Skip to comments.Kerry, Character And Vietnam
Posted on 09/26/2004 6:44:11 AM PDT by FlyLow
So now that it's almost certain Senator John Kerry will be the Democrats' candidate of choice, how low will they go to regain the office of the presidency? Despite the claims of John Kerry that theirs is a positive message, that only the Democrats can unite this divided country and restore hope for a better tomorrow, we've already been given a preview of things to come. The party best known for soiling the highest office in this great land continues to treat that office with a level of disrespect and contempt never before seen by this generation. The petty, partisan attacks on President Bush, in which he has persistently been accused of lying and misleading the American public, have only become more ugly as the Democrats attempt to raise the specter of Vietnam in a vile attempt to discredit and destroy a great public servant and to cause further division within our country. DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe and Democratic front-runner John Kerry seem intent on making personal attack based on lies and mistruth a cornerstone of their campaign to retake the White House.
Obviously, 2003 was a divisive year for our country. Operation Iraqi Freedom was a polarizing event, one that many thought would be the decisive issue in the upcoming presidential election. However, Democrats seem very intent on making this election about character rather than policy, leaving one to wonder if the war in Iraq or Vietnam will be the key issue. Democrats have consistently attacked and maligned the character of President Bush throughout 2003. Aided by their liberal allies in the media, their campaign of character assassination has apparently worked, at least for the time being, as polls indicate that a majority of Americans actually believe that President Bush either hyped up intelligence reports or misled them during the build up to war. By invoking this left-wing mantra over and over again, the Democrats and the media are attempting to turn Iraq into another Vietnam.
A greater example of misleading the public via a malicious propaganda campaign has not been seen since the days of Joseph Goebbels and the Nazi Party. With little regard for acts or historical record, the Democrats have attempted to rewrite history solely for their own political gain. This has nothing to do with the war in Iraq or a supposed abuse of power and everything to do with cheap, petty politics. The Democrats want to win back the presidency, at all costs. What is troubling is that many of our fellow citizens seem to be totally oblivious to what is happening. Are their minds so malleable that they cannot remember the events that led us to war?
Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, President Bush has made it perfectly clear that his main objective was to root out and destroy terrorism. After a successful campaign in which the Taliban and Al-Qaeda forces were routed in Afghanistan, all eyes were turned toward Iraq. A rogue state, which possessed WMD, invaded a neighboring country in 1990, and a known supporter of terrorism, Iraq was persistent in its refusal to comply with international law. U.N. Resolution 1441, the last of many resolutions passed by the United Nations in its attempt to force Saddam Hussein to disarm, threatened Iraq with "serious consequences" if he did not cooperate and disarm. The corrupt and inept United Nations had no intention of enforcing its own resolutions, so we were forced to do so. Imagine what the Middle East would be like today had we not de-fanged the threat posed by the regime of Saddam Hussein.
The fact that only now are we seeing the true state of disarray within the Iraqi regime provides even greater confirmation that Saddam was not being cooperative, nor forthcoming with information about his weapons programs. No one knew what was going on within this closed society, yet Democrats have taken the position that President Bush did know. Both the Kay Report and CIA Director Tenet's recent testimony refute this and clearly exonerate President Bush of all charges of wrongdoing. However, once again, we've seen how the Democrats and their liberal allies in the media have selectively used this new information to further their own agenda to discredit and destroy President Bush. Democrats, by politicizing this war, will hamper future actions that might prevent future terrorist attacks on our country. While a unified America, with two significant victories in the war on terror, could send a strong message to terrorists and their allies around the world, Democrats and the Bush-haters on the left seem intent on sending a different message: America no longer possesses the strength and conviction it once had.
So now Democrats wish to revisit Vietnam and what it means to America. Throughout Operation Iraqi Freedom, Democrats made repeated comparisons between Vietnam and Iraq. Crying that there would be hundreds of thousands of body bags coming home and that this war would be a quagmire, Democrats once again proved themselves to be wrong. By making outlandish claims that President Bush lied and misled to take us to war, Democrats are attempting to make this war another Vietnam. Perhaps the 60's-era hippies are seeking some sort of validation or last hurrah to justify their spitting on our soldiers when they returned from Vietnam? The only similarities to the Vietnam War is the role being played by Democrats like John Kerry who have emboldened our enemies abroad with their constant attacks on President Bush and their campaign to undermine his credibility, particularly during a time of war.
