Posted on 04/28/2004 2:05:14 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Look at the clips of young John Kerry, back from Vietnam, leading protests against the war, and you see a modern-day Paul Revere. With one or two significant differences.
Kerry circa 1971 was a far more complex figure than his fellow Massachusetts patriot. He fought bravely in Vietnam, but briefly; using three minor wounds, he went home on a technicality, leaving his buddies behind. He had gone off to war dreaming of establishment leadership and came back to head an army of alienated outsiders.
Like Revere, Kerry had a grand sense of drama, but his message wasn't nearly so clear. Kerry made accusations of widespread American atrocities, and he even confessed to committing some himself.
Today, as a presidential candidate, Kerry says his words "were inappropriate" (i.e., false). But he clearly meant to be believed at the time.
Doubtless, Kerry returned from Vietnam genuinely shocked and angry. But he didn't lose his native New England caution, either. He threw away other people's medals. He knew his own would come in handy someday.
Kerry's complexities can be explained by a simple biographical fact: He was a very young man at the time, susceptible to a young man's weaknesses. Popularity, especially in his social circle, meant opposing the war. Admit atrocities, and you got to hang with John Lennon and Jane Fonda. Support the war, and you had to dine with Lurleen Wallace.
Kerry also wanted a political career in Massachusetts. His idols and gatekeepers were the Kennedys. They were against the war. And to be fair, there is no doubt he was, too. His own opposition was sincere, even if it was self-interested.
In any case, Kerry went before Congress and sounded a warning: He had been to Vietnam and seen it with his own eyes! The Americans are coming! They must be stopped. The charges made Kerry famous overnight. At the time, he must have regarded this as a very fine thing - a form of doing well by doing good.
But young men, even farsighted young men, cannot see 30 years into the future. The John Kerry of 1971 probably never thought about what his accusations would sound like in 2004. Or that he would be forced to go on "Meet the Press" and watch a tape of his 27-year-old self calling a generation of American veterans war criminals.
This ordeal should provide a chilling example to today's aspiring young radicals. Back in 1971, only the chosen few got on TV. Now, in the age of omnipresent camcorders, everybody's a star. Make a few wild accusations at a rally or carry a sick enough banner ("Barbara Bush Should Have Exercised Choice"), and you will wind up in 2036 trying to explain to Tim Russert Jr. what it was you really meant.
Kerry's story also gives today's adults something to think about. During Vietnam, the Greatest Generation - scared for their children and scared of them - abdicated responsibility. Grown men and women who would never have entrusted their money to a twentysomething banker or put their lives in the hands of a surgeon with four months' experience were suddenly happy to follow the national security prescriptions of kids.
That's not to say that Kerry and his fellow activist veterans were mistaken about the need to end the war. But that insight didn't come from their military service. Soldiers can describe a battlefield and their feelings about being there, but they are not automatically endowed with wisdom or good judgment.
Or honesty. You can't blame the young John Kerry for seeking fame and fortune as his generation's Paul Revere. The difference is that in 1775, the British really were coming. And Revere didn't resort to atrocity tales to arouse the countryside. Or if he did, there were no cameras there to catch him in the act.
Mr. Kerry needs to find a new venue. Maybe the circus is hiring.
/john
sorry
This fact, among others, will sink Kerry because Americans are keenly aware of the brave soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan who are wounded in battle and stay specifically because they don't want to leave their buddies behind to finish the job without their help. Friends and families of those soldiers will spread the word that Kerry is the poster child for opportunism.
You can't blame the young John Kerry for seeking fame and fortune as his generation's Paul Revere.
Uh yes we can, especially when it's done without consideration of the soldiers it hurt or killed.
Yes, you can. By shallowly seeking to rise to the top of the proverbial heap by stomping all over America's Vietnam soldiers, he abdicated his potential claim to moral leadership, perhaps to leadership in any capacity.
Contrast sKerry's protracted ride on the anti-war wave with the "October surprise" that nearly cost Bush the 2000 election - Bush apparently drove under the influence. In a moment of poor judgement, he did something stupid. When confronted with it, he did not dissemble, but sought to put the incident behind him by admitting his responsibility.
JF'nK seeks to put his past behind him not by admitting responsibility, not by admitting he foolishly lied and fooled people into believing his lies, but instead by chanting "That was 30 years ago - it doesn't matter..." and then launching into an attack on his political opponent.
One last thought... George Bush seems to understand that sKerry is his "opponent". To JF'nK, Bush (and every conservative American) are not "opponents" - they are "enemies".
THE MAN WAS IN LED A CPITULATION MOVEMENT IN HIS OWN COUNTRY ! !
It's suck, it's wrog, it's unforgetable, and unforgivable.
Sorry, but this is simply untrue. I lived through the times and those who opposed that was were a distinct minority who disgusted the rest of us. The only reason this guy thinks differently is because he was one of them. We knew their leaders were commies. We knew Johnson wouldn't let the soldiers win it and was probably using the war to enrich his Texas cronies.
I was a student on a NJ campus when that November protest occurred. The only reason there was a crowd was that snivelers in the administration canceled classes. We heckled the crap out of the antiwar speakers and those who spoke in favor were loudly cheered.
Bite on that Chafets and the Daily News. And bite me.
Bug out John urged us to cut and run leaving the South Vietnamese hung out to dry. The end of the war meant tens of thousands executed, hundreds of thousands of boat people, and millions more into reeductation camps. The US never lost a significant battle. We were defeated by guys like Kerry and the Dem Congress who cut off funding after getting us in there in the first place. I agree that Kerry is Benedict Arnold, not Paul Revere.
This one makes about as much sense as kerry's explanation of his/someone elses medals/ribbons that did/did not get thrown/placed over/by the capitol/or someplace else in Washington DC/state???
STEAMING pile of BS - the idiot was 27 years old when he pulled that little stunt. By 27, you know better.
I think you've NAILED it!
You have no idea how BIG this is coming from The New York Daily News.
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.