Unfit for Command? New anti-kerry ad

[basso]

i'm sure the source (swiftvets) will cause many to dismiss it out-of-hand, but this is still one of the more devestating campaign ads i've seen in a while. link opens embedded WMA file.

http://humaneventsonline.com.edgesuite.net/unfit_video_wmv.html

random followup:
one of the kerry campaign's prime mantras is that Batman's (http://humaneventsonline.com.edgesuite.net/unfit_book_video_2.jpg) service in Vietnam renders him uniquely qualified to be Commander-in-Chief. if that's true, what does that say about Robin (http://edwards.senate.gov/images/press/edwards_headshot.jpg) , or for that matter, Catwoman? (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/images/election98/hc.jpg)

[SamFisher]

I love it when you and the Swift boat veterans, most of whom didn't serve with Kerry or offer startlingly different accounts 30 years post hoc, http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp attack Kerry's war record.

It's disgraceful, and it allows me to post this:

Feb. 28, 1969, was a day that started out badly and got much worse. Kerry and his crewmates were given a mission to take their Swift boat up a canal off the Bay Hap River, surrounded by thick mangrove brush and many, many Vietcong. There were two ambushes.

"I guess we had gotten 800 yards or 1,000 yards at the most," recalled crewmate Fred Short. "And this time, another B-40 rocket hit, and maybe a couple more. But this one was close aboard. It blew the windows out of the crew cabin. I see out of a spider hole a Vietcong stand up dressed in a loin cloth, holding a B-40 rocket."

"Charlie would have lit us up like a Roman candle because we're full of fuel, we're full of ammunition," said Sandusky.

Protocol at the time would be for Kerry's Swift boat to fire to shore and then take evasive action. But Kerry ordered Sandusky, his second-in-command, to drive the boat onto the beach — directly into the ambush.

"I knew right away that, you know, uh-oh, we're in the doo-doo now," Sandusky said. "But, yeah, I knew — you know, John was intent. You know: 'We got to go and get this guy.' There was no way we were going to back down off the beach." Alston recalled: "I know when John Kerry told Del to beach that damn boat, this was a brand-new ball game. We wasn't running. We took it to Charlie."

They saw their enemy up close, Short noted. "I would say he was so close that I could see that he had a mustache, a very weak mustache, that he was growing. I could see the mustache on his face. And things were going slow-motion now, because you feel you were, you know, this is really getting scary."

Things almost went against the sailors. "He needed like, 25, 30 yards to arm that rocket, all right," Sandusky said, "and as we beached, he could not aim it at us. So he got up out of the spider hole, started running."

Tommy Belodeau was manning the boat's M-60 machine gun, Short said. "Tommy in the pit tank winged him in the side of the legs as he was coming across," he said. "But the guy didn't miss stride. I mean, he did not break stride."

Kerry assessed their options quickly, according to Sandusky. "John sized up the situation and realized that once Tommy had started shooting at the guy and wounded him in the leg, you know, that this was the only course of action — you know, John was going to chase this guy down and kill him. 'Cause if he didn't, we were all dead."

The man was still running down a path when they got to the bank. Kerry, Belodeau and Michael McDarris, in hot pursuit, saw the Vietcong soldier. Short recalled: "The guy was getting ready to stand up with a rocket on his shoulder, coming up. And Mr. Kerry took him out … he would have been about a 30-yard shot. Which, we were dead in the water up on the bank, point blank. If he missed us, he would have to, you know — there's no way he could miss us. He could've thrown a rock and taken me out."

The others agreed that it was a close call. "If this guy would have got up, and he had a clear shot at us, we would have been history," Thorson said. "Wouldn't have been no doubt about it." "If that RPG had exploded in the pilot house or anywhere in that area," Short said, "we were toast."



http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cach...r+beached&hl=en

Quote:

In March, 1969 JimRassman was a Green Beret in Vietnam when the river boat he was riding hit a mine in the Hap River and came under heavy enemy fire from the banks. A short distance ahead, then-Navy Lt. Kerry was in command of a Swift Boat also under attack. Kerry, wounded in the arm, ordered his boat to turn around. He directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire, then moved into an exposed position on the bow to pull Rassman out of the water




Quote:
Reading Brinkley’s book, one wonders why Kerry’s campaign does not make more of another occasion when Kerry was sharply reprimanded for having stepped ashore. On a narrow tributary of the Duong Keo River, he and his crew came upon what looked like a deserted village. Then someone thought he saw a man running away. There was no response to a call for surrender, and Kerry took his gun and went to have a look. As he approached, forty-two Vietnamese—women, children, and old men—appeared with empty hands raised. They were in desperate shape, hungry and sick, and although Kerry received radio instructions to leave them and get on with the business of killing enemy combatants, he herded the villagers onto boats and took them to the nearest American base to receive food and medical care. “For an afternoon,” he told Brinkley, “it felt good to really be helping the Vietnamese instead of destroying their villages.”


http://mitchcohen.blogspot.com/2004/07/forty-four.html


What's the matter basso, are you that tapped out of ideas?

I can just post random moveon.org attack ads too, but I don't see the point of it.

[nyquil82]

I take all campaign ads with a chunk of salt, and that goes for ads from both camps and places such as moveon.org, but what i don't understand is the plethora of ads, seem to be preaching to the converted instead of strategically targeting towards 1. independent 2. non-voters and 3.undecided voters. It makes those in 1, 2, 3 NOT want to vote. Are supporters from both camps so blind as to not see the viewpoint from those in the middle?

[basso]

Originally posted by SamFisher


What's the matter basso, are you that tapped out of ideas?

I can just post random moveon.org attack ads too, but I don't see the point of it.

i wasn't aware that i'd coomented on the veracity of the ad, only that it was effective, as an ad.

as to the larger question of why this has been brought up, it's really quite simple, kerry himself has made it the defining issue of his campaign, or perhaps you missed him "reporting for duty" at the DNC? and the cavalcade of retired officers and other vets he's presented at every campaign stop. this is all fine and dandy, and certainly kerry's service, for the most part, is admirable and should be treated as such. however, this is virtually all he talks about! where was the mention of his accomplishments during his 18 year congressional stint? apparently, banned-in-boston. kerry has invited these attacks, since he thinks his vietnam service somehow innoculates him against charges he's soft on defense. understandably then, that service is going to get scrutinized. if you, or he, can't take it perhaps you should both just moveonPac man.

