1
   

McCain condemns ad, Kerry's commander backs off

 
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2004 05:35 pm
and the thought plickens but nobody cares.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2004 05:42 pm
Revel's argument:
Quote:
I was on that boat with him that Christmas, and we were not anywhere near Cambodia," says Steven Gardner, who served as Kerry's gunner's mate on PCF-44 (patrol craft fast) and who is now a member of SBVT. PCF-44 was based in Cam Ranh Bay, a good distance from the Cambodian border. "He didn't have the balls to do that and break international law, let alone do what we were supposed to half the time.


You don't know, the writer didn't know, and I sure don't know whether Gardner or the other guy knew what he was talking about re their position. The commanders, the guys responsible for the boats, say there is no way Kerry's boat was in Cambodia either in December or January.

The point is they are all saying Christmas in the accounts you are posting. We have shown that none of the facts Kerry has related stack up against the known facts. And now, Kerry is trying to get the account changed to say January, not December, despite the fact that this particular Christmas was 'seared into his memory' and the guys speaking up for him are all saying 'Christmas'. If all these guys are saying Christmas, how come Kerry is now trying to get the story changed to January instead of Christmas?

You see, it just isn't adding up.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2004 06:05 pm
Gosh foxfrye, maybe I am just really slow, but that guy said, "I WAS ON THAT BOAT WITH HIM THAT CHRISTMAS."

You said that Kerry was lying because he confused Janurary with Christmas. I was merely telling you that another guy confused Janurary with Christmas as well.

They were close to the border of Cambodia as even a website that is obviously not a kerry supporter website shows:

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2004/08/brinkley_on_ker.html

Quote:
P. 218: Describing the Christmas incident, Brinkley never describes Kerry as crossing the border. Wasser is quoted: "We were getting close to Cambodia," Wasser explained later. "We were out there all alone in the darkness


All this is just stupid.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2004 06:21 pm
Who in the Hell cares if he remembers being in Cambodia. That was 1969. I have no idea where I was at all in the months of November and December 1969. Anyone who can say they do and especially if they were involved in combat are liars themselves. I'm sure nobody here who would even attempt it has ever misspoke about where and when they were over thirty years ago. I don't believe any of those who are involved in this book, financed by Texas Republicans, can give any accurate accounts of their whereabouts in that war and pin-point it even down to a particular week, let alone a month.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2004 06:21 pm
Bullshit!
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2004 06:24 pm
sometime during the first few weeks of nov in 1963 I was on leave in Sydney Australia and I got laid, I remember that.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Aug, 2004 11:08 pm
Okay I'm saying one more time. Nobody but Kerry said they were in Cambodia on Christmas 1998. He said he remembered spending Christmas there....it was 'seared into his memory'. He is further on record as saying Nixon ordered them there illegally. His gunner said no way they were in Cambodia on Christmas. Another guy said they 'could have been in Cambodia on Christmas' as 'they didn't know exactly where they were.'
Finally, Nixon wasn't president on Christmas, 1998 or until late January 1999.

But now Kerry is saying that it wasn't Christmas, after all but rather it was January. Nobody else is saying that it wasn't Christmas but instead was January. He in effect is even calling his supporters liars.

You don't see a problem with this?

The man lied. He got caught, and the more he tries to wriggle out of it, the worse it gets.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 05:49 am
Back then Cambodia and Vietnam - were literally interchangeable....you know, like ribbons and medals.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 06:01 am
I think you meant 1968
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 06:18 am
I will be the first to admit that Kerry gets caught in all the silly attempts by the repubs to paint him in a corner. He needs to learn to rise above it and let it slide into oblivion rather than feeding it by trying to correct his misstatements or defending his medals which don't need defending.

And no foxfrye, nice try, but Kerry is not calling those who said Christmas as well he liars. He is merely correcting his misspoken word.

january is around Christmas time; so it is not out of the ordinary to just call it Christmas.

Can you really not see how trivial and stupid this all is? All the mistakes that those swift boat guys are pointing out are little nick pick things that don't mean beans in the context of his account of the cambodia (or near cambodia, excuse me Rolling Eyes ) at Christmas (January, excuse me) story.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 07:06 am
Yes 1968 Joe....typo land. And okay Revel, I accept that you will believe Kerry doesn't know the difference between Christmas and January Smile

I won't accept that the Swift Boat guys are nitpicking however. They were there. All served their full tour of duty. All earned their medals and ribbons along with a right to tell their side of the story. They are such a diverse bunch, I cannot believe they all share identical ideologies or have the same ax to grind. Therefore, at this time given what we know, Kerry's story looks a whole lot less credible than theirs.

