Reply
Thu 12 Aug, 2004 04:14 am
Let me start by saying I was NOT in Vietnam,and I am willing to bet that most of the
people on here werent either.
I do however have to ask some questions about what these swift boat vets are saying in
their ad
First off,lets clear something up.If you watch the ad,not one of them is saying they were
on Kerry's boat,they are saying they served with him.That means they were in the same unit
as him,they saw how he operated,they went on patrols with him,they were around him.
To me,that does make them qualified to comment on him.
My question is,why is the Kerry camp threatening lawsuits? Dont these people have the
right to speak?
I realize there is no right to be heard,but it seems to me that the Kerry people are
trying to deny them the right to speak.
If what they are saying is a lie,then that will be proven in time.
John Kerry could prove them to be liars very easily,just release his records.
The press and the left raised hell when Bush refused to release his service records,but it
seems to me that they find it acceptable that Kerry wont release his.Why the double
standard?
The left has claimed that the Dr that claims to have treated Kerry's first wound didnt
treat him,because he didnt sign the paperwork.
I can tell you from first hand experience (25 years worth) that is nothing unusual.Usually
a soldier wounded in the field gets his first treatment by a medic,then if needed he goes
to see a Dr.
The Dr will then examine the wound,and determine if its serious enough for him to follow
up.If it isnt,another medic will,under a Drs. instruction,treat and dress the wound.
It is then the medic that signs the forms,AFTER the DR reads and ok's them.
I guess my main question is why wont Kerry release his medical and service records?
If he did that,then this whole thing could be cleared up.By releasing his records,that
would prove or disprove everything that has been said by and about him,concerning these
four months.
I am NOT saying he didnt serve,and I respect and appreciate the fact that he did volunteer
to go into that mess.But,he has made it the cornerstone of his campaign,and it is
therefore right to question him about it.
IMHO,he made a tactical error by focusing on his Vietnam record,instead of his Senate
record.
But I will ask again,why doesnt he release his records and silence his critics,and why
hasnt the left and the press called him on it?
Remember,they hammered Bush for not releasing his records.
MM? You don't really expect Kerry's people to dignify your queries with replies do you? Those were really rhetorical right?...the answers being implicit. You are just being Aristotilean (SP?) or Episcopalean or some such cuteness right? Next, what compels you to pose such elemental questions? Kerry's lying by ommission...right? He is attempting some kind of silly deception to cover his over 20 years of voting against anything military...even the color khaki...right? ( a little humor: "the color khaki"...tee hee!) What employer would hire some dork who refused to include the last 20 years of relevant experience on his employment application? Don't answer that! I was being Aristotle-like. (Like my toga?) Anyway MM. Your Mom's calling. Next time you think up questions? Go outside and play...in the traffic.
MM? You don't really expect Kerry's people to dignify your queries with replies do you? Those were really rhetorical right?...the answers being implicit. You are just being Aristotilean (SP?) or Episcopalean or some such cuteness right? Next, what compels you to pose such elemental questions? Kerry's lying by ommission...right? He is attempting some kind of silly deception to cover his over 20 years of voting against anything military...even the color khaki...right? ( a little humor: "the color khaki"...tee hee!) What employer would hire some dork who refused to include the last 20 years of relevant experience on his employment application? Don't answer that! I was being Aristotle-like. (Like my toga?) Anyway MM. Your Mom's calling. Next time you think up questions? Go outside and play...in the traffic.
Of course they have a right to speak. However, they do NOT have a right to lie. That's slander / libel and against the law.
I'm just ABB, not pro-Kerry. I don't care about his Purple Hearts nor his service in Viet Nam - as long as Bush will be removed from the White House. And because Nader does not see to be a real threat, I support all people who want to vote Kerry.
I am pro-Kerry. But frankly, while I can see how they are courting older voters with the comparison between his service record and Bush's, it's only a small issue to me.
There are a gigantic number of present-day issues that Bush loses to Kerry on IMHO....
Cycloptichorn
I think America has a serious 'Nam'-trauma.
Re: A question for the Kerry supporters
mysteryman wrote:My question is,why is the Kerry camp threatening lawsuits? Dont these people have the
right to speak?
I realize there is no right to be heard,but it seems to me that the Kerry people are
trying to deny them the right to speak.
The "Kerry camp" has not filed any lawsuits, nor have any lawsuits been filed charging that the ads have libeled Kerry. Rather,
three "campaign finance watchdog groups" filed suit, claiming that the ad violated federal election finance law.
If you have a problem with that, take it up with them,
mysteryman, not Kerry.
Joe- You are right. I was simply addressing the issue I have with the ad / group, which is that they are not being truthful.
Re: A question for the Kerry supporters
mysteryman wrote: First off,lets clear something up.If you watch the ad,not one of them is saying they were on Kerry's boat,they are saying they served with him.That means they were in the same unit as him,they saw how he operated,they went on patrols with him,they were around him. To me,that does make them qualified to comment on him.
This is assuming two things: 1) They are telling the truth, and 2) they served on the same boat that he did,
at the same time that he did. Neither of us is in a position to judge them on 1). In the ad, are they saying anything about 2) ? Are they actually saying they served "with him", as opposed to just "on the same boat"?
mysteryman wrote:My question is,why is the Kerry camp threatening lawsuits? Dont these people have the right to speak?
They do have the right to speak, but not the right to slander. If the Kerry campaign is threatening lawsuits, they're probably doing it to tell voters that the ad is dishonest, dishonest enough that Kerry would win a slander case against the people who made the ad. (Not sure if slander will be the charge they choose, but I'm guessing so.)
mysteryman wrote:t they are saying is a lie,then that will be proven in time. John Kerry could prove them to be liars very easily,just release his records. The press and the left raised hell when Bush refused to release his service records,but it seems to me that they find it acceptable that Kerry wont release his.Why the double standard?