[RocketMan Tex]

Originally posted by basso
i...kerry himself has made it the defining issue of his campaign, or perhaps you missed him "reporting for duty" at the DNC?

So did Bush. Perhaps you missed him declaring himself a "war President"?

[SamFisher]

Originally posted by basso
i wasn't aware that i'd coomented on the veracity of the ad, only that it was effective, as an ad.

as to the larger question of why this has been brought up, it's really quite simple, kerry himself has made it the defining issue of his campaign, or perhaps you missed him "reporting for duty" at the DNC? and the cavalcade of retired officers and other vets he's presented at every campaign stop. this is all fine and dandy, and certainly kerry's service, for the most part, is admirable and should be treated as such. however, this is virtually all he talks about! where was the mention of his accomplishments during his 18 year congressional stint? apparently, banned-in-boston. kerry has invited these attacks, since he thinks his vietnam service somehow innoculates him against charges he's soft on defense. understandably then, that service is going to get scrutinized. if you, or he, can't take it perhaps you should both just moveonPac man.


Wow, straight out of Republican talking points 101.

1. While it has been a feature of his campaign, Kerry very rarely speaks personally of his exploits in Vietnam in detail -- in fact, almost never. "virtually all" he talks about? No. Go to his website and read his speeches if you don't believe me.

2. Kerry has, and does mention his congressional record, at least he did in the last article I read about him; You and I know that this argument is a canard anyway that inherently plays off the nature of a legislator-- committee chairmen get their names on bills, but that doesn't mean that nobody else ever does anything. For the record, the last press release I saw said Kerry has sponsored something like 57 bills that passed the Senate , and worked on the consensus building, glad handling, and other unquantifiable stuff. Most of the bills that he has doen the most for are Crime bills (he used to be a prosecutor, you know) and I think he had an AIDS bill get through.

3. If anybody has invited attacks about past military service by glorifying themselves, it's this man.
http://www.allhatnocattle.net/Bush%20nuts%201.jpg

So if you truly believe that this is a valid issue, I want you to stipulate that George W. Bush's spotty record of service, which he entered to avoid Vietnam anyway, is a valid campaign issue -- and that even the most vile propaganda about it is fair game.

[rockbox]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&ncid=536&e=3&u=/ap/20040805/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_mccain


McCain Condemns Anti-Kerry Ad

1 hour, 13 minutes ago Add Politics - AP to My Yahoo!


By RON FOURNIER, AP Political Writer

WASHINGTON - Republican Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), a former prisoner of war in Vietnam, called an ad criticizing John Kerry (news - web sites)'s military service "dishonest and dishonorable" and urged the White House on Thursday to condemn it as well.


AP Photo


AP Photo
Slideshow: John Kerry




"It was the same kind of deal that was pulled on me," McCain said in an interview with The Associated Press, referring to his bitter Republican primary fight with President Bush (news - web sites).


The 60-second ad features Vietnam veterans who accuse the Democratic presidential nominee of lying about his decorated Vietnam War record and betraying his fellow veterans by later opposing the conflict.


"When the chips were down, you could not count on John Kerry," one of the veterans, Larry Thurlow, says in the ad.


The ad, scheduled to air in a few markets in Ohio, West Virginia and Wisconsin, was produced by Stevens, Reed, Curcio and Potham, the same team that produced McCain's ads in 2000.


"I wish they hadn't done it," McCain said of his former advisers. "I don't know if they knew all the facts."


Asked if the White House knew about the ad or helped find financing for it, McCain said, "I hope not, but I don't know. But I think the Bush campaign should specifically condemn the ad."


Later, McCain said the Bush campaign has denied any involvement and added, "I can't believe the president would pull such a cheap stunt."


The White House did not immediately address McCain's call that they repudiate the spot.


Steve Schmidt, a spokesman for the Bush-Cheney campaign, said Kerry's record and statements on the war on terrorism — not his service in Vietnam — are fair game. "The Bush campaign never has and will never question John Kerry's service in Vietnam," he said.


In 2000, Bush's supporters sponsored a rumor campaign against McCain in the South Carolina primary, helping Bush win the primary and the nomination. McCain's supporters have never forgiven the Bush team.


McCain said that's all in the past to him, but he's speaking out against the anti-Kerry ad because he believes it's bad for the political system. "It reopens all the old wounds of the Vietnam War, which I spent the last 35 years trying to heal," he said.


"I deplore this kind of politics. I think the ad is dishonest and dishonorable. As it is, none of these individuals served on the boat (Kerry) commanded. Many of his crew have testified to his courage under fire. I think John Kerry served honorably in Vietnam. I think George Bush served honorably in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War."


McCain himself spent more than five years in a Vietnam prisoner of war camp. A bona fide war hero, McCain, like Kerry, used his war record as the foundation of his presidential campaign.


The Kerry campaign has denounced the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, saying none of the men in the ad served on the boat that Kerry commanded. The leader of the group, retired Adm. Roy Hoffmann, said none of the 13 veterans in the commercial served on Kerry's boat but rather were in other swiftboats within 50 yards of Kerry's.


Jim Rassmann, an Army veteran who was saved by Kerry, said there were only six crewmates who served with Kerry on his boat. Five support his candidacy and one is deceased.

[FranchiseBlade]

I saw the ad last night. Only person in the ad even served with Kerry. The rest is all guess work by the people involved.

These guys can attack Kerry all they want but it doesn't change the fact that Kerry is a war hero.

Who among these guys is trying to deny the story of Jim Rasmussen? Jim was the man who went overboard one of the swift boats and was underfire from both sides of the shore. John Kerry ordered his boat turned around. John Kerry himself went and exposed himself to fire, and reached over the edge of the boat to pull the fallen soldier back in.

Not one of the people in the ad can deny that the event happened. So no matter what else they want to try and say about Kerry it doesn't matter. That incident alone is enough to make him a war hero - advantage KERRY

The fact that Kerry checked the box beside the option, send to Viet Nam, and Bush checked the box that daid DON'T send to Viet Nam is something none of these guys can deny. - advantage KERRY

The fact that once in Viet Nam and sitting at sea, Kerry requested a transfer into a combat situation, and that Bush while 'on duty' didn't pass or take a physical and was removed from flight status, and still doesn't have all his time with the national guard accounted for is something none of these guys can deny. - advantage KERRY.

[Rocketman95]

WWWB?

[Batman Jones]

I don't understand why McCain would have a hard time believing Bush supported this line of "dishonest and dishonorable" smear campaign, since it was Bush's people who executed the disgusting smear campaign which impugned McCain's own service and suggested he was not mentally fit, as a result of it, to lead. It's got to be killing McCain to support a man he rightly and deeply hates.

basso: I haven't watched the ad. I'll take your word it's effective. So was Willie Horton. So was the disgusting anti-Cleland ad. So was McCarthyism. What's your point?

[Chump]

how f`ed up do your ads have to be to have leaders of your own party calling you out for airing them?

"dishonest and dishonorable" indeed

[rimrocker]

Originally posted by Steve Schmidt, a spokesman for the Bush-Cheney campaign

"The Bush campaign never has and will never question John Kerry's service in Vietnam," he said.

Very fine slicing there...

[Faos]

Almost as bad as the moveon.org Bush = Hitler ads.

[Chump]

http://www.calpundit.com/blogphotos/Blog_Bush_No_Overseas.gif

[basso]

Originally posted by Batman Jones

basso: I haven't watched the ad. I'll take your word it's effective. So was Willie Horton. So was the disgusting anti-Cleland ad. So was McCarthyism.

so was "Daisy."

my point was really, regardless of whether the ad is 'propaganda' or 'the truth', the ad exists because kerry and the democratic party jave made such a fetish of his service. one can't continually trumpet a particular qualification as making a candidate uniquly qualified, then scream that any questioning of those qualifications is unfair and dishonest.

[glynch]

Since the DNC the conservos have been getting nuttier and nuttier.

I think they smell defeat.

[MadMax]

this was a bad idea with mccain...and it's a bad idea now.

news bulletin: politics still suck.

[mc mark]

Originally posted by Faos
Almost as bad as the moveon.org Bush = Hitler ads.



God how often are you going to trumpet this lie?

[FranchiseBlade]

Originally posted by basso
so was "Daisy."

my point was really, regardless of whether the ad is 'propaganda' or 'the truth', the ad exists because kerry and the democratic party jave made such a fetish of his service. one can't continually trumpet a particular qualification as making a candidate uniquly qualified, the scream that any questioning of those qualifications is unfair and dishonest.

I would think one could trumpet a qualification 24/7 and still have the right to complain in of others make ad against the qualification if the ad lacks merit. If someone makes a legitimate counter argument to the candidates trumpeted quality they shouldn't complain, but this ad doesn't fall into that category, and they have every right to complain.

Most of the attacks on Kerry's service don't fall into the category of legitimate counterpoint.

[Faos]

Originally posted by mc mark
God how often are you going to trumphet this lie?

It wasn't a lie. It was still found on their website as recently as less than one month ago. They might not have created it, but they hosted it so what's the difference?

[bnb]

Originally posted by basso
so was "Daisy."

my point was really, regardless of whether the ad is 'propaganda' or 'the truth', the ad exists because kerry and the democratic party jave made such a fetish of his service. one can't continually trumpet a particular qualification as making a candidate uniquly qualified, the scream that any questioning of those qualifications is unfair and dishonest.

I'll disagree with you here basso. Kerry played up his service as any politician would. i remember campaigns for Ford (i think?) that noted he was a member of the boy scouts -- yet no-one questioned his merrit badges. It's the anti-Kerry group who has a fetish with questioning the valour of his service. It's very dirty politics. Michael Moore would be ashamed to run some of that stuff.

Crazy.

[basso]

Originally posted by bnb
Michael Moore would be ashamed to run some of that stuff.

Crazy.

and yet it was MM who swiveled his hips and smiled obscenely while salivating over the prospect of Bush-Clark debates during the primaries, precisely because it would contrast their respective service in the military.

i ask you once again: if kerry's service is so important, what does that say about his choice of running mate, a man who could end up as president? and what does it say about other potential nominees in the future? is service in wartime a prerequisite for the presidency now?

[Vik]

Originally posted by Faos
It wasn't a lie. It was still found on their website as recently as less than one month ago. They might not have created it, but they hosted it so what's the difference?

Clutch doesn't write everything that appears on the bulletin board (and lord knows he doesn't agree with it all), but he still hosts it. Surely you see the difference there.

[basso]

Originally posted by Vik
Clutch doesn't write everything that appears on the bulletin board (and lord knows he doesn't agree with it all), but he still hosts it. Surely you see the difference there.

and if clutch thought it crossed a line, he'd lock the thread. if moveon thought it was dishonest, why was it still present on their site as recently as a month ago, month's after they were called on it?

DOUBLE STANDARD?

[bnb]

Originally posted by basso


i ask you once again: if kerry's service is so important, what does that say about his choice of running mate, a man who could end up as president? and what does it say about other potential nominees in the future? is service in wartime a prerequisite for the presidency now?
.

If the ad were to say "hey thanks john -- you served honourably for a few months thirty years ago, but what the hell have you done since!" it would resonate a lot more with me and i'd find it much less offensive.

It's the drive to belittle his service that grinds me. There's no need for that. It's dishonest, alienating, and insulting. Don't you agree?

[glynch]

Well I think the conservos are making a big mistake. Keeping the attention on the relative service records of the two candidates can only hurt Bush with most voters. It might turn out the loyal dittoheads as apparently this type of thing turns them on.

[basso]

Originally posted by bnb
.
It's the drive to belittle his service that grinds me. There's no need for that. It's dishonest, alienating, and insulting. Don't you agree?

yes, i do, ultimately. however it doesn't exist in a vacuum. there's been a years' long drive to do the same to Bush, so it's hardly surprising some of the same tactics are used against kerry. furthermore, kerry's activities after he returned remain highly controversial with many veterans, the swiftvets are just the most vocal. lastly, as stated several time already, Kerry has attempted to use his service as a shield against all manner fo other criticism, thus opening himself up for these attacks. yes, taken by themselves, they're unfair, and it would be wonderful if we as a a country could put Vietnam and the '70s behind us (come on, red, white, and blue platform shoes with orange and black paid pants? what was i thinking?!?), but as long as kerry pretends that nothing he's done after 1982 matters as much as what he did before, that's not gonna happen.

