fence sitter. Where ever anyone comes down on the answer to that question, the question still remains the big challenge for Kerry. If he continues to handle it poorly, its lights out for him. He needs to get it off his plate and move on.

Perhaps my point was obtuse:

This medal issue is a non issue. It is a diversion from the real issues. Whether it was raised by Charlie Gibson or Karl Rove is pointless. (Isn’t this the theme of this blog?) Good Morning America is not exactly an issues oriented program. I believe it is a sound byte infotainment show, but if that is where you derive your substantive information from then I begin to understand your base of argument.

Perhaps we could discuss some of the other issues that Good Morning America raised that morning. Unfrtunately, I missed that program. Let me guess, were the other issues about Britney’s lip syncing and how to bake better muffins?

The ridiculousness of this issue is so blatantly obvious that humor is the only way I know to respond.

Why don’t we make an issue of whether W. tossed his empty alcohol bottles in the trash or recycled them, too!

Your candidate and his cohorts are all pathological liars. WMD - none; Sovereignty in Iraq - duh?; economy growing - 308,000 new burger flipping jobs to replace 3 million manufacturing and white collar jobs; enemy combatants dangerous - children freed from Gitmo and British have no reason to hold Gitmo releasees; Secrecy needed for energy meetings- California cheated out of $9 billion by “Kenny Boy”, meeting of top oil companies in London on how to divide Iraqi sea of oil; Democracy in Iraq - but they cannot change laws laid down by L Paul Bremer.

And the best your gang of war criminals can do is distroy anyone who does not agree with them - Kay, Clare, Woodward, Paul O’Neil and now Kerry!

Perhaps all of you had the wonderful type of not funded “no child left behind” programs like your war criminals promote - which would put you somewhere in the mental range of 4th or 5th graders with special needs. Maybe that is why the non issue of medals is such a big deal to you. Of course your boy does not have any, or has Rumy changed policy where AWOL War Zero’s now get a chest full of medals for being sneaky and leaving?

There are some of us who can easily connect the very big messy drops of oil spills everywhere.

“This medal issue is a non issue. It is a diversion from the real issues.” No kidding—the “real” issues being that Bush is a lying liar who tells lies? Since when have the Democrats wanted to talk about issues?

Speaking of “real issue”, did you all hear that Kerry served in Vietnam? I just saw him talking about it on CNN, and I can’t understand why he’s been so mum on the subject until now.

Destroy Woodward, Maureen? Does advertising his book on Bush’s campaign website count as trying to destroy him? Oh, I guess you think that Republicans are “war criminals,” eh, since you use the phrase about five hundred times? Guess who has confessed to commiting war crimes, though? A hint—his intitials are JK.

Oil huh? Who besides Saddam Hussein, Russia and France has profited from Iraq Oil? The UN, whose oil-for-food administrator is on his way to the klink for skimming millions. So much for the lofty ideals of the “world community”—turning a profit by propping up a homicidal lunatic.

We can do what we want with our medals. Mine are….somewhere around here…….I think. Or maybe they got thrown out in the trash. Who cares? I don’t need them, but I earned them as did Kerry. He stood up for the war, went and fought and got wounded three times. Afterward he had second thoughts and stood up against the war. He stood up twice. George W. Bush never stood for anything except his own comforts and daddy and his buddies made sure he didn’t have to.

Martin,

Speaking of “real Issues” rather than argue about war that killed 50,000 Americans so that Saigon could be renamed for Ho Chi Minh. Perhaps 30 to 40 years ago you were for the assasisnation of an elected official so we could “free” a shining democracy. Perhaps you supported the drafting of poor black Americans to die while rich white Americans avoided slogging through the swamps. Perhaps you thought McNamara’s car factory body count policy that lead to the slaughter of innocents was the right thing to do. Perhaps you didn’t care that Johnson and Nixon both knew that this was a quagmire but insisted on killing more and more people to save face. Maybe you want a repeat of an administration that lies to the American public so it looks tough on defense. Maybe you wish to discuss Bush’s position on Vietnam sitting in Mississippi reading magazines or prone after a beer and coke bash.

