You are really getting tiresome. This is my last post to you, because although you seem to grasp the language, you totally fail to comprehend what I am saying.
Let me be frank and blunt and cut out the niceties:
The DU people make asinine statements, w/o basis of fact, then they make slanderous allegations against Republicans, thus making themselves look like morons.
When we copy their tactics, by making outlandish statements like "Kerry is a domestic terrorist" then we begin to look like the idiots that they are.
It has become tiresome to try to explain to you my point, since your lack of comprehension knows no bounds.
I will instead revert to an old cliche:
"Never argue with a fool, some people will not be able to tell the difference."
But let me try and see it from your perspective. Even if we go with your thesis, at the VERY minimum, the DU charges require incredibly loose definitions of terms like "war criminal" and "AWOL" in order to stick, definitions that the vast majority of people would not accept.
However, I'd be very interested to hear -anyone- who would claim that the definition of "domestic terrorism" would not, absolutely and without caveat, include conspiring to assassinate U.S. Senators in a time of war.
There's a difference between "shocking" and "outlandish". Yes, the charge is shocking, but it is not outlandish, there is a great deal of evidence to support it, far far more than the flip side from DU you are trying to present.
Reading your arguments, the only thing I can glean is that if it's too shocking, it's out of political bounds. Sometimes the truth really is shocking. What do you suggest then - ignore the truth, or cover it up?
Qwinn