And it would be trivial and stupid to make a big deal out of it now if Kerry himself had not chosen to do that. He's the one who wrote his resume to be: I was born. I was a war hero. I am the best man to be president. Now at such time that he wants to move the focus to what he has been doing in the 35 years since Vietnam, that would be okay too. I suspect he knows that's going to look even worse, however.
0 Replies
 
Piffka
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 08:05 am
What a nasty lot of innuendo fueled by hatred you have, madam. When are the Republicans going to start facing issues and quit throwing mud, I wonder? I doubt they will because THAT is all they know how to do... other than invade small countries.

We were better off on September 12, 2001 then we are now and there are A LOT of people who feel the same way as I. Then only 3000 people died and we had the whole world in sympathy with us. We made mistakes... that is why those terrorists got through... but rather than face mistakes (MR.Bush doesn't believe he's ever made any) we've blundered into a position of becoming the most hated of any country. What a travesty.


from the LA Times - Kerry's Crime-Fighting Early Days by James Rainey, Times Staff Writer
July 18, 2004

Quote:

Beginning at the Democratic National Convention this month, the Kerry campaign plans to highlight this part of his resume to help show that he has the toughness to be the nation's chief executive. Republicans, meanwhile, say that will hardly deter them from continuing to depict Kerry as a fuzzy-headed, unreformed liberal.

It was at the Middlesex district attorney's office that Kerry got his first extensive management experience. He nearly tripled the size of the operation, introduced specialized units and won a conviction of the man once suspected to be the state's notorious "Torso Killer."

And it was there that he displayed qualities that would become trademarks of his almost 20-year U.S. Senate career ?- a willingness to work long hours, an enormous appetite for the details of policy and an interest in digging deep into controversial topics.

It did not surprise his fellow lawyers that Kerry went on to lead a series of congressional inquiries ?- into alleged drug-running by Nicaraguan Contra rebels, the fate of prisoners of war and those missing in action in Vietnam, and the corrupt Bank of Credit and Commerce International. More than any legislation, those probes have been the signature of his Senate career.

On its face, the job of an assistant prosecutor might have seemed inglorious ?- too humdrum for a man who had led thousands in Vietnam War protests and been featured on "60 Minutes" as a future American leader. But Kerry said he saw the job as a respite from the hurly-burly of politics.

"I was excited about it. I had already done some trial work while I was in law school and I loved it," he said in a recent interview. "I loved the sense you were delivering justice ?- providing some justice in people's lives."

Kerry found a willing patron in Middlesex County Dist. Atty. John J. Droney.

Droney was an old-line pol in the Bay State tradition, one who first made a name for himself not long after World War II. He was Cambridge coordinator in the first congressional campaign of a fellow fledgling Irish-Catholic politician, John F. Kennedy.

According to Droney family lore, Kennedy later returned the favor. As a U.S. senator in 1959, he leaned on Massachusetts Gov. Foster Furcolo to appoint Droney to the D.A.'s job in Middlesex County.

By the time Kerry took his post as one of Droney's assistants in 1976, the county had grown to 1.3 million residents and included more than 50 communities. The prosecutor's office had not kept pace; it was handling thousands of criminal cases with fewer than three dozen assistant district attorneys, many of them part-timers who practiced law privately on the side.

Droney had another problem after nearly two decades in office. Although he had a reputation for honesty and a tough-minded attitude toward criminals, he was suffering from Lou Gehrig's disease, which left him unable to adequately give voice to his still-agile mind.

An election stood on the horizon in 1977, when Droney made Kerry his first assistant, the operational head of the district attorney's office. Some veteran prosecutors were jealous and angry about the office upstart's elevation.

"A lot of people's faces fell to the floor," one colleague told a newspaper at the time of Kerry's rapid ascent months out of law school. But others saw perfect sense in the frail Droney's decision to make the hard-charging young lawyer with a souffle of thick hair the office's public face.

"Mr. Droney, in his mind, saw someone who had already demonstrated the skills," said John Markey, then a deputy district attorney and now a prominent Boston lawyer. "John Droney was a very, very shrewd individual."