Some people pose as heroes. Some heroes actually do something beside ride on their fathers coattails.

Greg, thirty years ago I was a twinkle in my father’s eye, so I have no vested interest in defending some culturally defining moment (which the anti-war movement is for old leftists) for its moral correctness. Actually, I have the benefit of looking at history and the murderous results of the left’s having made common cause with the Communists. The “this is a rich man’s war” argument begun during Vietnam and recycled today in untimely fashion (like bell-bottoms or love-beads) falls utterly flat. And not just because it was the very line fed Jane Fonda by the Communists for her radio propaganda, but because it’s simply not true. Rich or poor, none of us want to be incinerated in our work-places by Arab radicals—it’s all of our war. And it’s also the war of those over 90% of Iraqis whose greatest fear is that we’ll leave too soon.

Martin, your professed youth would be known without the professing. Have you not read history from a number of authors of the period? If not, you know not what you speak. If you have, then you do discredit to the authors whose hard work and time was endeavored so that such as you would know history and not be, through ingnorance of it, condemned to repeat it.

It amazes me that with history so clear, hindsight so obvious, young people are still taught that Communism in N. Viet Nam was a threat to the U.S.
N. Viet Nam is , and has been, Communist and no harm to world or our Democracy has come from it. This is an irrefutable fact.

Yet such as you use untruth to defend against an enemy that does not exist. That enemy that does not exist, is the Republicans, the Democrats, the Libertarians, The Greens. The people who make up these parties are all Americans seeking the same things and for the same reasons. They differ only in how they balance priorities, amidst an infinite number of needs and finite resources. And Democracy is government that is supposed to permit an informed consent among these people to choose the balance of priorities.

We all want peace, security, comfort, freedom of choice and options and to feel important and loved. We all do. Politics is not a sport, nor should it be a war that divides a nation’s people. Democratic politics is supposed to be the means by which we come together for common purpose and common gain. But, our Democracy is fading as truth fades, as history fades, as our common experience diminishes. Your comments reflect great animosity, distrust of your fellow Americans, and an adherence to an affiliation right or wrong, in exchange for the hope of being on the winning team. Political parties are not sports teams, Martin, and if one political party representing huge numbers of the American populace fails, then America fails. Democracy is supposed to compromise such that all Americans win in part, and lose in part. But, I recognize that our Democracy is failing, as eventually will we all if we do not respect, learn, and compromise with each other.

Martin, you don’t actualy seem to know anything more about Vietnam than what I hear on Rush and what I read in really bad Ann Coulter books.

Martin,
You are rehashing the disinformation of the Nixonites. I wasn’t a leftist. I voted for Nixon and Ford. What I later learned was all about Watergate and Nixon’s paranoia that caused him to violate the civil rights of law abiding Americans to serve his political interests…as he did during the McCarthy period as well. I was young and gullible, musch like you appear to be now.

What is being rehashed is the use of Communism (now terror) to fool the American public and divert attention away from political facism. Any fool that believes today that Jane Fonda was a large influence in the anti war movement clearly doesn’t know much about it. It was the draft and the coffins coming home every week that created the anti war movement. It was the lack of any real goals except body counts. It was the killings at Kent State. It was Mai Lai. It was the veterans who came back and told the truth, that this was a an aimless slaughter without purpose.

Wake up Martin, The anger in the middle east is similar to the anger in Southeast Asia. The moderate arabs are tired of being manipulated and occupied. The radicals find support because of the continued use of military power to foist U.S. goals upon them at their losses both economically and in lives.

