Originally posted by: Sketcher
Originally posted by: tss4
You respect it when it suits your needs. Like I said, military service alone cetainly isn't reason to vote for kerry, but its definately a point to him versus a man that skipped out on national guard duty. But your too busy bashing kerry to even address bush's military service.
Respect military service only it when it suits my needs? You can tell all of that with one post eh? I respect military service irrespective of party affiliation. I do not respect the claims of someone who campaigns on being a hero when their own service record and more eye witness accounts than not tell otherwise. My patriotism runs deeper than party advocacy and I take particular interest in Kerry's claims and actions
after his stint in Vietnam. A period of time is interesting, ones actions over time are telling.
Compare Kerry's Vietnam service to Bush's National Guard duty? First, not to cast aspersion on the National Guard but who in their right (or left) mind would compare the two in the first place!? As far as records go, Bush released all restrictions on his National Guard records. Kerry claims to release his records then does so selectively; accusing anyone dissatisfied as being slanderous while stepping behind the legality of a right to privacy. Bashing Kerry and ignoring Bush's military service? Hardly, you're painting me with the same broad stroke that is being leveled at anyone who even hints at questioning Kerry's campaign. Kerry is campaigning on the merit of his Vietnam service which is suspect at best in consideration of his own varying statements, speeches and writings. Bush is campaigning on what he's actually done and is capable of doing; his time and accomplishments in political office is verified, corroborative and are matters of historical record (regardless of whether or not you like his policy). Kerry touts his Hero story and then his own party backs away from it when he begins to go into questionable detail causing his own accounts to conflict with documented personal, military and congressional record. Historicity is not only important but critical when it comes to your campaign base.
Why so much interest in Kerry's four months in Vietnam? All war record investigation aside, perhaps it's because he's campaigning on it. Four months of duty no matter how potentially heroic lend little credibility to running a nation whereas his nineteen years in public office is not only left out of the campaign story but glossed over when it's brought up. Nineteen years in political office and what you campaign on is a far removed four months in the Navy? At this point, I don't care whether Kerry is wood or gold when it comes to the validity of his Nam service. What I question is what he did after Vietnam. His effectiveness as a politician of nineteen years having been inspired by the passion of his service and conviction thereof is what should be the hallmark of Kerry's campaign.
So, I'm Kerry Bashing? I'm asking reasonable questions to significant issues and I think I'm doing it fairly without imbuing undue sarcasm though I'll admit a slight penchant for a hit along the fringes. You offer up the typical knee jerk reaction in accusing me of bashing, not answering the questions and then posing accusations to defer the point. If a Kerry supporter in this forum makes a campaign inquiry or accusation it's somehow an honorable and well intentioned effort. If a non-Kerry supporter poses the same campagin inquiry toward the Kerry camp they're immediately flamed for being a basher, neo-con, right-wing extremists etc. and then expected to make good on delineating broad characterizations not wholey relevant to the point of the thread. I'm not saying others aren't contributing more than a bash to fuel the flames. I speak for myself and ask questions that seem to be basic enough in nature that they can be answered in a civil and non-party frenzied manner. It's either been done or it hasn't. And time does tell. Further, I don't believe I have it all neatly packaged in an airtight disclaimer that I'm completely right and have the argument cornered. I just ask you to validate the issues which are being discussed and shore up your rhetoric with substance.
If you campaign on something, you're responsible to answer the scrutiny that is leveled at your base. If you publicly state something, you are responsible for explaining the inconsistency or variation from official record that your statement may bring to light. If you publish something, you are responsible to answer the questions and claims by those people who also share the experience of which you claim to have seared into memory, eloquently written about and now proclaim while patriotically waving the very flag that you at one time had spit on in contempt.
My fellow veterans (at least those in my local VFW's) brush off the banter and concern ourselves with the issues that we believe are consistently worth supporting. The Veterans in my local are a mix of Democratic, Republican and Independent voters. We have civil discussion on both Bush and Kerry and my Left leaning veteran friends are dissapointed that they are left to vote on a general party affiliation rather than an inspiring campaign platform or candidate whom they can trust. They have mixed opinions about Kerry's service but across the board they all agree that his nineteen years in politics should be what he campaigns on, because that's the person we're getting if he wins election. A supposedly heroic stint in the Navy would be a nice bullet point on the resume if it were true, but the effectiveness of Kerry as president is more appropriately gauged by his significantly long and presumedly passionate service as a politician.
BTW, we're Veterans of Foriegn Wars and of my friends many are Vietnam Veterans. They don't talk about themselves or regale us with heroic stories of their experience as John Kerry does. They are comfortable in not wearing their war experience on their sleeves (some of which are certainly more heroic and noteworthy than John Kerry's). When they do talk about their service they're humble and respectful in a manner that is in bold contrast to Kerry's grandstanding. In light of the fact that these guys also remember first hand Kerry's activist performance after Vietnam and don't see that side of Kerry in the media simply furthers the asking of questions.
If that's bashing and avoiding the issues then please step up and show us what it's like to hit a home run because as far as I can see, not only are there no runners on base for team Kerry but the pitcher doesn't seem capable of putting one over the plate. (baseball reference in no way intended to reflect actual political ballpark events).
.
Facebook
Twitter