Replies

You see, they are letting the issue be Bush and his supposed non service. This is being done to scare the republicans away from attacking Kerry for his left wing behavior after returning from Vietnam. The repubs need to strongly attack Kerry for claiming, without justification, that the American soldiers in Vietnam were war criminals. The dems are scaring the repubs out of it, and even getting the bonus of going on the offense against Bush.

Bush has nothing to be ashamed of. Defend his service, and bash Kerry over the head with his poor judgment in falsely accusing soldiers of atrocities, throwing away other peoples' medals, etc.

By the way, the dems started this so it is all fair game! It really troubles me that the repubs can't turn on a dime, as is needed: "Senator Kerry, I served in the national guard and flew jet fighter aircraft and was ready to be called to combat as so many brave guardsmen were in Iraq. But this election is about our ability to make sound judgments as president. I applaud the bravery you showed when called upon in a combat situation. But in my opinion you disqualified yourself from the presidency when you then chose to appeal to left wing politics in Massachussets by condemning your fellow soldiers as war criminals and accusing them of the most outrageous atrocitiies - which you later had to admit you saw none of in Vietnam. And I also respectfully believe you showed poor judgment when you made a public show of throwing away soldiers' war medals - medals of the type you now display in your Senate office." etc.

The Democrats are simply making the best of a bad political situation for them. Last year, it was believed that their best shot at winning the White House in 2004 would be if the economy tanked or the war in Iraq went badly. Kerry was the early front-runner because it was perceived that the economy would be the major issue. Dean became the front-runner (and Clark entered the race) when the economy began to recover but the casualty figures from Iraq started to bother voters.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, Dean's demise had nothing to do with his infamous melt-down after Iowa. Remember -- his meltdown came after he had finished third in a state where he had piled a ton of money and resources. His "official" term as front-runner for the Democratic nomination ended when the U.S. military dragged Saddam Hussein out of that hole in Iraq.

Since the economy and the war aren't the major issues it was hoped they would be, the Democrats are in a position where they must bank on a long-shot: they will put forward a candidate who can claim that he never liked Saddam Hussein (hence his voting record in the U.S. Senate), but "would have done things differently." Since the party is devoid of any ideas about how things might have been done "differently," they are left in a position where they must rely on a candidate whose only real claim to fame was that he did something heroic in Vietnam more than 30 years ago.

This Bush-Kerry war service reminds me of the Dan Quayle-Bill Clinton war service debate in the late 80's early 90's. I remember Ted Koppel on "NightLine" giving Dan Quayle a hard time about his record but gave Bill Clinton a complete pass on his interview. It was just another example of ABC's liberal bias that is sometimes subtle.

You see, they are letting the issue be Bush and his supposed non service. This is being done to scare the republicans away from attacking Kerry for his left wing behavior after returning from Vietnam. The repubs need to strongly attack Kerry for claiming, without justification, that the American soldiers in Vietnam were war criminals. The dems are scaring the repubs out of it, and even getting the bonus of going on the offense against Bush.

You are exactly right. I would only add that the Dems don't want anyone to examine Kerry's war record, which is also worthy of scrutiny. Four months in Vietnam, three superfiical "wounds", and Kerry's initiation of a request to be reassigned Stateside using an administrative rule about being wounded three times. The best defense is a good offense.