This is stupid, greed motivated policy (in part) that is costing lives because of the political aims of our President. LBJ was equally stupid.
The only problem is it isn’t just money or pride that is being lost. It is human beings being killed. Sadly, people with little understanding of history or a blindness to it are being appealed to on nationalistic rational. This IS immoral. Rwanda was about nationalism. Open your eyes Martin. ” Patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings”

Comment deleted for critiquing the Messenger instead of the Message - WatchBlog Manager.

Well, after perusing the comments above, I can wholeheartedly state that mark’s post is the most simplistic and vapid post yet. Not only does it NOT address the issue, but it does so in a startlingly unintelligent manner. One can only hope that mark was simply trying to be funny, despite failing miserably.

It is salient to note that many of the posts were directed simply at Bush, rather than as an explanation of Kerry. IF Democrats continue on with the “I’m not Bush” campaign that not only bloggers but also leaders are following, it will end badly for them. The “you did it TOOO” pout went out in about 3rd grade, and wasn’t ever effective. It will continue to be ineffective.

Kerry is not doing a good job as a candidate—he has spent a couple weeks now dodging the medals issue. This means he is playing the Republicans’ game, rather than his own. This has been, and continues to be a problem for him that he needs to resolve.

> The “you did it TOOO” pout went out in about 3rd grade, and wasn’t ever effective.

A lot of people seem to be forgetting that the National Guard issue was in the news long before the medal issue. So it doesn’t really make sense to fault Kerry in this case for saying that “you did it too”. If anyone is playing that game, it is the GOP.

I think one reason he is being cagey is because Gore was slammed for “lies” that weren’t really lies, and it looks like the media all ready to play that game with Kerry. He is probably right in figuring that he can’t win, so he better change the subject (back to original subject, Bush being AWOL).

Woody Mena: I don’t buy the GOP is playing the “you did it” game here.

Brent Hume (O.K. I know I know Fox News) had a great conversation about this on his show yesterday. He once tried to bait Cheney to say something about Kerry’s service or his actions after he returned, but could not get a bite. It was obvious to him that the GOP was going to focus on Kerry’s Senate voting record and only praise his service. A good strategy given Bush’s questionable service and Cheney’s having something better to do during Viet Nam.

The only tie to the GOP on flap is to Karen Hughes who said something on MSNBC on Sunday night. But she is out hawking a book so you can expect stuff like that from her (or from Clarke, Woodward, etc).

This one is on Kerry because he has done a terrible job of managing it, plain and simple. He is not a good candidate, and that is detrimental to any chance of having the debate that we need this year. While I don’t doubt that the “dirty tricks machine” is out there, it just doesn’t work on this one.

it is hard for me to take this seriosly, Kerry is getting slamed for his military history?

I understand the right wanting to make an issue out of everything but…..

stick to other topics or just give up!

Woody:
A couple of things of interest:

1) The National Guard issue has been tried over the past 4 years, but now all of a sudden, John Kerry reverses field and says it IS an issue to discuss. He’s on record as saying it wasn’t an issue.

2) Its obvious to me that Bush pulled in some favors in regard to his National Guard duty. Its just as plausible to me that Kerry pulled in some favors to limit his time in Viet Nam. Additionally, Kerry certainly has tried to play the medal issue in multiple ways. BUTTT>>>>neither issue really matters to me since both were 30+ years ago. Both men have changed dramatically since then.
3) I find it interesting that you focus on GOP gameplaying but not Democratic gameplaying. Certainly the GOP is relishing this whole to-do, but I dont see them as having started it. It started with the media. Both sides play games——right now, the Republican side is winning this particular game.

joebag—> 2) Its obvious to me that Bush pulled in some favors in regard to his National Guard duty. Its just as plausible to me that Kerry pulled in some favors to limit his time in Viet Nam.

Read that out loud to yourself, kerry LIMITED his time IN VIETNAM. Bush pulled favors in regard to the NATIONAL GUARD.
and that was when we didn’t send the national guard overseas to fight.

see what I mean, get a new issue right dwellers.