[basso]

interesting stat from the latest rasmussen reports daily tracking poll:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm

"Nearly half of all voters (48%) say they have family or friends who are currently serving in Iraq or Afghanistan. These voters prefer President Bush by a 51% to 41% margin. Military veterans prefer Bush by a wider margin."

[rimrocker]

So, Kerry has a dead crewman that does not endorse him... just like Vince Foster DA-DA-DA-DUMMMM!

By the way, where do a bunch of Swift Boat guys get the money to produce and run a week's worth of ads? I know that the lead guy is a lawyer, but ads are expensive.

Hannity, Instapundit, even Basso... all are calling the ad "devastating." I'm glad to see Grover's group is still getting those talking points out and of course, has nothing to do with the Bush Campaign.

A guy named Hoffman is one of the ringleaders as well... Here's what Brinkley wrote about him in Tour of Duty, pages 177-178...

Kerry would never forget how ardently Captain Hoffman lauded the exploits
of one “enterprising officer” from the Danang Swift division. The officer had surprised some thirty Vietnamese who were fishing in round, floating baskets just off the shore of a peninsula in an area that was, unfortunately for them, a free fire zone. Hoffman considered it ideal military thinking that the Swift skipper had shown the presence of mind to sneak his boat in between
the baskets and the shore, cutting the fisherman off from escape and then
opening fire on them. All the baskets were sunk, and so were the fishermen.
“Fantastic,” Hoffman reportedly proclaimed upon hearing the news.

[DonnyMost]

Unfit for Command? New anti-Bush ad.

[nyquil82]

Originally posted by basso
and if clutch thought it crossed a line, he'd lock the thread. if moveon thought it was dishonest, why was it still present on their site as recently as a month ago, month's after they were called on it?

DOUBLE STANDARD?

then its still an assumption that they supported it. Some people support free speech and will be less reluctant to censure things until enough people complain about it. Other's have a much shorter line with things that they don't agree with. What you are confusing is supporting a message and supporting free speech, which I speculate some conservatives assume are the same.

Our country allows the KKK as well as other extreme groups to speak freely but doesn't support them. We will only shut them up if they go to far.

[ROXTXIA]

Originally posted by rockbox
McCain said the Bush campaign has denied any involvement and added, "I can't believe the president would pull such a cheap stunt."

While I don't mind that such a prominent Republican is bashing the anti-Kerry ad, the above quote makes me wonder, Hunh?

Bush's people in SC killed McCain's bid for the Republican nomination by push-polling, i.e., calling Repug voters and letting them know that McCain had sired a half-black child out of wedlock. Actually, seems he and his wife had adopted a Bangladeshi girl. But it worked. McCain's lead over Bush evaporated, and Bush went on, as we know, to the White House.

So "I can't believe the President would pull such a cheap stunt" must actually be a public swipe, w/o directly mentioning That Which Has Gone Before, at Incurious George: "There you go again, George."

[rimrocker]

Comics Watch
Kerry fights "Dracula" in Vietnam

By Mark Rahner
Seattle Times staff reporter

Set aside the question of whether all politicians are bloodsuckers, and check out John Kerry in the latest issue of "Sword of Dracula" (Image, $2.95). The Democratic presidential candidate turns up for a sighting of the fanged one in an unusual place: Vietnam, 1968, where Kerry served in the U.S. Navy.

Kerry doesn't drive a stake through Nixon's heart, and his appearance as a swift-boat skipper in the Mekong Delta is just a flashback within the modern-day "military horror" story — in which writer Jason Henderson reimagines Drac as the world's foremost terrorist.

Combining Bram Stoker's source novel with the real Romanian prince, and a drop of Japanese animé influence, Henderson, 32, says from his Austin, Texas, crypt, "This is the guy, who in the 15th century was the greatest war criminal of all time. If he were alive today, he'd be a nightmare of a character."

Issue 5 of the six-issue arc just hit the stands (check your neighborhood comic shop or www.swordofdracula.com). Vampire-hunter Ronnie Van Helsing has captured her nemesis, but springs him to face an even greater horror.

The black-and-white interior pages started as a cost-cutting measure, Henderson says. But producers of the "Die Hard" series and the coming "Spy Hunter" movie have optioned it, and a "Sword" video game is in the works.

Henderson says Kerry will be back, "because we're going to have to find out what happened in 1968." But why use him in the first place?

"I didn't put Kerry in to push a leftist doctrine. I just thought people deserved to remember that this man, when he was a young man, actually walked away from a wealthy and comfortable life and went to a place where there were pieces of metal flying around that could tear you apart."

Henderson hadn't planned to make George W. Bush into a character but says, "I do believe in equal time."

If fans want to see the president during his Air National Guard stint, Henderson says he's game, and considers the possibilities: "... stuffing envelopes?"

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/2004/07/28/2001991184.jpg

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/artsentertainment/2001995756_comicswatch04.html

[Oski2005]

Should we listen to people who have said the same thing for 30 years or people who suddenly changed their minds? Aren't the swift boat vets wafflers?

[basso]

Originally posted by Oski2005
Should we listen to people who have said the same thing for 30 years or people who suddenly changed their minds? Aren't the swift boat vets wafflers?

apropos your sig, isn't that precisely what kerry and his supporters are demanding re his time in 'nam? that there be no criticism, and if there is that such criticism is "reprehensible," if not "unpatriotic?"

[rimrocker]

I guess it's true you canjudge a man by his enemies...
_____________

Excerpts from Nixon White House tapes
Conversations reveal Nixon's desire to discredit John Kerry in 1971

NBC News
Updated: 5:57 p.m. ET March 15, 2004


April 23, 1971: Oval Office meeting with Haldeman, Kissinger
President: Apparently, this fellow, uh, that they put in the front row, is that what you say, the front [unintelligible] the real stars? Kerry.
Haldeman: Kerry. He is, he did a hell of a great job on the, uh --
President: He was extremely effective.
Haldeman: [Unintelligible] he did a superb job on it at Foreign Relations Committee yesterday. A Kennedy-type guy - he looks like a Kennedy and he, and he talks exactly like a Kennedy.
Kissinger : [Unintelligible].
President: Where did he serve?
Haldeman: He was a Navy lieutenant, jg., on a gunboat.

