Skip to comments.
Kerry to Democrats: "Stop 'AWOL' Jabs at Bush"
New York Post ^
| February 16, 2004
| bronc1
Posted on 02/16/2004 11:29:38 AM PST by Bronc1
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:19:35 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
February 16, 2004 -- Democratic front-runner John Kerry yesterday urged Democrats to stop charging that President Bush went "AWOL" during his Texas National Guard service - a claim being pushed by the party's national chairman, Terry McAuliffe. "I don't plan to do that, and I've asked them not to," said Kerry, a decorated Vietnam vet, during what could be the final presidential primary debate heading into tomorrow's Wisconsin vote.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; absence; awol; bush; democrats; johnkerry
1
posted on
02/16/2004 11:29:39 AM PST
by
Bronc1
To: Bronc1
Kerry's campaign handlers are starting to feel the blowback and wish that McAuliffe would just drop the whole "issue" that is not.
2
posted on
02/16/2004 11:33:42 AM PST
by
TADSLOS
(Right Wing Infidel since 1954)
To: Bronc1
I hope Kerry does not think Bush supporters will shut up about Kerry's FACTUAL post-Vietnam anti-American activities.
It's well and good for Kerry to try and get democrats to QUIT LYING, but this will not stop the truth of Kerry's anti-american agendas.
3
posted on
02/16/2004 11:34:07 AM PST
by
Iron Matron
(Give me time, I'll think of something)
To: Bronc1
"... some say, President John F. Kennedy."Those familiar with JFK's dirty little war say that.
He was certainly the first to send U.S. soldiers to Viet Nam.
4
posted on
02/16/2004 11:40:13 AM PST
by
Redbob
To: Bronc1
Another in a long line of obtuse lies by one John Kerry.
5
posted on
02/16/2004 11:41:50 AM PST
by
jwalsh07
To: Bronc1
Sooner or later Kerry's service will be looked at with a fine-toothed comb and he is getting............
scared!
6
posted on
02/16/2004 11:43:11 AM PST
by
CROSSHIGHWAYMAN
(I don't believe anything a Democrat says. Bill Clinton set the standard!)
To: Bronc1
Just as I thought...now that Kerry's Goebells-esque strategy of repeating a lie often enough becomes believable, whenever someone legitimately brings up Kerry's treasonous behavior during Vietnam, Kerry can claim, "both Bush and I have been subjected to pumelling on the Vietnam issue...let's leave it behind."
The issue of Bush's service should be dropped because it is a non-issue...Kerry's Vietnam history, however, should be brought up again and again.
7
posted on
02/16/2004 11:53:41 AM PST
by
what's up
To: Bronc1
I could understand the average stupid young liberal thinking Nixon started the Vietnam War, but Kerry is an stupid old liberal who was actually there. You would think he would remember what president signed his commission.
8
posted on
02/16/2004 11:54:45 AM PST
by
USNBandit
To: TADSLOS
Too bad Kerry is not McAwful's boss. Klintoon needs to give him the word.
BTW Did you notice that this became an issue the day after Klintoon met with the demoncraps in their capitol hill strategy session.
9
posted on
02/16/2004 12:00:29 PM PST
by
pfflier
To: Bronc1
Still, Kerry claimed Bush failed to apply Vietnam lessons to IraqI wish Kerry would explain what he means. I don't see any important connection.
10
posted on
02/16/2004 12:00:33 PM PST
by
syriacus
(Schumer is afraid of life terms of fed. judges. Maybe he should work on a Constitutional Amendment)
To: Bronc1
I am still wondering why this is even an "issue" when it was shown to be lie four years ago? Of course I know the reason but I still get amazed at the brazeness of the mainstream media in their bias.
To: Bronc1
The Democrats hate Bush so much that they're going to pull out every sleazy issue they can even before the campaign starts. When things get underway for real, they'll have nothing left. Karl Rove must be laughing himself silly.
To: Bronc1
"Still, Kerry claimed Bush failed to apply Vietnam lessons to Iraq, and he referred derisively to "Richard Nixon and his war in Vietnam" - though it actually began under Democratic President Lyndon Johnson or, some say, President John F. Kennedy."
Another big lie by Ketchup Kerry. Anybody keeping count?
13
posted on
02/16/2004 12:04:11 PM PST
by
lilylangtree
(Veni, Vidi, Vici)
To: Bronc1
So maybe someone is asking for his military records and he wants-- needs-- the subject changed.
To: Bronc1
John "The Big O" Kerry strikes again. (O for Opportunist)
He thinks he can look like a "good guy" for (supposedly) calling a halt to a story that was so dead that it was stinking.
