Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (32018)	2/27/2004 8:37:13 PM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793575

I am not arguing John Kerry's service in Vietnam E. I am asking about his wounds during his service. It is quite obvious that neither you or JF Shepard are capable of answering my questions, so I will try to find them elsewhere. M

To: E who wrote (32018)	2/27/2004 9:03:53 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793575

You remember this, I suspect: Message 19583000 I've heard repeated "explanations" of why we went into Iraq and still haven't a clue. And "HINT: OIL" I don't believe is the answer either. Whatever it was, the war was launched without credible evidence to back up claims being made. That was apparent before the first shot was fired. Subsequent events have simply proven that. But we're in now. The only question of consequence about Iraq at this point is "Now what?" How do we get out without leaving an even worse mess behind than we found? I suspect some more war heroes are going to get made on the way to that, regardless of what happens in November. But back to the election: It appears the Dems are on their way to nominating what I would consider a liberal Democrat. We had a thorough dose of that with LBJ. Even the largest fraction of liberals now, I believe, admit his Great Society and the endless welfare stream it promised were a dismal failure. This will about sum up the economic side of things: Message 19857959 perhaps more strongly than you like. What you fail to recognize, I think, is that in picking Kerry the Dems have left a large fraction of the population with little alternative but Bush. And that may yet be precisely what you get. If so, the Dems have no one to blame but themselves. And Ralphie's back, remember? Bush these days reminds me of Gray Davis in his last desperate efforts to stave off his justly deserved recall: Anything for a vote! Border control? Screw it. Let's have another amnesty, but that's a BAD WORD (because we've had so many "last amnesty"'s before), so we'll call it something else. The Senior vote! Let's add prescription drug coverage to Medicare! The program's already bankrupt and is certain to sink without drastic changes (suggested this week by AG, and raising him again in my estimation). To ** with that, I need the votes! Now he has ABSOLUTELY reaffirmed an already existing US policy (stupid and pointless as it is) of non-recognition of Cuba to get the Cuban refugee vote and hopefully FL with it. The budget deficit? Who gives a **? I can't be President anymore by the time that gets to "really hurts" anyway! (Unless, of course, you subscribe to the Raymond Duray November Coup theory. And in that case you won't get to complain about it anyway! Not that Duray ever has any credibility.) Where did principle go in this mad rush to November? Now frankly if the Dems gave me an alternative I could live with, I'd vote Dem in November. But they give me Kerry. The only alternative I see is Libertarian. They're my party of preference anyway, so they make a good "None of the above" vote. Not that it matters. The Dems could literally run a jackass and take CA.

To: E who wrote (32018)	2/27/2004 9:07:26 PM
From: MichaelSkyy	Respond to of 793575

Unbelievable........... Message 19855707 Taking a look at Mr. Kerry’s much-promoted Vietnam service, his military record was, indeed, remarkable in many ways. Last week, the former assistant secretary of defense and Fletcher School of Diplomacy professor,W. Scott Thompson, recalled a conversation with the late Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt Jr. that clearly had a slightly different take on Mr. Kerry’s recollection of their discussions: “[T]he fabled and distinguished chief of naval operations,Admiral Elmo Zumwalt,told me — 30 years ago when he was still CNO —that during his own command of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam,just prior to his anointment as CNO, young Kerry had created great problems for him and the other top brass,by killing so many non-combatant civilians and going after other non-military targets.‘We had virtually to straitjacket him to keep him under control,’ the admiral said. ‘Bud’ Zumwalt got it right when he assessed Kerry as having large ambitions — but promised that his career in Vietnam would haunt him if he were ever on the national stage.” And this statement was made despite the fact Zumwalt had personally pinned a Silver Star on Mr. Kerry. Mr. Kerry was assigned to Swiftboat 44 on December 1, 1968. Within 24 hours, he had his first Purple Heart. Mr. Kerry accumulated three Purple Hearts in four months with not even a day of duty lost from wounds, according to his training officer. It’s a pity one cannot read his Purple Heart medical treatment reports which have been withheld from the public. The only person preventing their release is Mr. Kerry. By his own admission during those four months, Mr. Kerry continually kept ramming his Swiftboat onto an enemy-held shore on assorted occasions alone and with a few men, killing civilians and even a wounded enemy soldier. One can begin to appreciate Zumwalt’s problem with Mr. Kerry as commander of an unarmored craft dependent upon speed of maneuver to keep it and its crew from being shot to pieces. Mr. Kerry now refers to those civilian deaths as “accidents of war.”And within four days of his third Purple Heart, Mr. Kerry applied to take advantage of a technicality which allowed him to request immediate transfer to a stateside post.