[edit]

Haldeman: He was only over there for, I thinks it's four months or five months.
President: Bob, the Navy didn’t have any casualties in Vietnam except in the air.
Haldeman: Well, this guy got a Purple Heart with two clusters and the Navy Star. He's got a hell of a bundle of lettuce up here.

[edit]

Kissinger: Well, it, it's an outrage --
Haldeman: No, but he's said some good things.
Kissinger: -- that eight hundred veterans --
President: Yeah.
Kissinger: -- of whom I’m sure a significant percentage are phonies --
President: Yeah.
Kissinger: -- get five minutes on national television every --
President: [Unintelligible].
Kissinger: -- night.
Haldeman: Well, they've got about six paraplegics up there with the whole bunch and that's, God, everything ya read would make ya think all those guys out there had no legs.

[edit]

Haldeman: I think you’ll find Kerry running for political office. I think you’re exactly right, he’s building himself –
Nixon: Is he from Massachusetts?
Haldeman: I don’t know.

April 28, 1971: EOB phone conversation with Charles Colson
Colson: This fellow Kerry that they had on last week --
President: Yeah.
Colson: -- hell, he turns out to be, uh, really quite a phony. You know, we --.
President: Yeah, I know.
Colson: That story we're getting out, that, uh, --
President: Are ya?
Colson: --[Newspaper columnist Jerald] TerHorst is writing that for --
President: Good.
Colson: -- North American Newspaper Alliance.
President: Well, he is sort of a phony, isn't he?
Colson: Well, he stayed, when he was here --
President: Stayed out in Georgetown, yeah.
Colson: -- he stayed in Georgetown with, uh, one of the old-line Washington socialites, Elsie Leiter*, and, uh, was out at the best restaurants every night and, uh --
President: Sure.
Colson: -- you know, he's just, the complete opportunist.
President: A racket, sure.
Colson: He was in Vietnam a total of four months. Uh, he's, he's politically ambitious and just, uh, looking for an issue.
President: Yeah.
Colson: He came back a hawk and became a dove when he saw the political opportunities.
President: Sure, well, anyway, keep the faith.
Colson: We’ll keep hitting him, Mr. President.
Presdent: Bye.
Colson: Yes, sir.

*Note: Kerry says that while he visited the home of TK, he spent every night on the Mall with the other veterans

June 2, 1971: Oval Office meeting with Bob Haldeman
Haldeman: We got these guys now forming this Veterans for a – Peace with Justice, or uh – the veterans –
Nixon: They came in to see me? Are they here?
Haldeman: No we don’t want them to be able to see you yet. We don’t want to –
Nixon: Who are they?
Haldeman: Well, it’s this guy, uh, he’s got a beard, one of ‘em, and there’s this Navy officer [John O'Neill], just got out yesterday –
President: Yeah.
Haldeman: -- crew cut, real sharp looking guy who is more articulate than Kerry. He’s not as eloquent; he isn’t the ham that Kerry is. But he’s more believable.

[edit]

Haldeman: Colson put this together.

[edit]

Haldeman: This guy now [O’Neill], is gonna, he’s gonna move on Kerry. He’s gonna move around the country.

June 16, 1971: Oval Office meeting with John O’Neill
Nixon: I really feel that what you’re doing, you’ll take brickbats, you go on some of these TV shows like the Cavett thing, you’re gonna get banged, but – you’ll get terribly discouraged and say the whole country’s – and so forth. But I think ya gotta remember, uh, you have to remember, that uh, that uh, now {unintelligible] in Vietnam should be enough, that now you would have the [unint] to get back and reassure people that those few that come back – like Kerry and the rest – don’t speak for all.

[edit]

Nixon: That’s great. Give it to him, give it to him. And you can do it, because you have a pleasant manner, too, because you’ve got – and I think it’s a great service to the country.

[edit]

Nixon: You fellows have been out there. You’ve got to know, seeing the barbarians that we’re up against, you’ve got to know what we’re doing in that horrible swamp that North Vietnam is. 33:40 You’ve got to know from all our faults of what we have in this country that, that what we’re doing is right. You’ve got to know too, people are critics. Critics of the war, critics of [unint], run America down. Those that are, uh – well in every respect, either get out of Vietnam, get out of [unint], get out of the world, etcetera etcetera. You’ve gotta know that you’re on the winning s—that, that you’re on the right side.


© 2004 MSNBC Interactive
URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4534613/

[basso]

oh great, now Hamster-gate? (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5594565/site/newsweek/)

--
GOP Questions Kerry's Hamster Heroism
Rodent story 'doesn't add up,' mass e-mail claims
By Andy Borowitz
Newsweek

Aug. 3 - A mass e-mail from the Republican National Committee is questioning whether or not Democratic nominee John Kerry actually saved his daughter Alexandra's pet hamster, Licorice, from drowning during a family boating trip as she has claimed he did.

The e-mail, with a subject line reading "Kerry Hamster Story --We Smell a Rat," was sent to more than 2,000 news outlets just hours after Alexandra Kerry charmed the Democratic national convention with her tale of the Senator's hamster heroism.

In the e-mail message, the GOP quotes an unnamed witness who claims that not only did Kerry not save the rodent's life, but he may have actually been responsible for its premature demise.

According to the witness, Licorice was "breathing normally" when Kerry pounced on the hamster and administered "unnecessarily forceful CPR" in an over-the-top bid to appear heroic, breaking several of the hamster's ribs and puncturing its left lung.

Speaking at a campaign stop in Flint, Michigan, Kerry defended his daughter's version of events and was joined onstage by several veterans of the boating trip during which Licorice fell overboard, a group Mr. Kerry called his "band of brothers."

But perhaps the most vehement defense came from wife Teresa Heinz Kerry, who told the gathering, "The Licorice story is true, and if you don't believe it, you can shove a live hamster in a secure, undisclosed location."

Later in the rally, Sen. John Edwards retracted his statement about there being two Americas, saying that he had gotten that information from Mapquest.

Andy Borowitz is the author of The Borowitz Report, and the winner of the National Press Club's humor award.
© 2004 Newsweek, Inc.

[mc mark]

LOL!!

basso do you know who Andy Borowitz is?

Hint: he also writes for the onion

[basso]

Originally posted by mc mark
LOL!!

basso do you know who Andy Borowitz is?

Hint: he also writes for the onion

uh, yeah-uh.

[rimrocker]

This answers were some of the money is coming from... and O'Neill's book comes out soon... published by Regnery...
________________

Vietnam Veterans Buy Ads to Attack Kerry
By JODI WILGOREN

A group of Vietnam veterans has bought television time in three swing states for an advertisement that attacks Senator John Kerry, accusing him of lying about his war record, including the circumstances surrounding his medals, and betraying his comrades by later opposing the war.

"When the chips were down, you could not count on John Kerry," one of the veterans, Larry Thurlow, says in the 60-second advertisement, scheduled to begin running today in scattered markets in Ohio, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

Robert G. Elder, like Mr. Kerry a Navy lieutenant who commanded a Swift boat, declares, "John Kerry is no war hero," and Robert Hildreth, who held a similar post, intones, "John Kerry cannot be trusted."

The Kerry campaign immediately denounced the group, noting that none of the men had actually served on the Swift boats that Mr. Kerry commanded, like Gene Thorson, who told reporters, "These assertions are garbage; these people weren't there with John Kerry."

The advertisement, which layers snippets from recent interviews with a dozen veterans over familiar black-and-white photographs of Mr. Kerry and his men in uniform, is the latest tactic of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a 200-member group that held a news conference in Washington this spring to make similar accusations. It is one of several independent groups, known as 527's for the provision in the tax code that enables their operation, to run attack advertisements this season.

Tax documents show that from April to June, the group collected $158,750 from 11 people, $100,000 of it from Bob J. Perry, a Houston developer who is a major contributor to Republican campaigns.

Steve Schmidt, a spokesman for the Bush campaign, said he had not seen the advertisement and tried to distance the president from it.

"The Bush-Cheney campaign has never and will never question John Kerry's service during Vietnam," Mr. Schmidt said. "The election will not be about the past, it will be about the future."

Mr. Kerry's aides circulated an 18-page packet discrediting the veterans group and linking its backers to Republicans, noting that a public-relations consultant the group paid $27,000 this spring, Merrie Spaeth, was also involved in a advertising campaign attacking Senator John McCain during his tough race against Mr. Bush in the 2000 primary in South Carolina. The Kerry campaign also convened a conference call in which two of Mr. Kerry's crewmates, and a man he pulled from the Mekong River, defended his service.

"The fact is, John Kerry risked his life to save the lives of others,'' said Chad Clanton, a spokesman for the Kerry campaign.

Adm. Roy F. Hoffman, who is retired and who says in the advertisement, "John Kerry has not been honest," acknowledged that the men in the advertisement did not serve on Mr. Kerry's boat, but he said their time in parallel boats on coordinated missions, or as Mr. Kerry's superiors, made them valid commentators on his record. The group provided station managers with a 13-page memorandum, backed up by more than 60 pages of sworn statements, book excerpts and military records.

"We were on the same operations, we were operating within 25-50 yards of him all the time, and for them to suggest we don't know John Kerry is pure old bull," Mr. Hoffman said. "He has made this the centerpiece of this campaign, and we just don't think he's qualified to be the commander in chief of the armed forces. We have every right to be heard."

Produced by Stevens, Reed, Curcio & Potham, a Republican firm based in Alexandria, Va., the advertisement tees off with Mr. Kerry's running mate, Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, saying that the best way to understand Mr. Kerry is to "spend three minutes with the men who served with him." Then the anti-Kerry veterans speak one by one:

"John Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star," says one, Van O'Dell. "I know. I was there. I saw what happened."

Another, Jack Chenoweth, says, "His account of what happened and what actually happened are the difference between night and day." Adrian L. Lonsdale, one of Mr. Kerry's superiors in Vietnam, says Mr. Kerry "lacks the capacity to lead," Shelton White, a Swift boat commander, says he "betrayed the men and women he served with in Vietnam," and Joseph L. Ponder adds, "He dishonored his country, he most certainly did."

A doctor, Louis Letson, repeats accusations he made in newspaper interviews this spring that Mr. Kerry did not deserve his first Purple Heart because his wounds resulted from a ricochet off friendly fire, saying in the advertisement, "I know John Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart because I treated him for that injury." The Kerry campaign pointed out yesterday, as it had previously, that another doctor, J. C. Carreon, signed Mr. Kerry's treatment record.

Mr. Hoffman said the group was spending $500,000 to run the advertisement but would not say how long it would be on the air; a Kerry aide said the buy was far smaller, $156,000 in seven smallish markets like Green Bay, Wis., and Toledo, Ohio, suggesting it was a "vanity buy'' intended to attract news coverage.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/05/politics/campaign/05veterans.html?pagewanted=print&position=

[Cohen]

... "It was the same kind of deal that was pulled on me," McCain ...

[Oski2005]

McCain's thoughts. Funny, with Repubs, McCain is hated, adored, and then hated again. I'm gonna go with hated on this.


McCain condemns anti-Kerry ads, calls on White House to follow suit
- RON FOURNIER, AP Political Writer
Thursday, August 5, 2004


(08-05) 10:20 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --

Republican Sen. John McCain, a former prisoner of war in Vietnam, called an ad criticizing John Kerry's military service "dishonest and dishonorable" and urged the White House on Thursday to condemn it as well.

The White House declined.

"It was the same kind of deal that was pulled on me," McCain said in an interview with The Associated Press, comparing the anti-Kerry ad to tactics in his bitter Republican primary fight with President Bush.

The 60-second ad features Vietnam veterans who accuse the Democratic presidential nominee of lying about his decorated Vietnam War record and betraying his fellow veterans by later opposing the conflict.

"When the chips were down, you could not count on John Kerry," one of the veterans, Larry Thurlow, says in the ad. Thurlow didn't serve on Kerry's swiftboat, but says he witnessed the events that led to Kerry winning a Bronze Star and the last of his three Purple Hearts. Kerry's crewmates support the candidate and call him a hero.

The ad, scheduled to air in a few markets in Ohio, West Virginia and Wisconsin, was produced by Stevens, Reed, Curcio and Potham, the same team that produced McCain's ads in 2000.

"I wish they hadn't done it," McCain said of his former advisers. "I don't know if they knew all the facts."

Asked if the White House knew about the ad or helped find financing for it, McCain said, "I hope not, but I don't know. But I think the Bush campaign should specifically condemn the ad."

