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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (18597)	4/27/2004 9:35:11 PM
From: Glenn Petersen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

...there is something contradictory about running for president as a war hero while having to ackowledge that you threw the symbols--medals and/or ribbons way because you were ashamed of your participation in that war. Some observations from your pen pal, Lyn Nofziger: lynnofziger.com April 27, 2004--Sen. John F. Kerry’s decision to run for president as a Vietnam junior grade Audie Murphy seems to be back-firing on him. And unless he succeeds in changing the subject it could well cost him the election. His current effort to contrast his Vietnam service to President Bush’s national guard service appears to be falling flat. For the fact is that nobody really cares about Bush’s military record for a couple of reasons: First, it compares nicely to the record of his two-term, draft-dodging predecessor, Bill Clinton, and, more importantly, as president he has proved himself under fire. Even those who disagree with his policies are forced to admit that. In the meantime, it is Kerry’s own fault that it is his record that that is being examined and that, at least in part, it may not survive close scrutiny. Early on I think almost all Americans, regardless of party, were willing to accept that Kerry is a legitimate hero; he has three purple hearts, a silver star and a bronze star with a V for valor. Few men in the service can equal that record. And had Kerry been smart he’d have let it go at that. It was there, he is a combat veteran and everybody knew it He didn‘t have to talk about it. But by talking about it and because the hatchet men in his party set out to contrast his record with that of Bush, he opened himself--and they opened him--up to careful scrutiny and to a second look not only at his combat record but also at his post-service record as the war-protesting male version of Jane Fonda. Actually, it is his activities as the latter that have now drawn new attention to the former. The record shows that a bemedaled Kerry came back from four months of combat duty in Vietnam, linked up with Jane Fonda and other war protesters, testified before congress about a whole series of as yet unproven atrocities he alleged were committed in Vietnam by Americans and then joined with other veterans to throw his medals (or did he?) over the White House fence in a symbolic protest against the war. Unfortunately for Kerry , though he denies it, he has told several different stories about that event, the contradictions in which have got some people saying he lied and him saying he didn’t. Much ado about nothing, perhaps, but the questions remain and they go to the matter of his veracity: Did he toss medals or ribbons? Did he toss his own medals/ribbons or someone else’s, because he left his at home? Ordinarily, this would have been a tempest in a teapot, but there is something contradictory about running for president as a war hero while having to ackowledge that you threw the symbols--medals and/or ribbons way because you were ashamed of your participation in that war. But, while the ribbons vs medals controversy is making headlines today, Kerry’s boasting of his heroism may have created additional problems for him by opening up for further scrutiny not only his service record but also his congressional testimony, which, if he had kept his mouth shut probably would not be the case. As it is, there are stories wandering around the internet questioning the legitimacy of his record, looking askance at his collection in a brief four months of three Purple Hearts without ever missing a day of duty, as well as the Silver Star he was awarded for jumping off of his boat and killing a wounded Viet Cong. Before this presidential campaign is over you can bet he will be questioned again and again, not only about his service record but also about the accuracy of his post-service testimony before a cogressional committee. He is going to need satisfactory answers but even if he has them they may not be enough, not only because doubts always linger but also because they take away time and attention from the issues he should be making in his campaign. If Kerry had remembered the old saying about letting sleeping dogs lie he would have been smart to treat that long-ago Vietnam war as just another sleeping dog. Now it’s too late. ------------------ Once long ago I was involved in the primary campaign for the United States senate of a candidate who had spent several years as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam and who had been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. Following our advice the candidate never talked about the war, but it was always there as a subliminal issue and the fact that we had him using a cane was a quiet reminder of his wartime wounds. In the meantime he talked about issues of importance to the state. That strategy carried him to an easy primary victory over two better-known, better-financed rivals. Not knowing when he was well off, he dumped the campaign team that had led him to victory and hired a manager who promptly ran him as a war hero and an ex-POW. He found out too late that that wasn’t good enough for an electorate that wanted not primarily a war hero but someone to represent their interests in the senate. He lost when he should have won. If John Kerry is not careful he, too, like that senate candidate, could easily find that though Americans may admire a man for his wartime record they want more than that when they are choosing a president.