[cyncooper]

Oh, and as the Cheney gambit, that will backfire on the dims, too.

But maybe this indicates Kerry will pick Clark for VP (could he possibly be that stupid?) if there is going to be military record comparison ongoing from that side. How else would they employ such a plan to downgrade Cheney unless the dem equivalent had some kind of military record to compare it to?

[leadpenny]

If Cheney comes under attack because of his lack of service during Vietnam, it won't be coming from the left, at least not initially. If he stays on the ticket he will be attacked by the dems during the campaign. Quite frankly, I think they would like him to stay. Any attack over the next couple of months would most likely be coming from within the GOP. imo.

[leadpenny]

The House just went into session for some formal business. Before adjourning they have allowed a few "one-minute speeches." The first democrat up, Rep Allen (ME), brought up the Cheney/Scalia duck hunting trip last month. This is the "sleeper" issue that will go all the way to November - - not Cheney's non-military service record.

[Consort]

Edwards is toast and Kerry is ninth of the Ten Little Indians. The tenth indian killed all the rest. Who is it?

[af_vet_rr]

Cheney, who was born in 1941, received a series of draft deferments as a student, a husband, and a father during the Vietnam era.

I have to ask "so what?". Anybody and everybody who could get deferments got them.

I can see anger from those who were students, husbands, and fathers who tried and didn't get deferments, but Cheney was not the only one who got deferments. I think it's probably unique that he got several, however this was the early on, and Vietnam wasn't in full swing. Had he been born around 1948, and been called up in '66 or thereabouts, I have no doubt that he would have served. He's that type of guy.

He didn't do anything wrong by getting a deferment - that's why they existed. He sure as hell wouldn't have burned his draft card and ran off to Canada.