All this drama about the presidents and all is all BS! Oh my god freak out because this guys lying and freak out because the other guy is lying, who CARES! If everybody just stopped pinning crap on each other and decided to actually talk and debate about issues that were relevant to the nation maybe everyone would stop bitching about everything.

Kat, you are so right.

Unfortunately, ,the Republicans don’t have anything other than the “War On Terror(tm)” to talk about. If they brought up any other issue, people would realize that they just don’t have anything to contribute.

martiniwitz:

How typical of you…Thanks for folding right into the stereotype of what I was railing against. I said that both situations were irrelevant to today, and made sure that I was not partisan towards either candidate.

I took careful pains NOT to point a finger at either candidate, though of course I could have focused on either one, had I so chosen. I made sure not to get into the details of each candidate’s faults, since that leads to partisan arguing.

And in response? You bash George Bush and gave John Kerry a pass. [Comment deleted for critiquing the messenger, instead of the message - WatchBlog Manager]

Why doesn’t Bush display his Vietnam medals?

>the Republican side is winning this particular game.

You seem to believe that Kerry is being hurt by the medal accusations (whatever they are — I still don’t get it), but Bush isn’t being hurt by the AWOL accusation. I haven’t seen a shred of evidence that this is true. It may very well be the other way around. The last poll I saw showed Kerry with a slight lead.

Its just as plausible to me that Kerry pulled in some favors to limit his time in Viet Nam.

why joebag does that seem just as plausable as Bush pulling favors to get in the national gaurd? tell me why.

I can’t beleave this is a topic we are accutually debating, kerry went to war bush went out to party. The truth is I don’t fault bush at all for what he did, I am in my mid twenties, I would pull every string I could to get out of having to go to war, but Kerry didn’t so why is the right bringing it up?

For a non issue, this certainly has stirred the por.

Perhaps I was wrong, It clearly touches a nerve somewhere.

Joebagofdonuts, I agreed with your post just after Mark’s I don’t think Kerry has handled this particularly well.

Unfortunately, Kerry is running toward the center as is Bush. Neither candidate is being forthright on their positions.

I suspect this will be a very close election. I wonder how the population will react if the Florida situation occurs again. Maybe Iraq won’t be the only site of unrest.

martinwitz—

First and foremost, my apologies for having written something that stirred the ire of the editor. If I could remember what I had written, I could either explain it or apologize directly for it, but I have no idea what I wrote. Regardless, my apologies (musta been pre-coffee).

As to why Kerry pulling strings being as plausible as Bush pulling strings:
1) Both come from influential and wealthy families
2) Both had family connections who could help
3) While I support Kerry’s serving in the military, it was done after an attempt to be deferred was rejected. This is NOT a criticism of Kerry, but it does show that volunteering for service was not his first choice.
4) He used a ruling to get out of Viet Nam. Had he WANTED to stay, he could have. But he chose to use the ruling (perfectly acceptable) to get back to the states, and then to leave active duty 6 months early.

Now, lest you accuse me of smearing Kerry’s patriotism, let me assure you I am not. You asked why I find it plausible to suggest that Kerry might have pulled strings also. My points directly answer that question.

I give Kerry credit for having gone into combat. If that were the ONLY issue involved in voting for a president, I’d vote for Kerry. But in the same vein, we would have had President Bob Dole as well. So its obvious that we should take more into consideration when voting.

thank you joebag, i am done with this!

Joe, your comments put you into a distinct minority within your side of this blog. Your lack of hypocrisy is refreshing.

I have to point out, however, that John Kerry’s father wasn’t a member of Congress (1968-71), US ambassador to the United Nations (1971-1972), or chairman of the Republican National Committee (1972-1973).

-Cf

He used a ruling to get out of Viet Nam. Had he WANTED to stay, he could have.

joe, I’m pretty sure it was SOP for the Navy to send home anyone who accumulated three Purple Hearts. I’ve never heard of anyone saying that Kerry asked to go home.