Regardless, they were wrong then and they are wrong now. Vietnam proved to the world that the United States was going to take a stand against the spread of communism. The War on Terror will prove to the world that we will take a stand against the evils of terrorism. The one very valuable lesson we learned from Vietnam is that we should allow the generals to fight the war, not the politicians. Our unprecedented success in both Afghanistan and Iraq confirm that this lesson has been learned. By revisiting the Vietnam War during this election, we might take this opportunity to show our appreciation and thanks to those veterans who for so long have felt unappreciated and forgotten. This time around, there will be no spitting on American soldiers, we will make sure of that.
Despite his wish that Vietnam not be made an issue during the 1992 election, John Kerry (the poster boy for opportunism) now sees a grand opportunity to use Vietnam as a tool to denigrate the character of President Bush. In recent weeks we've heard charges of desertion and AWOL coming from the likes of DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe and conspiracy-nut Michael Moore. The fact that John Kerry has jumped on the bandwagon should speak volumes concerning his character, or lack thereof. This election will not only be a referendum on Iraq and Vietnam, but on character as well.
Speaking of character, if so much time and energy is to be devoted towards investigating the National Guard service of George Bush, then shouldn't the service of John Kerry be scrutinized as well? He has certainly made his service in Vietnam a campaign issue. It is ironic that he proudly boasts of his heroism today, yet felt such shame for his service back in the 70's. Questions persist concerning the three Purple Hearts he received while in Vietnam. How does one receive three Purple Hearts and yet only miss two days of duty as a result of those injuries? What about reports that he killed a wounded Viet Cong soldier? Why was this soldier not taken into captivity? Wouldn't that type of incident be treated as a war crime today? If John Kerry conducted himself inappropriately in a time of war, then it is only fitting that a comprehensive investigation into possible war crimes be initiated.
The question also remains; why do so many Vietnam veterans despise John Kerry? Amongst this brotherhood there is a code of honor and loyalty that forms an unbroken bond. To have such strong feelings of dislike and contempt for fellow-soldier John Kerry raises red flags. Who better to judge one's character than a fellow soldier? The fact that he not only joined the anti-war movement, but also helped to lead it, calls into question his loyalty to those he served with. Marching under the flag of the North Vietnamese while his fellow soldiers were still fighting in Vietnam was deemed by many of his fellow veterans as not only unforgivable, but traitorous. John Kerry's organization, Vietnam Veterans Against the War, was even given credit for emboldening the enemy at a time when they were possibly close to defeat.
Another possible character flaw has arisen via charges of adulterous behavior. Only time and further investigation will determine if these charges are true. If so, this would only confirm that he is not a loyal or trustworthy person. We've seen how he abandoned his first wife while she was struggling with depression. Of course, the same people who felt that Janet Jackson exposing herself on TV was not a big deal will be as morally complacent on these issues of loyalty, trustworthiness, and faithfulness. However, they represent character flaws, strong ones at that. So while Democrats will surely cry foul over these recent rumors about Kerry's indiscretions, they've shown no remorse for their own campaign of character assassination waged over the course of the past year.
John Kerry has proven himself to be a blue-blooded opportunist throughout his career. He played up to anti-war sentiment in order to run for political office. As a senator, he has proven to be soft on defense by consistently voting to slash defense spending. He has even gone on record as wanting to treat terrorists not as enemy combatants, but as criminals. His voting record is filled with contradictions: he voted against the Gulf War in 1991, yet voted to authorize the use of force against Saddam Hussein in 2003, all the while naively maintaining that his vote was only to threaten the use of force, and then voted against funding for the war. John Kerry is an admitted internationalist, who favors US action only if blessed by the United Nations. Is that the kind of person we want to lead our country?
Does America want a man in office who seems to be so lacking in character? So much rides on this election; the terrorists that seek our destruction are not only watching, they are rooting for John Kerry to win. George Bush has proven to be a man of strong conviction and moral character, that's why liberals hate and despise him so. He does what he says he is going to do, which is rare for modern-day politicians. To not re-elect George Bush would not only send the wrong message, it could ultimately lead to more attacks and possibly our demise. Hopefully, America will see past the negative attacks of the Democrats and recognize the fact that Democrats have been the true party of dissent and division within this country. Character should be the determining factor in this election, and that is something the Democrats and John Kerry have proven repeatedly that they are lacking.
How low will the Democrats go to win this election ? If it was a well there would be no bottom. They will go as low as they have to. They have already tried forgery.
Lower than whale $h*t comes to mind.
Character doesn't matter to liberals. Popularity does.
"I bring you Socialism, Abortion, and Appeasement!
Higher Taxes and smug condescension directed at ordinary Americans!"
Where have we heard that liberal mantra before?
DEMOCRATS = Al QAEDA
JOHN KERRY = Enemy of Vietnam Vets
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.