John Kerry: Unfit For Command

[The Mad Monk]

Given the way you spelled prophylactics, I'll need proof.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by CyberShy

I'd take any non-militairy president over a militairy president any day. Unless we're talking about an important official (general or something) during war-time.

Yeah. Grant and Eisenhower were like the best presidents ever.

[The Mad Monk]

Given how we (Americans) view those presidencies, I'm not certain how to take that.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Pekka
How cares about the purple hearts. The fact remains, he served IN vietnam and fought. Everything else, semantics.

The fact is that Bush can't say the same. He has said to be in war. Now I don't see a huge uprising against that right now. Someone digs up some dirt on the service of Kerry, which is not even confirmed yet, and it somehow is a big deal.

Fact is: Kerry served, Bush didn't.

If I were on the Bush team (I'm not on anyones team btw), I wouldn't have allowed this move. Why? BEcause it will backfire on them. YOu want to start comparing military records? And Bush lied also about his military career. Kerry hasn't blatantly lied, hey if he got self inflicted wounds, then he got them. So what? So he is boosting up the story a bit, so what? He still saved his fellow soldier and actually fought in the freaking war. That tells me a lot more about the man than Bush.

WHat I think is that Bush team swallowed the trap. In Kerry's speach, he said that he hopes they cna do a positive race, and that it won't go to this level. And it went to this level. Now it will backfire on them, because Kerry gets the higher grounds by default. Huge mistake IMO. In Bush's website, it's not a BUsgh website. It's a Kerry hating website. Kerry's site is Kerry site. It tells me a lot more about Bush than Kerry, to see his website.

They have lowered themselves to mud throwing people, who don't fight the issues, but do these kind of stunts, which make sme believe their campagn isn't looking too good.

What a shame.

Just because you served doesn't make it ok. Military service does not make someone automatically better than someone who didn't. The military is full of people who I would surely move if they became president. I've met some really great people and some who are just plain muther ****ers.....

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

Yeah. Grant and Eisenhower were like the best presidents ever.

Eisenhower was good, Grant was either corrupt or tremendously incompetent as President..

[The Mad Monk]

I put Eisenhauer in the top 8.

[Urban Ranger]

The book isn't even out yet.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by CyberShy
Where does the american love for presidents who served in war come from?
Why would someone be capable to be a president if he served in war?
If someone served in war he showed that he's capable to take orders. Not to give them.

I'd take any non-militairy president over a militairy president any day. Unless we're talking about an important official (general or something) during war-time.

Um, Bill Clinton (Vietnam era Draft Dodger) beat George Bush Sr. (decorated Navy bomber pilot from WW2) and Bob Dole (decorated WW2 Infantry Officer) within the last 12 years.

Right now we are fighting two wars on the ground as well as a nebulous "war on terror" all over the place. So the experience issue has some meaning. Note that Bush has four years of experience in the top job, though he's been a bit of an incompetent. Kerry had four months at the lowest level, and one wonders whether he wasn't a bit of an incompetent as well, the claims made in this book aside.

His military record is almost unique. Someone above him was certainly very dilligent in filling out the paperwork to get him medals at a minimum. I mean how bad were his injuries that he got 3 purple hearts in 4 months? My uncle got one purple heart for getting shot by a machine gun and laying in a muddy shell crater for 2 days, during which time he was wounded several more times by shell fragments and had an infection that almost killed him. He had over 100 seperate holes in him, had to have the end of his penis removed due to wounds and infection and spent 8 months in the hospital recovering. Kerry's medals to months ratio has to be one of the highest in the history of the Vietnam conflict. It's surprising that we haven't heard more about him in history books.

That said I do agree with Pekka that he did his duty and risked his life regardless of whether more was made of his actions than is perhaps decent considering the often greater sacrifices of those who didn't have such an accomodating bureacracy above them. He certainly deserves more credit than G.W. Bush for his service, and lets not even talk about Clinton.

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Is it any wonder that less than half of them vote?

Actually, 51.3% voted in the last US Fed election. In Canada, 60% voted in the 2004 federal election, and it goes down every year. Considering we only have 30 million people, I'd say this difference isn't that great... when populations get bigger, less people vote, its just how it goes. Last time the US had 60% turnout, it had 120 million people in 1968. What does that say about us?

[Shi Huangdi]

Well you know, seeing that the Kerry campaign has talked non-stop about his service in Vietnam, I don't see how it is wrong to discuss it publicily/offer alternative views.

[gunkulator]

So the Bushies can find some anti-Kerry veterans. Big deal. Fact is, Kerry's platoon buddy told a pretty harrowing tale at the DNC about how Kerry saved his life over in Vietnam. 3 PHs or not, that's still a heck of lot more than Bush has to offer.

One of the reasons that Americans like veterans in office is that they've offered to put it all on the line for their country. Sure, most of them never come close to being killed but they've made the committment none the less. It takes a certain amount of courage to do this and as such, it's a sacrifice worthy of respect.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
Given how we (Americans) view those presidencies, I'm not certain how to take that.

That having been a successful military command doesn't say much about your suitability as president.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Pekka
Kerry hasn't blatantly lied, hey if he got self inflicted wounds, then he got them. So what?

[JohnT]

That really is an unflattering picture of the man... he looks like Death, pointing straight at you.

[GePap]

And this book will have the same effect as all those utterly blatantly partisan books you see out there in the bookstore...0. Maybe closer to absolute 0. I mean, honestly, look at your local bookstore and the current events section- the invective is massive. Anyone who thinks this is anything more than just one more unheard voice in the tumult, is, well, nuts.

As for comparisons to Farenheit 911. That film has made 100 milion. at NYC prices, it still means 10 million viewings. I doubt seriously 10 million people will read this crap.