Kerry Signs Form 180

[conjur]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2005/05/24/kerry_signs_form_180.html

The Boston Globe reports Sen. John Kerry has signed Form SF 180, allowing the release of his military records. The problem is -- in all too familiar Kerry fashion -- he hasn't actually sent it to the Navy yet. A spokesman said the form will be sent "in the next few days."

For those just tuning in, Kerry first said he would sign Form 180 when pressed by Tim Russert during a Jan. 30 appearance on Meet the Press. Trey Jackson has the video.

Well, this should prove interesting. It will either confirm whatever suspicions the Kerry-bashers have been conspiring to know for a long time or it will completely dismiss their theories.

 

[outriding]

Put up a poll..

Two questions..

a) was he lying
b) was he truthful

 

[Steeplerot]

Well, if he does have plans to try again he would kinda shoot himself in the foot if he was lying.
But then maybe he is planning to be a rep this time.

 

[Pliablemoose]

LOL 5 months after the promise & he still hasn't done it. It should have been done & over prior to the election.

In true Kerry fashion, he's signed it but hasn't given it to the Navy yet...

What a jackass...

 

[Genx87]

He will probably hope it goes away.

I mean, does anybody really care now??? This should have been done 12 months ago.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Genx87
He will probably hope it goes away.

I mean, does anybody really care now???

Not in the slightest, never like that guy anyway Seriously, at this point who cares Kerry?

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: outriding
Put up a poll..

Two questions..

a) was he lying
b) was he truthful

Agreed.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Well, this should prove interesting. It will either confirm whatever suspicions the Kerry-bashers have been conspiring to know for a long time or it will completely dismiss their theories.

Had Kerry released these records during the election, he could have essentially silenced the Kerry-basher special interests that did a hatchet job on his campaign.

Kerry devoted so many resources to fighting the smear campaign against his service record that it convoluted or otherwise distracted swing voters from his agenda.

Even if his record does confirm some of the Kerry-basher suspicions, I think the American public would have embraced his honesty about the whole issue...especially considering the smoke and mirrors surrounding Bush's National Guard service record.

Too little too late...had Kerry released these records last summer, he probably would be sitting in the White House right now.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

I doubt releasing the records would have silenced the Kerry bashers. More than likely those records would have verified what the records he did release provided clues to - that Kerry was intially discharged under less than honerable conditions, or possibly even dishonorably discharged. Considering that Kerry was using his military service as a campaign crutch, such a revelation would have been instant death to his Presidential bid.

Let's face it. If Kerry had nothing to hide in regards to his records, he wouldn't have hidden a portion of them. The lack of disclosure cost him as it was.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: outriding
Put up a poll..

Two questions..

a) was he lying
b) was he truthful

Agreed.

Don't forget the 3rd option:

c) Who gives a fvck - Kerry is irrelevant, and has been since Nov 3rd, 2004.

 

[judasmachine]

Oh no, let's hope it's not all blacked out like Bush's was....

It's funny to hear people say he's irrelevent, like they are scared that his record isn't going to be near as bad as their boy bush.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I doubt releasing the records would have silenced the Kerry bashers. More than likely those records would have verified what the records he did release provided clues to - that Kerry was intially discharged under less than honerable conditions, or possibly even dishonorably discharged. Considering that Kerry was using his military service as a campaign crutch, such a revelation would have been instant death to his Presidential bid.

Let's face it. If Kerry had nothing to hide in regards to his records, he wouldn't have hidden a portion of them. The lack of disclosure cost him as it was.

What is your basis for saying the part I bolded ?

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: judasmachine
Oh no, let's hope it's not all blacked out like Bush's was....

It's funny to hear people say he's irrelevent, like they are scared that his record isn't going to be near as bad as their boy bush.

Yeah, *that's* why John Kerry is irrelevant today. :roll:

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: judasmachine
Oh no, let's hope it's not all blacked out like Bush's was....

It's funny to hear people say he's irrelevent, like they are scared that his record isn't going to be near as bad as their boy bush.

Yeah, *that's* why John Kerry is irrelevant today. :roll:

I actually agree that he's irrelevent, it's just funny that this whole situation is being dismissed. I guess I'm just curious to see the docs. It won't make me mad at conservatives it'll make me mad at liberals for not electing the better man.

 

[nick1985]

he should have done this sooner. if he was truthful, this could have won him the election.

 

[bamacre]

Who is John Kerry?

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: bamacre
Who is John Kerry?

Text

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I doubt releasing the records would have silenced the Kerry bashers. More than likely those records would have verified what the records he did release provided clues to - that Kerry was intially discharged under less than honerable conditions, or possibly even dishonorably discharged. Considering that Kerry was using his military service as a campaign crutch, such a revelation would have been instant death to his Presidential bid.

Let's face it. If Kerry had nothing to hide in regards to his records, he wouldn't have hidden a portion of them. The lack of disclosure cost him as it was.

What is your basis for saying the part I bolded ?