Do you care at all whether the accusations you make here are true? I'm asking because John Kerry's records concerning his awards are just a Google search away. For example, the first hit for "Kerry military records" yielded
this collection of documents, published on John Kerry's own campaign website. I gather you didn't bother to perform this easy fact-check and make yourself look like an idiot instead.
(Edit: I should have read the thread before responding to its initial post. Squinney has already said it shorter and better than I did!
)
Squinney,
if you look at the list of his records available,you will notice his medical record is not among them.Why not?
Releasing them would clear up a lot of charges being made against him.
Joe,
Lawyers for the DNC and the Kerry campaign have sent letters to TV stations threatening them with lawsuits if they run those ads.Why are they doing that?
Squinney,
You claim those ads are not truthful.How do you know?
Were you there? Did you witness his actions during Vietnam?
Did you see all the actions that he talks/brags about?
For you to state unequivocably that the ads are false is wrong.Just like I wasn't there to see what happened,neither were you.
Hold yourself to the same standard you expect everyone else to measure up to.
Thomas,
NOT ONE OF THE PEOPLE IN THE AD CLAIMS TO HAVE SERVED ON HIS BOAT!!!
They claim to have been in his unit,during the time he was there.
Therefore,they would be more qualified to comment,because they saw him in action.Neither you or I can say what happened,because we WERE NOT THERE.
Therefore,I do have to take the word of people that were there.
Squinney,
you said..."Of course they have a right to speak. However, they do NOT have a right to lie. That's slander / libel and against the law."
Will you hold those attacking the swift boat vets to the same standard?
They have been attacked and lied about since their ad first ran.I don't see you defending them.They believe they are telling the truth,just like those that support Kerry believe he is telling the truth.
I love this. Conservatives once again trying to smear Kerry's war record.
This has been debated again and again. Every time Bush winds up looking worse as a result. Have fun in this thread, boys.
By the way, it all comes down to this:
Kerry killed roughly 20 VC.
Kerry saved a mans life.
Kerry was wounded (not enough for some, but we'll even let them have that one)
Bush? Well...he got a nice little hook up that made sure he would never be shot at or see action, then he took off early to help out with a campaign. What a man!
Oh, and lest we forget, remeber who was the person who checked the box to go over, and who was the one to check the box stating he didn't want to go to Vietnam...
mysteryman wrote:Joe,
Lawyers for the DNC and the Kerry campaign have sent letters to TV stations threatening them with lawsuits if they run those ads.Why are they doing that?
As can be seen from your initial post,
mysteryman, you tend to make assertions of fact without any supporting evidence. You'll excuse me, then, if I insist that you provide some sort of substantiation before I respond to this question.
I tuned in tho Hardball to see the interview with the co author of the swift boat vets book that claims Sen. John Kerry distorted his record of his service and medals from the Vietnam war. I wanted to see if this guy was some sort of "right-winger" or nutcase. I did find a politically motivated, biased and very rude person. It was so obvious that this person had an agenda and it was to make this make anyone who tried to disprove HIS biased view look bad. Thank goodness it back-fired on him. Even though this guy wouldn't let the person he just asked a question answer it unless he interrupted him. Now the bigggest problem. I am talking about the host of the show, Chris Matthews. What a rude and partison man. I believe this host must be working for Michael Moore, John Kerry or the DNC. The "guest" or really the victim came across very believable, kind, and maintained his composure even under such biased treatment. I have heard the term "liberal media" and this show proved it to me. Is Chris Matthews an outspoken "Bush-hater" because if not he sure acted like it. He made his biased opinion and agenda very obvious. I will never watch this station again for my news. Propoganda stuff!
Joe,
see here...
http://humaneventsonline.com.edgesuite.net/unfit_pdf.html
"HUMAN EVENTS has obtained a copy of a letter (see below) which lawyers for the Democratic National Committee and John Kerry have sent to television station managers attempting to suppress the blistering anti-Kerry TV spot created by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (click here to view the ad) and first reported here on HumanEventsOnline.com.@
The charges against Kerry's military service are politically motivated, not attempts to be truthful. Plus, even if by some magical turn of events they turned out to be blatantly accurate, I still would vote for a man who did what he did over a man who hid from duty as did Bush.
edgarblythe wrote:The charges against Kerry's military service are politically motivated, not attempts to be truthful. Plus, even if by some magical turn of events they turned out to be blatantly accurate, I still would vote for a man who did what he did over a man who hid from duty as did Bush.
Edgar,
So you are saying you would vote for a man that has admitted to committing war crimes,lied about going to Cambodia,Lied about getting wounded.lied to get his silver star,ran away from his duty by using a very obscure Navy reg that every other Vietnam vet ignored,and then came home and lied to the US Senate?
If all the charges being leveled by the swift boats true,and I admit that is a big if,then what does that say about your character?
Since neither you nor I was there,we cant say.But,I find it interesting and confusing that Kerry isnt responding.
When Bush didnt respond,the left claimed he was hiding something.Now,the left is creating a deafening silence about Kerry not responding.
Why wont the left hold Kerry to the same standard?
Bush's lies have done infinitely more damage than the supposed lies of Kerry could ever do.
to alter just a bit the republican mantra of "Bush is a known quality and Kerry is not" we can go a bit further and say "yes, we know Bush and would rather go with Kerry"
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace