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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (187270)	4/28/2004 7:55:55 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572334

Ted, the difference is that Bush isn't trying to promote his service in the National Guard in order to look tough on defense. That would be silly. Personally, I think Bush is very tough on defense, despite having pulled this stunt to avoid going to Vietnam. Whether he served his entire service or not isn't very important to me, but I am very disgusted at the press for putting the burden of proof on Bush. If it can be proven that Bush did it, then Bush ought to admit it, explain why he did it, and let the public decide. Of course, Bush didn't skip out early, and the only "proof" the press (and now Kerry himself) brings up is the lack of proof to the contrary. Hardly convincing. Meanwhile, Kerry's medals are important because they represent his own service in Vietnam, which itself is admirable. However, Kerry himself was caught saying he threw his medals over the fence, which would imply that he rejects his own service because he considered Vietnam vets to be nothing but rapists and pillagers at the time. I wouldn't have minded if that's what he once genuinely believed. After all, everyone has the right to change their minds, don't they? (If not, I wouldn't have changed from liberal to conservative.) But the fact is that he didn't toss his medals, meaning he wanted it both ways from the beginning. It's a prime example of how Kerry doesn't hold strongly to any belief whatsoever, except whatever the public believes in at the moment. And his own defense of his flip-flop is weak. Splitting hairs over "medals and ribbons"? Please, I'll take Clinton over that. The bottom line is this: On the issue of defense and national security, Bush is running on his war record for the past four years, and not on his National Guard service. Kerry isn't willing to run on his Senate record when it comes to defense, so instead he's running on his Vietnam record, which itself is marred by his own actions after the service itself. That's why it matters more for Kerry than it does for Bush. By the way, McCain is calling for a "truce" between both sides: cnn.com "At least could we declare that the Vietnam War is over and have a cease-fire and agree that both candidates -- the president of the United States and Senator Kerry served honorably -- end of story?" McCain said. "Now let's focus our attention on the conflict that's taking place in Iraq, that is taking American lives as I speak on this floor," he said. Tenchusatsu