15
posted on
02/16/2004 12:06:16 PM PST
by
syriacus
(Schumer is afraid of life terms of fed. judges. Maybe he should work on a Constitutional Amendment)
To: Redbob
Actually, Truman sent the OSS(forerunner to the CIA) to Vietnam. The first US casualty in Vietnam was in 1945....an OSS agent killed by the Vietminh.
Eisenhower was the one that had the CIA start to build a "South" Vietnam.
Kennedy sent the troops, which some say he later regretted and was looking for a way to exit Vietnam before he was murdered.
I find it incredible that John Kerry, only now, is asking the Rats to stop the AWOL crappola. It appears he waited to see if the smear had any legs.
16
posted on
02/16/2004 12:06:56 PM PST
by
stylin19a
(Is it vietnam yet ?)
To: Bronc1
I saw somewhere that the public voices a loud and resounding *YAWN* regarding the awol story by a 65-70% rate.
17
posted on
02/16/2004 12:07:05 PM PST
by
smith288
(http://www.ejsmithweb.com/FR/JohnKerry/)
To: Bronc1
Kerry claimed Bush failed to apply Vietnam lessons to IraqYeah, Vietnam lasted more than a decade, we never used our firepower to go after the heart of the enemy (the Bomb Hanoi! option) and we lost 55,000 troops. We hit Iraq with every effective weapon we could muster, stormed to victory in a few short weeks, and captured their "leader" cowering in a spider hole. While the deaths of 500 of our brave troops is difficult to accept, the comparison to Viet Nam is gratuitous and just plain stupid. In other words, typical democrat bullcrap.
To: Bronc1
He's a little too slow is asking to drop the AWOL issue.
19
posted on
02/16/2004 12:09:06 PM PST
by
ampat
(to)
To: Redbob
Those familiar with JFK's dirty little war say that.
He was certainly the first to send U.S. soldiers to Viet Nam.Wait..., weren't they just advisors?
20
posted on
02/16/2004 12:10:40 PM PST
by
Aeronaut
(In my humble opinion, the new expression for backing down from a fight should be called 'frenching')
To: Bronc1
I think he is starting to see a backlash against it, that is the only reason.
Note he let those accusation go on for weeks, without saying a word.
21
posted on
02/16/2004 12:11:02 PM PST
by
FairOpinion
(If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
To: Bronc1
Kerry rejected the idea that his vote for the Iraq war means he bears some responsibility for it, saying: "The president had the authority to do what he was going to do without the vote of the U.S. Congress."
So the Senate is entirely superfluous - I thought so but good to have Kerry confirm it! What a jacka**!
22
posted on
02/16/2004 12:12:26 PM PST
by
Rummyfan
To: TruthShallSetYouFree
"Yeah, Vietnam lasted more than a decade, we never used our firepower to go after the heart of the enemy (the Bomb Hanoi! option) and we lost 55,000 troops. We hit Iraq with every effective weapon we could muster, stormed to victory in a few short weeks, and captured their "leader" cowering in a spider hole. While the deaths of 500 of our brave troops is difficult to accept, the comparison to Viet Nam is gratuitous and just plain stupid. In other words, typical democrat bullcrap."
===
You summed it up very well in one short paragraph. :)
23
posted on
02/16/2004 12:12:55 PM PST
by
FairOpinion
(If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
To: Bronc1
Oh, John F'ing Kerry is such a statesman... I'm going to stop thinking that he's a flip-flopping, anti-military, anti-intelligence, anti-taxcut Massachusetts liberal. The media has convinced me that this guy really is trustworthy.
To: Redbob
"he was the first to send soldiers to Vietnam."
I think that is incorrect. Eisenhauer sent the first "advisors" if I am not mistaken. JFK raised the number and escalated it. By LBJ it was a committed thing with thousands of troops, but NOT a commitment to winning. Nixon finished it before he was finished.
We had friends flying helicopters there in the early sixties that were flying "slick ships" and getting shot at. They flew spotter/advisory
missions, and didn't like being targets with nothing to fight back with.
When my husband's 20 years was coming up,in 1966, Air America (CIA front) tried to recruit him. They were all over the area and surrounding countries. He declined, because they were still flying slick ships and getting shot at--pretending to be a civilian air service.
vaudine
25
posted on
02/16/2004 12:20:14 PM PST
by
vaudine
To: Bronc1
In 1965, John Opportunist Kerry was trying to decide what to do with his life.
What was his campaign buddy, Ted Kennedy, doing then?
Let's check a Life magazine cover for 1965
26
posted on
02/16/2004 12:21:42 PM PST
by
syriacus
(Schumer is afraid of life terms of fed. judges. Maybe he should work on a Constitutional Amendment)
To: USNBandit
Once a stupid 60's liberal, always a stupid 60's liberal. Cases in point: Kerry; Tom Peepen of the Atlanta Journal and many fellow journalists; professors with tenure at our univs.
vaudine
27
posted on
02/16/2004 12:23:24 PM PST
by
vaudine
To: Bronc1; lilylangtree; Redbob; USNBandit; Landru
Anybody keeping count? I've lost count. As late as 10:00pm central Kerry was repeatedly pushing the "Richard Nixon and his war in Vietnam" canard, during the debates in Wisconsin. The attending members of the press gave him a pass every time.

