what he did when he came home!
Posted on 08/24/2004 2:07:51 PM PDT by Ramonan
A true liberal paper, but a big Navy town...
Let's not put too much in the sanctity of Kerry's medals. Receiving a medal does not make you a hero. Remember that there were 20 Congressional Medals of Honor issued for the Wounded Knee massacre.
Truth be told, however, Kerry invited a thoroughgoing examination of his brief military career by making it the centerpiece of his White House campaign.
Just damn! As a native San Diegan living in exile, seeing this from the Union-Tribune just floors me.
Definite 9.0+ earthquake rockin' Johnny's world!
It seems that the MSM can't contain or bury this story any longer. The Swiftees have given this story very big feet and they are tap-dancing on the MSM.
One correction to their editorial - Bush did not (as I understand it) criticize the Swiftees ads. What he said was that he didn't think ANY outside groups should be airing ads (not necessarily a position I agree with).
When they report that Kerry has backed away from the Christmas in Cambodia and is now admitting that the first PH was unearned, THEN I will start looking for the fat lady.
Also, while they admit John Francois Fonda Keri Heinz's record is worth scrutinizing, they at the same time try and down play the relevance. Sorry, but if you have a guy running for Commander-in-Chief I'd say that if he fabricated his war record to win medals that he didn't diserve and he slandered his fellow vets, thus embolding the enemy, it's pretty darn important.
After all why bother to hear the guys views on Healthcare, education, the economy, etc. if he's proven to be Unfit for Command!!!!!!
The difference (which it will be a cold day in hell before the media points out) is that
1 - George Bush is not bringing up his service, his scholastics, his military and putting it on his sleeve as some sort of badge of honor ... his opponents are.
2 - His opponents doing so by lieing, calling him deserter, AWOL, etc. - all false claims.
3 - George Bush's records have been made public from the get go. Kerry's? not.
4- GW's detractors are trying to make serving (3 years?) in the National Guard (trained for fighter pilot duty in Vietnam but just trained a little late to go) as if this is a bad thing, much lessor than 4 months on a vietnam river. That won't set well with our National Guard at all. Shame on them for doing so.
5 - George Bush's are biased political detractors, where Kerry's are fellow vietnam soldiers and sailors, POW's and swiftboat crews, all upset for Kerry trying to be commander in chief based on his war service as well as his anti-war service ...
Time to separate the wheat from the chaft - Bush is worthy, Kerry is not.
Here's another record;
When anyone reads Kerry's service records one must question whether he was within the bounds of the law protesting considering, from Kerry's own records, was still in the military. It doesn't matter if the service is active or inactive reserves there are principles to what a soldier can or can't do. The dates are the most important part. Protesting against the government while under military service agreement was and is a crime. I served more recent than even Kerry and I don't believe the law changed between those times. Below are excerpts from Kerry's own personal and campaign website.
Can anyone provide further details of Kerry's reserve duty attendance?
John Kerry’s More Than 30 Years of Service - 1966, John Kerry Enlisted in the U.S. Navy; November 1968 through March 1969, Served in Vietnam; 1970-1978, Served in U.S. Navy Reserves; 1976-1979, Middlesex County District Attorney’s Office; 1983-1985, Lt. Governor of Massachusetts; 1985-2004 U.S. Senator from Massachusetts. Link Below;
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0712a.html
Actual Record below, from John Kerry's Website;
http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Service_Record.pdf
The MSM is pretty much all that Fn's got. If they decide to turn on him, it is all over.
Yes but next time be sure to get the name right, the "Soviet Union Tribune."
Kerry is a self-inflicted wound. The exact details of his service record may not have been known, but the broad strokes of his post-war record were certainly known by one and all, and for the Dems to choose him thinking his war record would innoculate them on the Iraq war issues is just spin-your-head-around-incompetent.
Almost anyone would have been a better candidate. Well, OK, Dean would have been chewed up pretty quickly, as would Kucinich, but surely there were some adults in the party that could have been pressed into service for the greater good of party and country...?
For the party to have passed up its more serious members (can't think of one right now, but maybe it'll come to me later) and give the nomination to a guy who famously committed treason, and then proceeded to do nothing for the next 20 years, thinking this is the guy to beat Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice-Powell is to prove themselves incapable of serious thought.
The Union /slash/ Tribune was for many years a fine Newspaper. with a somewhat conservetive editoral bent.
Since Helen turned it over to her little girl David and
his swishey friends it's not worth the time it takes to
get to the funny's.
They ought to change the name of the paper to "The San Diego Gay Blade" and be done with it.
what he did when he came home!
If he is so bad, why is he polling so well?
Luckily, things are beginning to go in GW's favor it looks like.
With the convention coming up (in which there will be very detailed proposals outlined according to what I have read....in contrast to the no-substance Dem convention...Bush should begin to poll better and begin to get Kerry dropping). On a side note, I heard there may be major tax reform proposals on their way at the convention. We will see I guess...
This may have been posted before, but here is a link with kerry's Navy docs from findlaw. Very organized.
http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/election2004/docs.html
I would add sanity to the list. Kerry found out recently that the defining moment of his life was a fantasy, a story he made up and told over several decades about being in Cambodia Christmas eve of 1968. John O'Neill, in his book "Unfit For Command" and in many personal appearances on TV and radio has proved beyond a doubt that the story was false.
Kerry told the story to the Senate of the United States and also worked it into a movie review he did for a Boston newspaper. But to my knowledge, Kerry has yet to find one person to confirm his fantasy. Not one of his crew has agreed that they were in Cambodia on Christmas Eve 1968, or at any time that I'm aware of.
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.