Droney gave his top assistant a relatively free hand. And Kerry made one of his most important changes almost immediately.

Although Droney was wary of the fickle nature of financial support from the U.S. government, Kerry vigorously pursued funding from the federal Law Enforcement Assistance Administration.

Kerry saw the money as fuel for change. He hired a full-time grant writer to go after the funds. Nearly $4 million flowed to the office in a single year, and the money helped expand the staff to more than 100 lawyers.

Two attributes stood out about the new hires. First, Kerry sought out top-notch lawyers, including some who turned away from more lucrative work in private firms or from the greater prestige of the U.S. attorney's office. And for the first time, many were women.

Rikki Klieman, a young lawyer who had worked in a corporate firm and served a clerkship with a federal judge, said Kerry lured her to the district attorney's office by persuading her that she "would be working on the side of the just."

"For a lot of us children of the 1960s, we felt this was a golden moment," said Klieman, a Court TV analyst and wife of Los Angeles Police Chief William J. Bratton. "We wanted to make a difference, and here was this charismatic leader to follow."

Kerry also used the federal funds to expand the office's specialized units ?- hiring professionals who focused on helping victims of domestic violence, pursuing white-collar criminals and bringing violent felons quickly to trial.

Such units, commonplace now, were novel 30 years ago. One made a particular mark by pledging to bring serious cases to trial within 90 days, rather than shoveling them into the maw of other pending criminal cases, said Peter W. Agnes Jr., then a prosecutor with Kerry and now a Worcester Superior Court judge.

Even the upstate Lowell Sun ?- the conservative newspaper that had excoriated Kerry as little more than a carpetbagging hippie during his 1972 run for Congress ?- warmed to him. The newspaper editorialized that Kerry had "turned the District Attorney's office from a traditional, non-aggressive agency into a first-rate, exciting prosecutor's staff that is now among the best in the state."

Kerry's detractors continued to see a man of more style than substance. They thought he spent too much time before television cameras talking about the office's work. And there were lingering digs that Kerry wore the title of prosecutor loosely. He had tried relatively few cases, mostly misdemeanors.

Kerry sought to change that perception. He set aside his executive duties long enough to win a murder conviction. And he took on what former colleague Markey called "the hardest case in the office."

Under indictment was George Edgerly, who had been an infamous figure in Massachusetts since 1959, when his wife's headless body turned up in the Merrimack River. Although Edgerly was charged as the "Torso Killer," luck delivered him a young defense lawyer named F. Lee Bailey. He was acquitted.

Not long after he was freed, Edgerly took a job as service manager for a Chevrolet dealership in Lowell, north of Boston. Soon, it was suspected that he organized a scheme to submit hundreds of thousands of dollars of overblown warranty claims to General Motors.

The automaker sent an investigator to look into the alleged fraud and, in short order, the company sleuth turned up dead. Again, Edgerly fell under suspicion. And he had more trouble: an accusation that he had raped a Lowell woman.

It was at this point that Kerry stepped in, taking the rape case himself. He risked a difficult prosecution against a seemingly Teflon-plated defendant, said several of Kerry's former co-workers. And he had to make his case on behalf of the victim, a prostitute, who might prove unsympathetic to a jury.

"I gave him a lot of credit for that, because if he failed it would have proved what a lot of people said: that he was a political assistant and that he never made his chops as a trial lawyer," said J. William Codhina, a former Kerry colleague who now oversees a 300-member litigation team at a Boston law firm.

Kerry threw himself into the case. He says today that he was persuaded "of what had happened to this woman and that it was wrong." He fought, in particular, to convince the jury that a prostitute could reject unwanted sexual advances. He ended the case, Markey recalled, with a show-stopping final argument.

"This is one of his first felony trials in Superior Court, and he probably gave a better closing than any assistant district attorney in the office could have given, just using his innate skills," Markey said. "I said to myself, 'Wow, he just won this case.' "

The jury convicted Edgerly, and the judge sentenced him to a minimum of 18 years in prison. (Later convictions for the murder of the General Motors investigator, and other crimes, would extend the sentence. Edgerly, 76, remains in prison.)

The reserved Kerry had never been one of the guys in the office, a colleague said. But on the night of the conviction, he dropped by the Barrister, a tavern where Middlesex's prosecutors often went to celebrate their victories.