McCain, chairman of Bush's campaign in Arizona, later said the Bush campaign has denied any involvement and added, "I can't believe the president would pull such a cheap stunt."

White House spokesman Scott McClellan declined to condemn the ad. He did denounce the proliferation of spending by independent groups, such as the anti-Kerry veterans organization, that are playing on both sides of the political fence.

"The president thought he got rid of this unregulated soft money when he signed the bipartisan campaign finance reform into law," McClellan said. A chief sponsor of that bill, which Bush initially opposed, was McCain.

In 2000, Bush's supporters sponsored a rumor campaign against McCain in the South Carolina primary, helping Bush win the primary and the nomination. McCain's supporters have never forgiven the Bush team.

McCain said that's all in the past to him, but he's speaking out against the anti-Kerry ad because "it reopens all the old wounds of the Vietnam War, which I spent the last 35 years trying to heal."

"I deplore this kind of politics," McCain said. "I think the ad is dishonest and dishonorable. As it is, none of these individuals served on the boat (Kerry) commanded. Many of his crew have testified to his courage under fire. I think John Kerry served honorably in Vietnam. I think George Bush served honorably in the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam War."

Retired Adm. Roy Hoffmann, head of the Swift Boat group, said they respected McCain's "right to express his opinion and we hope he extends to us the same respect and courtesy, particularly since we served with John Kerry, we knew him well and Sen. McCain did not."

McCain himself spent more than five years in a Vietnam prisoner of war camp. A bona fide war hero, McCain, like Kerry, used his war record as the foundation of his presidential campaign.

The Kerry campaign has denounced the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, saying none of the men in the ad served on the boat that Kerry commanded. Three veterans on Kerry's boat that day -- Jim Rassmann, who says Kerry saved his life, Gene Thorson and Del Sandusky, the driver on Kerry's boat, said the group was lying.

They say Kerry was injured, and Rassmann called the group's account "pure fabrication."

Hoffmann said none of the 13 veterans in the commercial served on Kerry's boat but rather were in other swiftboats within 50 yards of Kerry's. The group claims that there was no gunfire on the day Kerry pulled Rassmann from a muddy river in the Mekong Delta and that Kerry's arm was not wounded, as he has claimed.


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/08/05/politics1020EDT0544.DTL&type=printable

[basso]

not to demean kerry's service or anything, but it does look like there's been a bit of rewriting of history:

http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_08_01_archive.html#109167970892274992

--
In his speech to the Democratic convention, vice presidential nominee Senator John Edwards, D-NC, was the latest figure to distort John Kerry's service record in Vietnam:

When John Kerry graduated college, he volunteered for military service. He volunteered to go to Vietnam and to captain a swift boat, one of the most dangerous duties you could have. And as a result he was wounded and honored for his valor.

Like many others who have made the same claim, Edwards' implication is misleading. As Chris Suellentrop pointed out on Slate, Kerry volunteered for swift boat duty before it became so dangerous. Here's how the Boston Globe recounted the story in its multi-part series on Kerry:

Kerry initially hoped to continue his service at a relatively safe distance from most fighting, securing an assignment as "swift boat" skipper. While the 50-foot swift boats cruised the Vietnamese coast a little closer to the action than the Gridley had come, they were still considered relatively safe.

"I didn't really want to get involved in the war," Kerry said in a little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published in 1986. "When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I thought I was going to be doing."

But two weeks after he arrived in Vietnam, the swift boat mission changed -- and Kerry went from having one of the safest assignments in the escalating conflict to one of the most dangerous. Under the newly launched Operation SEALORD, swift boats were charged with patrolling the narrow waterways of the Mekong Delta to draw fire and smoke out the enemy. Cruising inlets and coves and canals, swift boats were especially vulnerable targets.

Kerry's biography on his campaign website (which Edwards echoed almost directly) promotes this confusion, citing the Globe's description of the revised mission of the swift boats and implying it was what the Massachusetts senator volunteered for:

In 1968, John Kerry began his second tour of duty, and volunteered to serve on a swift boat, one of the most dangerous assignments of the war. Swift boats patrolled the narrow inlets and canals around the Mekong Delta 'to draw fire and smoke out the enemy,' according to the Boston Globe."

In his convention speech, former President Bill Clinton also obscured what Kerry thought he was volunteering for, saying, "When they sent those swiftboats up the river in Vietnam and they told them their job was to draw hostile fire, to wave the American flag and bait the enemy to come out and fight, John Kerry said: Send me."

And some journalists have also gotten the facts wrong. For instance, Bennett Roth of the Houston Chronicle, who wrote that "Kerry enlisted in the Navy after graduating from Yale in 1966 and requested to command a Swift boat, one of the more dangerous assignments during the war."

Despite Kerry's decorated service record, the circumstances surrounding his request for swift boat duty should not be mischaracterized.

[glynch]

Poor basso, it must on a certain level distress him to have Dubya the awol little daddy's boy as his candidate.

I think this is one of the reasons the conservos get so nutso about Kerry's heroism. No matter how manly Dubya acts while prancing at photo ops or while sending other people's kids to war, they know he was so cowardly in his own personal life.

.

[giddyup]

It must really piss of American soldiers to be constantly referred to as "kids" by so many of the people that they are defending. Michael Moore goes with the more formal "children."

I heard that Kerry's enlistment in the Navy (relatively safe duty) was to avoid the draft (relatively risky duty).

[mc mark]

Originally posted by giddyup

I heard that Kerry's enlistment in the Navy (relatively safe duty) was to avoid the draft (relatively risky duty).

OMG!

So now it's more noble to be drafted than to enlist?

[Rocketman95]

Originally posted by mc mark
OMG!

So now it's more noble to be drafted than to enlist?

WWWB?

[mc mark]

Originally posted by Rocketman95
WWWB?

fill me in on the joke.....please?

:)

did I miss that thread?

[Rocketman95]

Originally posted by mc mark
fill me in on the joke.....please?

:)

did I miss that thread?

It's just a question I ask that I never get an answer to when conservatives try to belittle Kerry's volunteering to go to Vietnam.

Where was Walker Bush?

[mc mark]

Where was Walker Bush?

me likey!

:D

[FranchiseBlade]

Originally posted by basso
apropos your sig, isn't that precisely what kerry and his supporters are demanding re his time in 'nam? that there be no criticism, and if there is that such criticism is "reprehensible," if not "unpatriotic?"

