Replies

On the one hand, Edwards must demonstrate his Bush-hating bona fides to Dem primary voters. On the other hand, he is acutely aware of his own vulnerability on the issue.

I think this is where we disagree. I don't think a person should be a Vietnam vet before he becomes president and I think most Americans share this feeling. They didn't hold it against Clinton that he skated out on Vietnam. It was a really weird time in our nation and it is largely in the past.

What they will hold against a candidate is a sense of 'two-facedness'. Americans don't like that at all. This is why Americans don't like the French.

For most Americans, they aren't going to hold it against Edwards that he didn't serve in Vietnam. Likewise, they aren't really going to hold it against Dubya that he did the National Guard thing and maybe didn't show up for duty. In the mind of the average guy I sincerely believe the thought is 'Hey, you did what you had to do'.

But to serve and then do a 180 and stand by the likes of J. Fonda is unacceptable to Americans and particularly to then beat Bush on the head with his own 'non-service'.

The logic goes as thus- the war was wrong, therefore it was wrong to serve. Dubya did not go to war, but this makes him wrong because he is Republican. Clinton didn't go to war but this is ok because he is Democrat.

Bollocks.

Kerry served in Vietnam. Nobody will begrudge him that. What Fonda did was despicable. Everybody that served pretty much agrees with that. In no case does it make it ok for Kerry to use his clout as a veteran to back Fonda and what she did. What Fonda did was helpful to the enemy. If you backed her, you were helping the enemy by default.

I'll come right out and say it- better that a young person did what Clinton did- flee the country- than to use his status as veteran to help the enemy. Why? Because the veteran should know better.

Clinton was more honorable in the way that he avoided service than the way that Kerry sh!t on his comrades who were still serving. That's my opinion.

I don't know all that much about Jefferson or John Adams, but they never served or fought, did he? Hamilton did, Washington did, but I don't think John even owned a musket, and I cannot recall one instance of TJ ever firing a musket.

Yet TJ used almost EXACTLY the same Joint Resolution as Bush did to declare war (yep, check it out, he "declared war") on the Barbary Pirates (i.e., Muslim terrorists).

Someone might want to bring up Jefferson's military service.