Replies

John Kerry was as wrong to take it out on the troops in the 70s, as he is to take it out on the troops today (failing to vote for spending supporting the troops in 2003).

Terry McAuliff (sp?) made a direct attack on Bush today saying a match up with Kerry -- a "soldier with a chest full of medals" -- Vs. Bush with his "phony landing on the aircraft carrier" will show who has the real military credentials. (or something very close to that).

I'm old enough to know Kerry and his anti-war activities personally, I was at the Vietnam Veterans against the War rally on the Washington Monument grounds and heard him speak. (I worked for the company that ran the concession stands on D.C. area national park properties)

This SOB -- though less at that rally, than in his testimony to congress and other speeches -- did not just speak against the policy people and the people that sent these guys to war, he attacked the troops. He is directly responsible for the troops getting spat on when they came home.

IMO - he is long over due for an attack on his real "war record", not just the medals. No better time than NOW!

here's a NewsMax article on him --

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/1/20/131219.shtml

He is directly responsible for the troops getting spat on when they came home.

Do you think the GOP and Rove will have the balls to bring this up in ads, or are we going to be the only ones talking about it?

I have heard that he vilified the Vietnam vets he supposedly had saved and fought aside. None of the soldiers knew if these "innocent" villagers had bombs or planted mines or guns on them, man, woman and child. It was war and for Kerry to indict these brave servicemen (which includes several relatives who took tours of Vietnam in the 60s) is reprehensible.

And now they are whining about how Max Cleland was treated in his re election bid? I mean, was he immune to being criticized for his votes because of his injuries? Did the Democrats ever think for a moment that maybe the reason why Max Cleand lost in Georgia was because he was a lousy, inneffective senator?