Replies

What Kerry did or didn't do in Viet Nam is really a moot point. Let's stop debating the RATS about it. What counts is what he did after he returned to the United States.....

Honest men can disagree about whether or not Kerry fluffed up his deeds to get a purple heart, but his testimony before Congress was crystal clear: It's part of the Congressional record and tape recorded for posterity. His actions in testifying before Congress and in leading the VVAW gave great aid and comfort to the enemies of freedom. Only God Almighty knows the entire toll Kerry's actions had on the lives of the men he sold out, and on the innocent people of South Viet Nam who perished. My eyes well up with tears when I consider the years so many of our finest and bravest men suffered from injuries that were inflicted upon them by the enemy emboldened by Kerry's rhetoric. The names on the wall. The ones we will never know. Their blood cries out from the ground. Surely, we can in charity forgive John Kerry for his folly, maybe even excuse his actions because he was "swept up with the times." Maybe. But should this man ever be allowed the honor of serving as the President of the United States of America? Never.

"Surely, we can in charity forgive John Kerry for his folly, maybe even excuse his actions because he was "swept up with the times." Maybe. But should this man ever be allowed the honor of serving as the President of the United States of America? Never."

Excellent assessment, ppaul.

What Kerry did or didn't do in Viet Nam is really a moot point.

It is hardly a moot point. Does anyone think Lyndie is qualified to be CIC? What kerry did in Viet Nam was a lot worse than putting panties on terrorists heads. By his own account, he committed war crimes. He should be in Leavenworth, not the Oval Office. Acknowledging this fact does not in any way dimish the seriousness of his crimes and misdeeds since that time.

What counts is what he did after he returned to the United States.....

We all know this to be the major cause of distress for all Vets of the era, but the problem is that the general voting public majority knows or cares little about Kerry's anti-war BS.

The polling done on the second ad initially seems to show little effect, and I think it is for the reason above.

His anti-war antics seem to mean little to anyone under 50 years of age and it will not be enough to put his campaign on the skids.IMO

If being anti-war was a issue, it would have shown up in his prior election when the same subject was brought up time and time again. They just don't care that he hurt us worse than any wound could have.

Kerry must be shown for the opportunistic bastard he is.IMHO His bogus statement meant nothing at the time and since. John O'Neil, who fought him desperately and lost in the 70s can attest to this dilemma. He must be beaten by showing the public his total lack of character by putting all of it on the table. Including the acts after he came home as a part of the whole story.