The records Kerry did disclose included a cover letter from W. Graham Claytor, Jimmy Carter's Secretary of the Navy, that notes that Kerry's original discharge was subject to a review by a board of officers. Why would a review be necessary for an honorable discharge? It goes on to say the review was conducted under "Title 10, US Code Section 1162 and 1163" which deals with involuntary seperation of service.

Then there's the fact that Kerry had all his medals reinstated in 1985. He claims he lost all his certificates (uh huh) but a dishonorable discharge means a revocation of all pay and benefits, as well as medals.

I don't think its a stretch to put two and two together in this case. Once Kerry decided he had married into enough money and could finance a bid for higher office than Senator, he decided he'd be more favorably accepted as a war hero instead of a protestor, so he got his ducks back in a row to attempt just that. Unfortuntely, no matter what he did there were still some ducks missing and he just couldn't hide that fact.

 

[MidasKnight]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
LOL 5 months after the promise & he still hasn't done it. It should have been done & over prior to the election.

In true Kerry fashion, he's signed it but hasn't given it to the Navy yet...

What a jackass...

:laugh::thumbsup:

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: bamacre
Who is John Kerry?

Text

:laugh:

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: judasmachine

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: judasmachine
Oh no, let's hope it's not all blacked out like Bush's was....

It's funny to hear people say he's irrelevent, like they are scared that his record isn't going to be near as bad as their boy bush.

Yeah, *that's* why John Kerry is irrelevant today. :roll:

I actually agree that he's irrelevent, it's just funny that this whole situation is being dismissed. I guess I'm just curious to see the docs. It won't make me mad at conservatives it'll make me mad at liberals for not electing the better man.

I'm just commenting on the implied double standard that if liberals say he's irrelevant, then he is, but if someone who didn't vote for him says he's irrelevant, it's because they are afraid of potentially being wrong about him.

Not that it matters, but if you look through the the archives, I doubt you'll find a post where I ever belittled Kerry's service. Many of us didn't care too much then, and care even less now, all politics aside. Whether he was the the most heroic soldier the US ever had, or a coward, it still stands that many did not believe he was the right man for the job of US President.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: judasmachine

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: judasmachine
Oh no, let's hope it's not all blacked out like Bush's was....

It's funny to hear people say he's irrelevent, like they are scared that his record isn't going to be near as bad as their boy bush.

Yeah, *that's* why John Kerry is irrelevant today. :roll:

I actually agree that he's irrelevent, it's just funny that this whole situation is being dismissed. I guess I'm just curious to see the docs. It won't make me mad at conservatives it'll make me mad at liberals for not electing the better man.

I'm just commenting on the implied double standard that if liberals say he's irrelevant, then he is, but if someone who didn't vote for him says he's irrelevant, it's because they are afraid of potentially being wrong about him.

Not that it matters, but if you look through the the archives, I doubt you'll find a post where I ever belittled Kerry's service. Many of us didn't care too much then, and care even less now, all politics aside. Whether he was the the most heroic soldier the US ever had, or a coward, it still stands that many did not believe he was the right man for the job of Lesser Of the Two Evils 2004.

Fixed.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

I'm just commenting on the implied double standard that if liberals say he's irrelevant, then he is, but if someone who didn't vote for him says he's irrelevant, it's because they are afraid of potentially being wrong about him.

Not that it matters, but if you look through the the archives, I doubt you'll find a post where I ever belittled Kerry's service. Many of us didn't care too much then, and care even less now, all politics aside. Whether he was the the most heroic soldier the US ever had, or a coward, it still stands that many did not believe he was the right man for the job of Lesser Of the Two Evils 2004.

Fixed.

:thumbsup:

 

[glenn1]

The records Kerry did disclose included a cover letter from W. Graham Claytor, Jimmy Carter's Secretary of the Navy, that notes that Kerry's original discharge was subject to a review by a board of officers. Why would a review be necessary for an honorable discharge? It goes on to say the review was conducted under "Title 10, US Code Section 1162 and 1163" which deals with involuntary seperation of service.

Then there's the fact that Kerry had all his medals reinstated in 1985. He claims he lost all his certificates (uh huh) but a dishonorable discharge means a revocation of all pay and benefits, as well as medals.

I don't think its a stretch to put two and two together in this case. Once Kerry decided he had married into enough money and could finance a bid for higher office than Senator, he decided he'd be more favorably accepted as a war hero instead of a protestor, so he got his ducks back in a row to attempt just that. Unfortuntely, no matter what he did there were still some ducks missing and he just couldn't hide that fact.

While I don't reject out of hand that this is a possibility, speaking as a vet myself I know it's far easier for enlisted men to be discharged under honorable conditions than officers. Unless Kerry was dismissed (the officer equivalent to a dishonorable discharge for an enlisted man) or was seperated for a truly vile circumstance that didn't quite qualify for a dismissal (which I can't see having remainded hidden through an entire presidential election), there's not a whole lot else which I can think of that to me would have rendered him unfit for the Presidency.

Just to put it in perspective, ending military service is like ending a marriage. There's not many people out there who go through the entire course of a divorce without having done something which they'd not be particularly proud of. Yet just because someone has a rough divorce it doesn't mean they're an evil person.