How about John Kerry

Parent Cafe
161

<p>

You’ve captured his essence, Idmom. Even lifelong Dems despise the man! And you are correct that posting a 1972 remark simply shows a long, well-established pattern of anti-military sentiment. There have been many, many more since. If his stupidity is perceived as contributing to any Republican victories, perhaps the Dems will just convince him to go away. I don’t know if his colossal ego will allow that, though.</p>

162

<p>More on Stark: <a href=“http://fredericksburg.com/News/Web/2006/102006/1031allen/index2_html?qstart=1[/url]”>http://fredericksburg.com/News/Web/2006/102006/1031allen/index2_html?qstart=1&lt;/a&gt; </p>

<p>Seems he got violent long before the point originally thought. He should have been arrested.</p>

163

<p>The Dems should have hired that guy to “subdue” Kerry until the election is over! :p</p>

164

<p>That’s it! I’m not voting for KERRY! </p>

<p>What’s that? he not running for anything? Well, I’m still not voting for him! </p>

<p>As far as party lines, have any of you hard core Gopers seen some of the gopers relection ads? In my state the entire goper emphasis is how they opposed Bush and are independent of the party line. </p>

<p>The goper who is running for senate in the last couple of days has pulled out the Bush needs to hear us commerical, that bush is wrong on Iraq and the demo senator actually supports the war and GW! So at least in our state the gopers are trying like mad to distance themselves from Gw. So I would venture to guess the gop is not anymore as tight as the dems. When the ship is sinking it’s every rat for themselves.</p>

165

<p>Well, Kerry plans to run again for president. That’s what he was doing this week. If you’re a registered Dem, it’s good to have a reason to vote in the primary, even if it’s a vote against someone, rather than for someone you are enthused about. Kerry’s opponents are no doubt thrilled with his stupidity. They’ll be happy to hear of your decision.</p>

166

<p>He has been subdued and is quietly moving out of the spotlight. </p>

<p>I wouldn’t doubt it if Kerry and Bush have some elitist attitudes based upon when, where and how they grew up coupled with the wealth each has. But I find it hard to believe that a speechwriter for a senator so much in the public eye, like Kerry is, would have been so stupid as to write what Kerry had said and that no one would have caught such an obvious mistake. Especially in view of 2004 criticism of Kerry as elitist and anti-military. I thought the video showed that Kerry was stumbling over his words a bit shortly before the fateful phrase. To me, it makes it more credible that he misspoke.</p>

167

<p>odyssey, I really try not to assume being born into wealth makes one elitist. I’ve know enough wealthy people who were humble and down-to-earth to know that wealth and elitism are not always linked. I think we should judge each man on his actions.</p>

168

<p>What’s a goper? (jk!) I don’t consider myself hardcore anything. I don’t think Bush is perfect and recognize he has made mistakes. Anyone can see this from my previous posts. If you want to see hardcore…look at the folks on this board who refuse to address mistakes made by liberals…their only response to any criticism made remotely toward the left is to pull a Bush bash. It makes one wonder if ‘crawfishin’ isn’t an innately liberal trait.</p>

<p>btw, I agree with StickerShock. This has to have made Hillary’s day. And the Kerry story is running incessantly on Fox not to benefit Bush or the White House, but to benefit Rupert Murdoch’s new favorite lady, Hillary Clinton. (Both are Bilderbergers ya know, as were the Bushes. Thousand points of light anyone?)</p>

169

<p>Oops. I had better apologize as my words were taken in a way I didn’t intend. You are right, stickershock, that individuals raised in wealth and and/or having wealth does not automatically make a person elitist and generalizations of this sort aren’t valid. Having seen Kerry repeatedly accused of being elitist, I simply meant that knowing his particular background and the particular background of Bush (amply discussed during the 2004 election), I wouldn’t be surprised if either was elitist. </p>

<p>Now back to more relevant discussion.</p>

170

<p>He said something dumb, he apologized as he should. End of story.</p>

171

<p>Kerry has always despised our armed forces and his 1971 Congressional testimony, based on concocted “stories” and “accounts” of in some cases fake Vietnam veterans and in other cases authentic veterans who said very different things - is more of the same</p>

<p>"I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command…</p>

<p>They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country."
<a href=“http://www.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/JohnKerryTestimony.html[/url]”>http://www.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/JohnKerryTestimony.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

172

<p>At least the soldiers know what an idiot Kerry is (and they have a sense of humor)!</p>

<p><a href=“http://i18.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■/albums/b141/KelXOXO/20061101TroopsMessage-lg.jpg[/url]”>http://i18.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■/albums/b141/KelXOXO/20061101TroopsMessage-lg.jpg&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

173

<p>

</p>

<p>Wait…so criticism is necessarily hating them? </p>

<p>Who says that we can’t criticize them anyway? It seems terribly undemocratic to me to put any group, even soldiers, on a pedestal so lofty.</p>

174

<p>and Bush, yeah, who cut funding but ignore that and go after a statement, guess words mean more to some people than actions</p>

175

<p>Well, as far as I’m concerned, Kerry’s basically digging his own political grave. He can enjoy it, for all I care, as I never found him terribly engaging as a national politician.</p>

<p>But, the argument that somehow soldiers should be above or outside of debate or even criticism is a bit…well…irritating. I can’t help but wonder if this is partly why early American political thinkers were so afraid of standing militaries: they become something greater than the society itself.</p>

<p>Oh well, just a rant-tangent.</p>

<p>Back to Kerry. Dumb comment. The end. Nothing to see here people.</p>

176

<p>Citation? </p>

<p>So none of those things happened? ever? OK. </p>

<p>We have seven soldiers being tried right now from iraq for going out kidnapping a young girl, raping her, setting her on fire and executing her family. I know it never happened except three of the seven have already confessed. </p>

<p>I have a brother who did tours in nam, he still can’t talk about some of the stuff that happened. </p>

<p>Unless you were there, you’ve got nothing to say.</p>

177

<p>To add,</p>

<p>what Kerry said the other day was dumb. Don’t add to it.</p>

178

<p>I agree with you, ari. The military is not as pure as the driven snow; of course there are some bad apples, many of whom may be attracted to it for all the wrong reasons. I even wince at some of the over-the-top pontificating about Kerry’s “botched joke” myself. But let’s not pretend that the left doesn’t use those bad apples to push for their own agenda. I think our military is fundamentally honorable, which places my distain at the feet of those exploiting the cases of the bad apples, not our military.</p>

179

<p>I think that most of us agree that the military is an honorable profession, and that the great majority of our soldiers are honorable and praiseworthy individuals. But seeing venal political hacks wrap themselves up in sanctimonious and patently phony dudgeon over a perceived sleight to our servicemen and women is more than a little distasteful, and begs the question: who is showing the most contempt for our soldiers in Iraq, the politician who flubs his punchline, or the self-serving politicians and pundits who try to capitalize on that by claiming to “defend” the soldiers, but who actually are only seeking to advance their own political and ideological agendas? </p>

<p>Who is doing the exploiting here?</p>

180

<p>hereshoping,</p>

<p>Oh, I agree. But I also think that the GOP is just as irritating for using the military as a positive electoral tool. Then again, I’m suspicious of military in general, despite my long-term career goals inevitably intersecting with it.</p>

<p>I just think that both parties use the military to irritatingly large degrees.</p>

<p>Democrats: OMG MILITARY KILLS PEOPLE RAWR
Republicans: OMG MILITARY IS PURE LIKE VIRGIN MARY RAWR.</p>

<p>Bleh. This is why I tend to find American politics so very annoying.</p>