One by one, the crowd of attorneys drifted to Kerry's end of the bar to offer their congratulations. "I think he became accepted that night," Markey recalled. "He was accepted as a peer ?- someone who had gone into the trenches and won."

Kerry helped engineer a political victory as well. His improvements to the district attorney's office were widely seen as key to Droney's narrow win in 1978 over an aggressive public-interest lawyer, Scott Harshbarger, who later served as Massachusetts' attorney general.

Soon after the election, Kerry found his responsibilities reduced. He has said that Droney was feeling better, and was more able to resume a larger role in the office. Some news reports at the time, however, suggested that Droney had decided Kerry had served his purpose and could become a threat.

Kerry and Assistant Dist. Atty. Roanne Sragow left the office to start their own law firm. They developed a thriving practice. Among their victories was a successful appeal on behalf of a Boston man, who spent 16 years in prison for a murder they showed he did not commit.

Republican strategists say they intend, when they focus on law and order, to talk less about Kerry's record in Middlesex County and more about his record in the Senate and his current positions.

They plan, for example, to charge that after voting for the Patriot Act, the controversial anti-terrorism law passed shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, he no longer supports it.

Kerry has said he wants to fine-tune the Patriot Act, not overturn it.

And he said his hands-on years in the criminal justice system were pertinent.

"I think it shows that I take my responsibilities seriously ?- that I worked hard and that I tried to deliver a product to the citizens of the county," Kerry said. "I took risks … and I was able to be an administrator, to show leadership and to fight for the things I believed in."

In early 1982, his years as a prosecutor provided the springboard for him to reenter politics. As he announced his run for lieutenant governor of Massachusetts that year, his campaign cited first his "leadership in fighting crime in the state." Only after that was his service in Vietnam mentioned.

Kerry had found another important chapter for his biography, one on which he would rely for years to come, even as he set his sights on the White House.

0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 08:38 am
Could you elaborate on how my opinion is innuendo fueled by hatred Piffka? I thought I was expressing an opinion based on the evidence as I see it. I would not see it as necessary to insult you because you hold a different opinion.

At any rate:

Piffka writes
Quote:
Kerry has said he wants to fine-tune the Patriot Act, not overturn it


Well Senator Kerry said:

Quote:
On Senate Floor re the PATRIOT Act. "I am pleased at the compromise we have reached on the antiterrorism legislation, as a whole, which includes the sunset provision on the wiretapping and electronic surveillance component. It has been a source of considerable concern for people, and I think the sunset provision provides Congress a chance to come back and measure the record appropriately, and that is appropriate." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/25/01, p. S11027)

"Passage of this legislation is going to make it a lot more difficult for new terrorist organizations to develop." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/25/01, p. S11027)



But candidate Kerry has said:

Quote:
"So it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft. That starts with replacing the PATRIOT Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time." (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Iowa State University, 12/1/03)

"I will change the PATRIOT Act. And we have the good common sense, may I add, to put in the PATRIOT Act a sunset clause so it dies automatically at the end of this year and we'll change it." (Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel Democratic Presidential Debate, Milwaukee, WI, 2/15/04)

"If you are sensitive to and care about civil liberties, you can make provisions to guarantee that there is not this blind spot in the American justice system that there is today under the PATRIOT Act." (Sen. John Kerry As Quoted On NPR's "Morning Edition," 8/18/03)


Sheesh. No wonder Kerry is trying to run on a war record more than 35 years ago. His record since then is so hard to defend.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 11:35 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Yes 1968 Joe....typo land. And okay Revel, I accept that you will believe Kerry doesn't know the difference between Christmas and January Smile

I won't accept that the Swift Boat guys are nitpicking however. They were there. All served their full tour of duty. All earned their medals and ribbons along with a right to tell their side of the story. They are such a diverse bunch, I cannot believe they all share identical ideologies or have the same ax to grind. Therefore, at this time given what we know, Kerry's story looks a whole lot less credible than theirs.

And it would be trivial and stupid to make a big deal out of it now if Kerry himself had not chosen to do that. He's the one who wrote his resume to be: I was born. I was a war hero. I am the best man to be president. Now at such time that he wants to move the focus to what he has been doing in the 35 years since Vietnam, that would be okay too. I suspect he knows that's going to look even worse, however.


I did not say that I believe that Kerry does not know the difference between Christmas & January.

second, not all of them are saying the same, there are at least two who are on kerry's side. The things that they picked out to bring down kerry was nick picking things like the difference between christmas and january and saying at cambodia instead of near. The other things they said were just things like he didn't deserve his medals and even going so far as to imply that kerry signed his own recommendations for his medals. Those are nick picking petty things that can't be proven and it would take more than people's word on the matter.

The fact is that, like I said before, there were people against the war some of them were veterans of the war and some were just ordinary citizens. Some people were for the war and highly offended by those that protested the war and had things to say about it. The guy who started all this was of the latter group. Republicans are taking advantage of his stance and using it for all its worth. (or not worth)

the end.
0 Replies
 
Piffka
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 11:59 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Yes 1968 Joe....typo land. And okay Revel, I accept that you will believe Kerry doesn't know the difference between Christmas and January Smile

I won't accept that the Swift Boat guys are nitpicking however. They were there. All served their full tour of duty. All earned their medals and ribbons along with a right to tell their side of the story. They are such a diverse bunch, I cannot believe they all share identical ideologies or have the same ax to grind. Therefore, at this time given what we know, Kerry's story looks a whole lot less credible than theirs.

And it would be trivial and stupid to make a big deal out of it now if Kerry himself had not chosen to do that. He's the one who wrote his resume to be: I was born. I was a war hero. I am the best man to be president. Now at such time that he wants to move the focus to what he has been doing in the 35 years since Vietnam, that would be okay too. I suspect he knows that's going to look even worse, however.


How do you "know" anything about the Swift Boat group except that they don't like your guy? How do you know that these fellas earned their medals and ribbons? What hypocrisy... and it is dawning on me, that's why the democrats don't fight you so well. We can't do hypocrisy with nearly the flair.

Quit throwing stones and start saying where Mr. Bush is doing well. Tell us how his tax cuts have helped the economy, if you can. Tell us how his clever handling of the war has been well-thought out, if you can. Tell us how his appointments have made any sense except as political plums.

Your highly funded group of right-wing nuts has come up with a book, websites and innuendos to debase clearly authorized and fully recorded military honors. Why? They are hoping for a few fools to believe them. They know they'll get huge amounts of coverage in the right-wing fueled websites, radio and TV. I say, find something else if you want to support your party honorably. What you are doing dishonors every person who has ever served. It calls EVERY SINGLE RIBBON AND MEDAL INTO QUESTION.

I posted a whole series of paragraphs about Kerry's prosecutor days. He has only begun to show what he's made of.

And I think it is BS to post that Kerry changes his mind while at the same time everyone knows he is the most liberal voter in the whole damned Congress. Get it straight. It can't be one or the other. The Senate is full of compromise. Anybody who can't change their position won't get anywhere.

Kerry has been hated by the Republicans since Nixon. Why should it be any different now? He is a strong, passionate, and, I'd say, patient man who has served this country since college in one field of public service or another with success and honors. Who else can say the same? The only reason to snipe at Kerry is because you don't have anything else to say. Face it.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 12:46 pm
Piffka
Piffka

APPLAUSE!

BBB Very Happy
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 12:56 pm
BOO HISS!!


"Your highly funded group of right-wing nuts"


This type of personal invective against Foxfyre doesn't become you Piffka
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 01:07 pm
Panzade
Panzade, I suspect Piffka learned the phrase from several A2K posters who have slammed those with an opposing viewpoint as left wing nuts. However, since you singled out one comment, would you prefer that Piffka had written instead "right wing fanatics"?

BTW, Panzade, I hope you and your family survived the terrible storms without injury or property damage. My son and daughter-in-law are about to move to Florida. I think they must be storm wing fanatics. :wink: My son said this was the storm of the century so they would be safe for another hundred years.

BBB
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 01:15 pm
LOL, ty BBB I've learned that traffic is more dangerous than hurricanes
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Aug, 2004 01:15 pm
What doesn't become the quality of this political season is the "dishonest and dishonorable" smear attempts by and for the Bush campaign. Piffka is right to demand a more positive approach from them and from those who support them. This ad campaign, which has never gotten the slightest disavowal from Bush headquarters, represents the worst kind of unethical conduct imaginable. They dishonor themselves and all who served in the VietNam War.

Joe
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/05/2026 at 04:59:21