Don't forget Richard Nixon's
cruelty to animals!
28
posted on
02/16/2004 12:28:28 PM PST
by
BraveMan
To: Bronc1
Oh, how very honorable.
Secretly he is telling them to keep the lies coming. Thats the only way he can win is for democrats to plant the lies and keep repeating them.
To: syriacus
I wish Kerry would explain what he means[by accusing President Bush of not learning the lessons of Vietnam]
. I don't see any important connection.Apparently, Bush's desire for a meaningful victory and not seeing 50,000 American soldiers killed without being given a chance at that victory has Kerry upset. Kerry is a traitor, so anything he says must be translated back into our mode of thinking from that of an anti-American.
30
posted on
02/16/2004 12:30:32 PM PST
by
HenryLeeII
(John Kerry's votes have killed more people than my guns!)
To: Bronc1
Kerry advisor Max Cleland was still calling President Bush AWOL in a clip that ran on MSNBC last night... Cleland has the hatred and contempt for Bush that Dean pretends to have. I wonder if he is under consideration as a running mate for Kerry.
To: stylin19a
Yep...I also recall that Truman ordered MAAG...the Military Advancement Advisory Group, into Vietnam shortly after WWII ended. This is improtant, because there are still those liberals who like to pin US involvement in Vietnam on Ike, so they can exhonerate JFK and LBJ.
32
posted on
02/16/2004 12:31:59 PM PST
by
cwb
(Kerry may have saved one man but he abandoned thousands of others)
To: BraveMan
Located the post on Friday, Feb 13 by Hon who wants to compile all the lies by Ketchup Kerry. See below:
Would Kerry Lie? Let's Build A Record Of His Whoppers
Compilation ^ | February 13, 2004
Posted on 02/13/2004 9:22:29 PM PST by Hon
33
posted on
02/16/2004 12:38:50 PM PST
by
lilylangtree
(Veni, Vidi, Vici)
To: Bronc1
Hanoi john forgot to tell his pit bull Memphis US rep harold ford JUNIOR (Who btw votes only 4-5 points different than rep nancy pelosi) that he was not to bash Bush on the AWOL smear...JUNIOR finds any camera available at any hour to smear Bush.
34
posted on
02/16/2004 12:42:35 PM PST
by
GailA
(Millington Rally for America after action http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/872519/posts)
To: syriacus
Here's more about what Kerry's campaign buddy,
Ted Kennedy, was doing in 1965The 1965 Immigration Act: Anatomy of a Disaster By Ben Johnson FrontPageMagazine.com | December 10, 2002
America's current mass immigration mess is the result of a change in the laws in 1965.[snip] Senate floor manager and Camelot knight-errant Ted Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, assured jittery senators that "our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually."
...However, Congressmen managed to miss a loophole large enough to allow a 300 percent in immigration...
In 1965, Ted Kennedy confidently predicted, "No immigrant visa will be issued to a person who is likely to become a public charge." ... In all, 21 percent of immigrants receive public assistance, whereas 14 percent of natives do so. Immigrants are 50 percent more likely than natives to live in poverty.
Ted Kennedy also claimed the 1965 amendments "will not cause American workers to lose their jobs." Teddy cannot have it both ways: either the immigrant will remain unemployed and become a public charge, or he will take a job that otherwise could have gone to a native American. [excerpted]
35
posted on
02/16/2004 12:45:52 PM PST
by
syriacus
(Schumer is afraid of life terms of fed. judges. Maybe he should work on a Constitutional Amendment)
To: Bronc1
Could a politician be more obvious? He and the dem machine have been feeding the media red meat, knowing they would go into a feeding frenzy and then Kerry steps in to save Bush from the dogs.
36
posted on
02/16/2004 12:51:49 PM PST
by
Toespi
To: Bronc1
I guess this New York Post writer doesn't read the Washington Post. According to yesterday's WaPost, after Terry McAuliffe made his "Bush is AWOL" charge, Kerry's aides were furious at McAuliffe not for saying that, but for raising this issue too early in the campaign!
To: Bronc1
Gee, you reckon it could be because he doesn't want his own war anti-war record front and center? Too late, Camelface. You should have been thinking ahead when you were whoring around with Hanoi Jane.
38
posted on
02/16/2004 2:02:52 PM PST
by
sweetliberty
(To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it.")
To: All
39
posted on
02/16/2004 2:06:06 PM PST
by
Hon
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson