Suffering John Kerry

What will I do if John Kerry becomes President. Let alone Commander in Chief. I will have to drive on. I raised my right hand to protect and defend the Constitution. Since this a government for the people by the people I will support the decision the people have made and contiune my duties as a soldier. I will not make disparaging remarks about my Commander or ostracize him. La Shawn if the nightmare of President Elect Kerry becamee reality. I will need you to be my voice. At least until I retire from the Military (6 more years)

Demond

Okay. Will try again. One of my favorite posts ever, you sweet gal: The man of “the naive and unmotivated”

I took it personally, of course. I wish I were dead!

Pray for him as the leader, while hating his misguided leadership.

Pressure the conservatives left in the legislature to restrain him, to the point of using minority tactics developed by the dems to bog down any judgeship appointments and radical legislation.

Who knows, perhaps Pres Kerry will be the first in history to be impeached or recalled, not for criminal behavior but incompetence, A la Gray Davis.

I’m with Beau and Demond. I will take measures to protect myself, but I will also continue with my life. However, first I might have to ask for a recount. At this point, I really think Kerry will lose, and I feel like Rush is right about this. Kerry is unlikable and people are not jazzed about him. It is my personal opinion that Bush won by a very large margin in 2000, but that the Democrats are so adept at cheating in ‘key’ states that it seemed closer. That very well could be the reason that they are so vehemently opposing the electronic ballot box. They can’t screw around with it. La Shawn, good thoughtful post as always.

No spell check, but there is a handy button to check spellings you’re not sure of. Obviously, it doesn’t pick up misprints.

My feeling is that if Kerry wins it will not be the end of the Republic. I remember fearing President Carter’s election. It was with some amazement that I began to realize these screwy lefty types are actually pretty ineffctive. I agree that Congress would be the major player, THE government in fact, and Kerry will dance to their tune (and look silly doing so as the only ones who will truely take him seriously will be the Europeans as they all march through their self-imposed dream world).

The only thing I truly dread is four more years of Vietnam!

The down side is that a lot of ground will be lost during his term beacuse of in-attention and lack of focus on real problems and to make up the lost ground after 2008 will be very costly in treasure and lives.

Much more so than if we just attend to business now.

That said, he will be President. Not “their” President. No “my” President. President.

Just my opinion.

By the way, I have just have found you blog and think it’s great. Really good work.

Hey Beau,

I’m with you! Stock up now that the ban is off and make tons of cash if Kerry gets it re-enacted. Prices on pre-ban stuff went out of sight the last time around.

Although, he does say now that he is for the 2nd Amendment and citizen’s rights to own guns! The problem is, since he really isn’t, he doesn’t get that it is not about hunting. It is about the right to individual and collective self-defense.

I saw a sound bite over the weekend where he was touting the right to own guns to hunt. “I myself have hunted…uh…uh…beast and fowl! But, I have never hunted with an AK-47!”

Couldn’t think of any type of critter he had hunted but boy he could remember the name of those danged guns those Vietcong used to shoot at him with!

I’ve been having the “stock up on guns” idea for a few months now. I plan on doing it either way, really. It is ironic, because I live in Detroit right now, and don’t own a gun (OOPS, strike that – I have LOTSA GUNS, and I keep them all handy – especially at night), but now we’re contemplating a move to a more rural setting – and I’ve decided I definitely need a “piece.” Perhaps I’ve just seen “Deliverance” too many times, huh? lol. I really do think, though, that Kerry *could* screw us up more than a little. Militarily – I don’t trust him at all (not to mention how demoralized our troops might become with him as Commander-in-Chief.) My bil is leaving for Iraq in January … and I think it would be a great send-off for him to know that Bush was gonna be in the White House while he is over there.

Andy, hahaha, that’s great! I’m glad someone else notices these physical quirks of kerry’s that is annoying the heck out of me. His “herky-jerky jig”(great description) is strange, to put it in the best way possible. Along with his clenched fist in the air, his bag of frawns facial features, his super long face with a chin that dripped way down past clinton’s, his eastern-religion-worship-gesture of palms together in front of chest, and awkward movements and gestures when it comes to physical contact with others on stage. Nothing really substantial, just super annoying. I’ll play the game, if he wins in November, these physical attributes alone would make me stay in bed with radio off, computer off, and TV off for the next 4 years.

I’ve never noticed Kerry’s body movements, but I do know I couldn’t STAND to listen to him on that one commercial – the whole Genges Khan thing … that voice – that inflection … ugh! I often wonder if he got beaten up a lot as a child. He would have here in Detroit. Someone once compared his accent to that of Thursten Howell III from Gilligan’s Isle … I think that is pretty dead on.

Whoa Daniel,

Know what you speak of before you speak. John Kerry was testifying to what he was told by other members of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW)during the “Winter Soldier” investigation. The whole Winter Soldier thing was put on by a group of anti-war activists. Many of the members of VVAW who told those stories Kerry repeated before the Congressional hearing in 1971, it turned out, were either veterans who had not served in Vietnam (for example, someone who served as a clerk typist on Okinawa making up stories of being in combat), or veterans who had deserted from posts other than Vietnam (like Germany). Some were not even military veterans at all, having never served.

The stories related by Kerry were fabrications, pure and simple. Do atrocities happen in war? You bet. Are Americans guilty of them sometimes? Of course, American soldiers are human, and sometimes get caught up in the moment. However, the military made a concerted effort to track down stories of atrocities by American troops and to deal swiftly with those who committed them.

The problem was that Kerry gave the impression that atrocities were just matter-of-fact everyday occcurrances heartily condoned by the brass, and that just wasn’t so. He also stated that he had witnessed and participated in such activities. If that were proveable by the military or congressional investigators you can bet he would have been sharing a cell with Lieutenant Calley, and not running for President today.

“Agent Orange” was not a “chemical weapon” per se. It was not something we sprayed on enemy troops to disable or kill them. It was simply a very effective defoliant. We sprayed on the jungle in areas we wanted to deny cover and concealment to the enemy. We used it around camps and along river banks (you know like Kerry patrolled in his Swift Boat).

Many returning Vietnam Vets have blamed contact with Agent Orange for medical problems, calling it a carcinogen. Sometimes they would be in an area scheduled for spraying when it would be sprayed and get some on them that way, or patrol through an area recently sprayed. I don’t know how carcinogenic Agent Orange is but I have an older cousin who was assigned to a unit in the Air Force that sprayed it, and was frequently doused with it while tranferring it from drums to the aircraft tanks. he is in his fifties and has not had any problems (yet).

Oh, and I don’t know what part of the country that you live in, but in Oklahoma 3/4 of the people are glad the ban is gone! As a 19 year police officer I can tell you it was absolutely useless for crime prevention.

Let’s see, move to France where I won’t be blown up by terrorists…yet, but who’s to say how long that will last. Beau and others, you’d better go ahead and get your assault rifles now. If Kerry’s elected, you know that ban will go back into effect immediately.

Carin — perhaps you should consider dealing with the issues Mr. Buchanan addresses instead of snickering him off. He makes not a little bit of sense.

I noticed some of you all intend to stockpile arms should Kerry be elected. I remember in late ‘92 or early ‘93 “Guns and Ammo” magazine dealt with that very issue. There was a great article on how to hide or bury you weapons on obscure property for safekeeping against the Clinton horde. Of course, these fears proved true as the “Assault Weapons Ban” was enacted in 1994 (recently allowed to lapse. Yay!)

Reading the postings here confirms one position held by the right wing of this nation — our education system must be in trouble to have produced such ignorant, ill informed and intellectually bereft people. I’m not sure what or who is to blame for the fear, anger and resultant irrationality, but it’s frightening to observe. It’s difficult to even know where to start, the errors are so deep and wide…
1) “…he’s the dependent of a fabulously rich, bored woman…” This puerile ad hominem attack reveals the pettiness of your attitude and arguments and barely deserves a response. It doesn’t even connect to the first part of the sentence where you attempt to castigate Kerry for misquoting and misinterpreting Scripture. While Kerry obviously benefits from his wife’s wealth, he is hardly the “dependent.” I suppose he was groveling in the streets prior to marrying Theresa.
2) When and how has Kerry tried to “convince the naive and unmotivated that money and profit are evil…”? Your language suggests some Scripturally-based guilt here – as Shakespeare would say, “methinks the lady doth protest too much.” And as to the notion you ascribe to Kerry that “high taxes are good,” he has never even suggested that; rather, he argues that those who benefit most from the riches and opportunities of this nation and who are most able to afford to pay to defend it, should not pass off their responsibility to future generations.
3) With regard to suppressing the vote of minorities: I suppose what occurred in Florida in 2000 was just a fantasy concocted by just about everyone not intimately connected with the Republican party. I guess they really didn’t turn away thousands of mostly African-Americans whose only crime was that they shared the name and skin color of felons. And then they tried to do it again. Are you really so naïve or blind that you believe it was all an honest mistake?
4) Exactly where is your evidence that Kerry ran on an “America is evil platform.”? And he never “despised” the soldiers he served with. The only men he “despised” were the leaders who cared little for our soldiers lives and sent them to fight a useless brutal war the cost the lives of over 50,000 Americans and several million Vietnamese. Those who actually fought with Kerry support him, regardless of their own political leanings. How dare you say he spat on the men he fought with. He cared enough for our soldiers to fight to bring them home from the senseless carnage they were thrown into. See “Fog of War” if you dare to hear the truth about Vietnam from that “anti-war type” Robert McNamara (I assume you know who he is).
5) It is George Bush who the terrorists love. Like a modern day Manchurian candidate, Bush could not have done more to further the goals of Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden. He’s given them a $200 billion recruitment campaign. Had he kept his eye on the prize, focusing our and the world’s attention on securing Afghanistan and destroying Al-Qaeda, perhaps he could have been a hero. Instead, he diverted our attention and resources by incompetently, dishonestly and arrogantly dragged us into insanity of Iraq and is now making enemies 10 times faster than we can kill them.
6) The vast majority of Kerry’s supporters are not “anti-war types.” They are patriotic Americans who do not believe in blithely waging wars to settle personal scores or to further megalomaniacal neo-conservative fantasies, or to even topple tinhorn dictators. They understand that war should only be waged if we are certain of our need to protect ourselves. They, like John Kerry, understand that real human beings suffer and die in war, and it must not be undertaken lightly. And mostly, they understand that if we are going to wage war, we should do it competently and have a plan for its aftermath.
7) There is no contradiction in the position of Kerry voters who support someone who killed in war – they support him precisely because he understands the seriousness of his actions and has the courage to admit his mistakes. They castigate Bush not because he shirked his duty, but because he did so while hypocritically and cowardly cheering for a war in which others were sent to die and kill. And they castigate him because he has failed to tell the full story of his service, as he hides behind the empty rhetoric that he received an honorable discharge. Finally, they castigate him because he has learned nothing from his experience – he has once again carelessly and thoughtlessly sent others to die and kill.
RepJ’s comment that his/her personal opinion that Bush won by a very large margin in 2000 is laughable. For example, everybody but the most rabid Bush partisans understands that the over 8,000 discarded double-marked butterfly ballots in Palm Beach County were primarily intended for Gore. Similarly, even Pat Buchanan admits that virtually all of the 6,500 or so votes he received in the same county were also intended for Gore. Forgetting about the hanging chads, if even a small portion of these were recovered, the outcome would have been reversed.
9) Kerry’s atrocity testimony referred to among other things, “free-fire zones” in which anything that moved, including civilians, were targets. This was the atrocity in which he participated and it is a tactic was clearly sanctioned and supported by the brass. In addition, he was recounting the testimony of over 150 soldiers of their personal participation in atrocities that took place with the full awareness “of officers at all levels…” It matters little if a few of those accounts have been discredited – no reasonable observer of that war denies that these things occurred frequently. Where is the evidence that the “military made a concerted effort to track down stories of atrocities by American troops and to deal swiftly with those who committed them.” The My Lai massacre, which had just been adjudicated, was only exposed because of the brave and stubborn efforts of a few enlisted men. Most importantly, his testimony was given in the hopes of doing one thing — stopping the senseless deaths of more American soldiers.

( I Know I should ignore, but really, this is too much fun!)

1) Between wives, did John Kerry own a house?

2) How come Kerry is constantly saying – NOT that he is going to raise taxes, but that he is going to “take away the tax breaks” (from the riches)? Doesn’t this mean he is going to raise taxes? This is blatant class warfare.

3)Hooey. No proof. Laughable. Do you have one well-accepted study that accepts that to be true?

4) Why did Kerry tell lies about his fellow soldiers? He even wrote a book about his lies.

5) Ever read Iraqi blogs? Might open your eyes. As for “more terrorists” … it’s like dealing with a nest of snakes. Yep, some are gonna come out and bite, but you can’t just ignore it forever. That is what brought us to 9/11.

6) no facts in those facts, no point debating. I will say, who is on Kerry’s side? The Socialists, the anticapitalists … Yea, there was a lot of patriotic love on the streets of NYC two weeks ago…

7) Vietnam AGAIN. You know, I didn’t know Kerry served? He DID ?????

8)Being a “rabid” Bush supporter, I suppose it has no meaning … but I could care less if damaged votes weren’t counted. If someone doesn’t know how to vote (or how to ask for another ballot if they spoil theirs), they don’t DESERVE to have their vote counted.

9) False statements were made throughout that testimony … and in that book he made (which you can’t find anywhere). It wasn’t just about free-fire zones (which, it could be argued, actually helped save lives.) Regardless … given that people were proven to have made stuff up, it doesn’t matter WHY they did it. Or, do the ends, justify the means?

Here’s your study. You decide:
U.S Civil Rights Commission Report: Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/exesum.htm

Some excerpts from the executive summary:

After carefully and fully examining all the evidence, the Commission found a strong basis for concluding that violations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) occurred in Florida.

The state’s highest officials responsible for ensuring efficiency, uniformity, and fairness in the election failed to fulfill their responsibilities and were subsequently unwilling to take responsibility.

Disenfranchised voters are individuals who are entitled to vote, want to vote, or attempt to vote, but who are deprived from either voting or having their votes counted. The most dramatic undercount in the Florida election was the uncast ballots of countless eligible voters who were wrongfully turned away from the polls.

The disenfranchisement of Florida’s voters fell most harshly on the shoulders of black voters. The magnitude of the impact can be seen from any of several perspectives:
• Statewide, based upon county-level statistical estimates, black voters were nearly 10 times more likely than nonblack voters to have their ballots rejected.
• Estimates indicate that approximately 14.4 percent of Florida’s black voters cast ballots that were rejected. This compares with approximately 1.6 percent of nonblack Florida voters who did not have their presidential votes counted.
• Statistical analysis shows that the disparity in ballot spoilage rates—i.e., ballots cast but not counted—between black and nonblack voters is not the result of education or literacy differences. This conclusion is supported by Governor Jeb Bush’s Select Task Force on Election Procedures, Standards and Technology, which found that error rates stemming from uneducated, uninformed, or disinterested voters account for less than 1 percent of the problems.
• Approximately 11 percent of Florida voters were African American; however, African Americans cast about 54 percent of the 180,000 spoiled ballots in Florida during the November 2000 election based on estimates derived from county-level data. These statewide estimates were corroborated by the results in several counties based on actual precinct data.

La Shawn,
Oops, in my last comment to Drew just previous to this post, I reference a link to a site which discredits the report he linked to. Guess that’s why it doesn’t show up.
That’s OK, I can wait for you to check it out.

Kiki, loved the ditty and the saw about remembering the 70s. Kerry’s our poster-boy for those righteous riotous times.

I’m sitting here listening to the Sean Hannity webcast while catching up on the rest of this post’s commentary, when the intro to Talking Heads’ Once In A Lifetime came on.

Boy, I could have fun with lyrics like:

…And you may find yourself behind the wheel of a large automobile,
And you may find yourself in a beautiful house, with a beautiful wife,
And you may ask yourself-Well! How did I get here? …
And you may tell yourself This is not my beautiful house!
And you may tell yourself This is not my beautiful wife! …
Into the blue again/after the money`s gone…
Same as it ever was…

On the otherhand, their 1979 song “Life During Wartime” is Nostradamus-esque considering current affairs

Wow! That was the shortest full synopsis of why not to vote for KErry that I have ever read. LaShawn.. you run a great blog. Keep up the good work.

Montie,

Unless there’s something hidden on your link, your “proof” consists entirely of a statement by an unnamed member of the House of Representatives that the report was thoroughly discredited. Moreover, the “statement” appears to contradict itself since it seems to quote from the same report it says is discredited. And why is the author unidentified?

As to the Winter Soldiers investigation: Let me get your logic straight — there were a few discredited accounts, so we should therefore discard all of the other testimony, unless I can provide the proof that the actions described by veterans were verified by government/military authorities who had every reason to cover them up. Before you attack the credibility of soldiers who risked their lives, I think the burden is on you to prove they were lying. Where are your citations? Did you actually read the link I provided?

As to your prior comments regarding Al Qaeda in Iraq: I’m so relieved to know that the real reason we went into Iraq was to create thousands of new American-hating Islamists so we can fight them over there. I guess the Bush administration knew that all the new terrorists will be too busy in Iraq and won’t have the time to plot attacks in America or against our allies. I feel so much safer now. I wonder why they didn’t use that justification to sell the war in the first place. It has the advantage that at least half of it is true.

Andy,
First of all, the link I provided regarding the Winter Soldiers is not long. It is an article about the issue. It shows how well you read. Second, the point is that over 100 vets testified as to their personal experiences and you are denying the veracity of all of their accounts, based on the finding that a few may not be credible. If you are going to call them liars, it is your responsibility to prove that their eyewitness accounts are false.

Here’s another excerpt. Look up the references to atrocities (Son Thang and Thanh Phong,Tiger Force of the 327th Airborne Infantry in the Central Highlands in 1967, the Phoenix Program) if you really need to be convinced.

The remaining plank in Lewy’s case against the winter soldiers consists merely of noting the participation in Detroit of JFK assassination conspiracy theorist Mark Lane. And even in attempting to cast doubt on the veracity of the winter soldiers’ allegations, Lewy also wrote that “incidents similar to some of those described at the VVAW hearing undoubtedly did occur”; that policies such as the military’s emphasis on “body count” certainly “created an atmosphere conducive to atrocities”; that in 1967 Vietnam field commander General William Westmoreland had to issue orders prohibiting cutting ears or fingers off the bodies of the dead; and that the conduct of a war without fronts “created a setting especially conducive to atrocities.”

Other claims put forward at the Winter Soldier Investigation–such as an allegation that the Marines made an incursion into Laos (Operation Dewey Canyon) that was illegal under U.S. law–were later shown to be true. And in the years since the winter soldiers convened in Detroit, the general premise of their gathering has been validated: American soldiers did indeed commit atrocities in Vietnam; the most famous, the My Lai massacre of March 1968, was merely the starting point. The names of villages like Son Thang and Thanh Phong, locales of other acknowledged atrocities, are now burned into the memory of historians. The actions of Tiger Force of the 327th Airborne Infantry in the Central Highlands in 1967 are still today under investigation as war crimes. (Indeed veterans of Tiger Force have acknowledged the atrocities and have appeared on television to describe their roles and remorse.) And the Phoenix Program led to thousands of deaths despite efforts by the CIA’s William Colby to impose legal strictures on program activities

Oops, that should have been addressed to Drew, not Daniel. My bad.

Excuse me, that should have been addressed to Andy, not Montie.