I'm glad you cleared that up. I figured if that's what you were saying, I must have missed something somewhere along the line ! )
"What I was saying, is that there is ample ammunition about Murtha NOW to convict him of treason."
I agree. I can't figure out why hasn't he been charged except I noted W called it comforting the enemy, yet pointedly left out aiding the enemy. Of course, that was before he aligned with Code Pink.
"I'm not sure that there is a reason to go after his service record."
There is a long record of this opponent trying to bring his service record to light, to no avail. IMO, he is in a parallel position to Kerry because he is the left's 'legitimate' voice for America's 'military' strategy.
"The Swift Boat vets had abundant evidence and multiple sources to prove that Kerry's record was phony. I haven't seen that kind of evidence with Murtha, and wonder if it exists. The SBV absolutely did not hurt the credibility of the Republican party. A fishing expedition on Murtha would."
I agree that a fishing expedition would hurt the Republican party. Given that Murtha's opponent has this history, I see where -given Kerry's history- an exacting inquiry into Murtha's history should be pursued and might very well have the opposite affect... a legitimatation and solidification of the service provided to this country by SVPFT.
I believe, especially in light of John Kerry, these are legitimate questions that need to be asked and to let it go would be negligent.
As I said from the beginning, I am open to persuasion on the subject.
If handled correctly and for the right reasons, this might be good to pursue.
If done by his opponent as a legitimate effort to prove who Murtha is, and if the evidence is there, I have no problem with it.
If it's done just as some form of revenge for his betrayal of our troops (IMO, there are many other Dems who have done that), and lacking solid evidence, I would still suggest restraint.