John Kerry the Betrayer: Unfit to Command, part 3

[Cruddy]

[Outside observation]

I cannot understand why Kerry get's so much flak for dissing the Vietnam war.

All those in favour of pointless aggression and war... vote Republican!

[/Outside observation]

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The Repubs have only The latest Iraq war in their collumn of pointless wars.

The Dems have Korea and Vietnam to their credit.

[Patroklos]

Unfortunetly for your logic, Democrats presided over the Vietnam war, and the Republicans got us out.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Beat you to the punch P.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Perhaps in France you know all the political figures in your government, but here a citizen of CA could care less about an Mass Senator. Probobly didn't even know he was in politics untill be became national a year ago. I. E. no need to point put the failings of a non entity.

And did the fighter pilot or swifties pay for these adds? They simply told the right people the stories, and of course it would the anti-Kerry team, and someone sponsored them.

Well indeed. There are people who have a bias against Kerry (just like the vets on the other side have a bias for Kerry), and they can be useful in the political campaign. Hence the political campaign uses them. That there are ads, that such financial and mediatic means are used, is a campaign move.

If this confounds you, well you are a communist so open politics would.

Thanks for the stupid BAM, which I find highly insulting. Besides, unless you experienced running for office yourself, I think I know more about open politics than you.

And Kerry revolved his own campaign around his military record, which is FALSE. Talk about party idenfication, you are the poster child.

Were I an American, I'd probably vote Nader. I don't see where you see me supporting Kerry. I just attacked a statement of yours that I considered to be idiotic and blind. I would have attacked Sava just the same if he pretended F911 wasn't a campaign trick (granted, with probably nicer words)
I admit I consider Kerry to be the lesser of two evils, but that certainly doesn't mean I'm believing him on his military record. I don't remember having defended Kerry's record or "consistency", and for a reason: I couldn't care less. However, it is true that I attacked the rabid behaviour of the Republicans who'd swallow everything that came from their side.

Thats a good one Spiffor, that claim from Kerry doesn't even warrent the dignity of a respose. Kerry himself has bent over backwards to erase the memory of his claims of "war criminals" from the public eye. NOBODY, except maybe disgruntled Apolytoner's (which the best indication of nobody in the real world) considisders Vietnam Vets war criminals. Classic Spiffor, Classic.

Rationalizations, rationalizations...
Since the American crimes in Vietnam disgusted a whole generation of Americans, and put an end to all out American wars for about 25 years, I would be surprised that everybody in your country has now forgotten or disregarded them. Kerry's allegations of war crimes may be less PC now than then, but I would really be surprised if all Vietnam vets are now considered to be heroes.

[Mad Bomber]

This smear campaign, organized by the Bush Administration (Carl Rove by name) is far worse than the one which lost the election for Gore in 2000.

Does anyone remember when Gore was vilified for claiming credit for the internet? The truth is that Gore was instrumental in procuring funding to help transform arpanet into what is now the internet.

This is the same republican formula for winning elections since the 1960's. They claim their opponet is weak on defense, smear whatever accomplishments he may have call him 'wishy-wasy' 'flip-flopper' and make it seem that their opponet couldn't make a decision to save his ass and then wrap themselves up in their red-white-and blue flag and sing 'God Bless America' until the election is over. All the time ****ing up the economy, throwing our international relations into the crapper and letting our educational system fall to third world status. Not to mention funding the nation on the backs of our children instead of actually asking the american people (particularly the wealthiest 1%) to fund the government to the levels actually necessary.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Spiffor, I didn't say Bush didn't pay for the adds, but that the vets volunteered their stories to his campaign of their own accord. You take a lot of liberties when you get excited.

Ah ok. I understood "unsolicited" as if you considered the whole ads were from some grassroot movement, and weren't instrumentalized.

If you simply think that these people are sincere* in what they say, rather than bribed into saying that, well, this is most likely indeed (same with Vets for Kerry btw)



*"sinciere" not as "telling the truth", but as "telling that part of the truth that is in agreement with their own beliefs about Kerry, and which is useable for the political spin of their side".

[MikeH]

Originally posted by Ming
What about Fahrenheit 9/11 by Michael Moore. It's a full length movie timed to hurt Bush's re-election chances... Isn't that worse than just an Ad? And while they didn't fund the movie, they did feature Moore at their Convention... So if you are going to whine about the ads... at least whine at both sides

Absolutely, the entire campaign from both sides is obscene.

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Unfortunetly for your logic, Democrats presided over the Vietnam war, and the Republicans got us out.

Yes, but the current Democrat candidate has a track record of being opposed to pointless violence.

Unlike the Republican contender...

I'm guessing that Americans don't care too much for individual track records over party track records... or maybe that's a bit too simplistic.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber
All the time ****ing up the economy, throwing our international relations into the crapper and letting our educational system fall to third world status

Don't we have a generalization here? Reagan significantly boosted your economy, and Bush Sr. was an excellent diplomat.

I didn't follow enough American campaigns to know if the tactics are the same since the 60's (actually, I thought the smear fashion really begun with the Lewinsky affair). I had the impression the Bush admin introduced a very different tone compared to before, only similar to Reaganite or MacCarthyite periods.

[Patroklos]

Since the American crimes in Vietnam disgusted a whole generation of Americans

Of whom almost all of which are middle class stock brokers or lawyers or other yuppies, who rightly look back at their youthful activities with humor or disgust. It is fun to hang out, feel important, smoke dope and stick it to the man. Untill of course you become the man.

Is that your soul defense of the point, that a group of college drunks agreed with you at one time, long long ago?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Cruddy


Yes, but the current Democrat candidate has a track record of being opposed to pointless violence.

He has since come out to say that he would have engaged in war against Sadaam even knowing what he knows today. (at least that is his latest story)

This means for all intents and purposes they share teh same vision wrt Iraq. The only difference being in the implementation. Which is still a significant point although truth be told I really can't definitively describe significant difference there as well.

[Cruddy]

Yes, so what?

One contender stood up and was counted as against the war.

The other stuck his head in the sand and did not serve in any capacity except feathering his own nest.

No contest. One of them has a set of testicles, the other has a calculator and portfolio where his soul should be.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Is that your soul defense of the point, that a group of college drunks agreed with you at one time, long long ago?

My job with you is done. Thanks for your cooperation

[GePap]

What a pathetic ad. Ohhh, you felt bad about protesters-well, why the **** should I care?

The thing is, this ad much better exemplifies the reason for this campaign- men stuck in 1971 reliving their nightmares, but more importantly, thinking that their sacrifice somehow had to be lauded by the people. It didn't.

I generally do feel sad for these guys-thinking that the validation for their sufferings had to come from strangers and outsiders. Why? The people owed them respect, but thats it They did not owe them anything else. To think people should not have stated the truth as they saw it becuase men were being held prisoners of war is absurd beyond belief- it is a perversion of democracy, which is the ability to change policy even in the worse of times-perhaps specially there.

John Kerry did the right thing by speaking out against a war he saw as damaging to the US. Too bad these men thought wrongly he owed them anything more than respect. Hopefully they can get over their hangup some day, because if they don;t, they will die embittered men.