Absolutely not. Criticism is fine. Illegitimate criticism, from people who didn't serve with Kerry or those that try and paint the folks who awarded medals in a bad light, isn't ok.

So far all of the criticism like this ad would fall into the reprehensible category. Name one piece of legitimate criticism of Kerry's service in Viet Nam.

[Sishir Chang]

Originally posted by giddyup

I heard that Kerry's enlistment in the Navy (relatively safe duty) was to avoid the draft (relatively risky duty).

So how do you explain that he asked to be transferred from the relatively safe posting he got to the highly dangerous posting on a swift boat?

[SamFisher]

Originally posted by giddyup
It must really piss of American soldiers to be constantly referred to as "kids" by so many of the people that they are defending. Michael Moore goes with the more formal "children."

I heard that Kerry's enlistment in the Navy (relatively safe duty) was to avoid the draft (relatively risky duty).

I heard that republicans hate Kerry and will say any vile, disgusting thing that is necessary regardless of its truth so that their defective, failure of a president can stay in office and continue his policies that favor their own interests.

That's what I heard.

[FranchiseBlade]

Originally posted by giddyup
It must really piss of American soldiers to be constantly referred to as "kids" by so many of the people that they are defending. Michael Moore goes with the more formal "children."

I heard that Kerry's enlistment in the Navy (relatively safe duty) was to avoid the draft (relatively risky duty).

Really? Well facts such as Kerry volunteering to go overseas rather than stay stateside might contradict what you HEARD. Facts like Kerry volunteering to live the larger vessel at sea and instead command swift boats in the delta might contradict what you heard about a man wanting to avoid the draft.

[Oski2005]

Originally posted by basso
apropos your sig, isn't that precisely what kerry and his supporters are demanding re his time in 'nam? that there be no criticism, and if there is that such criticism is "reprehensible," if not "unpatriotic?"


You are way off and you most certainly know it. That quote is about criticizing the President for the decisions he makes as President. That isn't what you are doing. You do know about criticizing the President though because I'm sure you are quick to call people unamerican for questioning the decisions that Bush makes. Now it's known as Bush bashing.


"I don't think we should have gone to Iraq."

"When will the Bush bashing end?"

"I'm just saying I disagree with his decision."

"You libs make me sick with you mud slinging politics!"

[Faos]

Nightline will cover the Vets/Kerry topic tonight.

http://abcnews.go.com/Sections/Nightline/

[basso]

Originally posted by Oski2005
You are way off and you most certainly know it. That quote is about criticizing the President for the decisions he makes as President. That isn't what you are doing. You do know about criticizing the President though because I'm sure you are quick to call people unamerican for questioning the decisions that Bush makes. Now it's known as Bush bashing.


"I don't think we should have gone to Iraq."

"When will the Bush bashing end?"

"I'm just saying I disagree with his decision."

"You libs make me sick with you mud slinging politics!"

are those quotes of mine? could you provide links?

[RocketMan Tex]

Originally posted by SamFisher
I heard that republicans hate Kerry and will say any vile, disgusting thing that is necessary regardless of its truth so that their defective, failure of a president can stay in office and continue his policies that favor their own interests.

That's what I heard.

You heard right!:eek:

[giddyup]

I heard that when Kerrry volunteered for the swift boats, they were assigned duty off the coast of Viet Nam. In the interim, their duty changed to one more dangerous and hazardous on the delta.

Is that not true? I'm only asserting that that is what I heard.

And what about the volunteerism... so he wouldn't be drafted. Is that a lie or possibly the truth?

[Rocketman95]

Originally posted by giddyup
And what about the volunteerism... so he wouldn't be drafted. Is that a lie or possibly the truth?

At least he volunteered.


http://www.calpundit.com/blogphotos/Blog_Bush_No_Overseas.gif

[RocketMan Tex]

Originally posted by giddyup


And what about the volunteerism... so he wouldn't be drafted. Is that a lie or possibly the truth?

I'm sorry Giddy, but exactly what the hell does this statement mean?????

[bnb]

i wonder if there's ever been as much scrutiny and second guessing over such a relatively short period of time.

What's sometimes lost in the debate over Kerry's service, is that he only served four months of active duty. He is not a Wesley Clark, or Colin Powel for whom the military was a much more significant part of their lives, and therefore, likely a better guage of their character. Yet Kerry's supporters trumpet his heroics (which nobody should dispute) and service to a much greater extent than is probably warranted. Not trying to belittle his service -- just pointing out, and acknowledging, that in terms of his past, he is, in my opinion, somewhat guilty of hyperbole.

I can understand the strategy -- given Bush and Cheney's past -- but do see how it could grind on some.

I'm also dumbfounded by the extent to which Team Bush has gone to discredit the man's service. Truly dispicable, and indicative of the way Team Bush plays very dirty politics. They did it to McCain in 2000, and have come out even more fierce in the buildup to this election.

[rimrocker]

Originally posted by bnb
i wonder if there's ever been as much scrutiny and second guessing over such a relatively short period of time.

What's sometimes lost in the debate over Kerry's service, is that he only served four months of active duty.

Before doing the Swift Boat thing, Kerry served a full tour on the USS Gridley off the coast of Vietnam. His four month tour was the Swift Boat assignment.

[rimrocker]

Kerry's Military Service from johnkerry.com...
_______________

February 18, 1966 Kerry formally enlists in the U.S. Navy

August 22, 1966 Kerry reports for Naval Officer Candidate School at the U.S. Naval Training Center in Newport, Rhode Island

December 16, 1966 Kerry receives commission as an Ensign

January 3, 1967 Kerry reports for duty at the Naval Schools Command at Treasure Island (CA)-Takes 10 week Officer Damage Control Course

March 22, 1967 Reports to U.S. Fleet Anti-Air Warfare Training Center (CA). Receives training as a Combat Information Center Watch Officer.

June 8, 1967 Kerry reports to USS Gridley-serves in several capacities

February 9, 1968 USS Gridley departs for a Western Pacific (WESTPAC) deployment, to engage in operations in support of the Vietnam War. Ship spends time in the Gulf of Tonkin off North Vietnam, at Subic Bay in the Philippines and in Wellington, New Zealand

February 10, 1968 Kerry requests duty in Vietnam He lists his first preference for a position as an officer in charge of a Swift Boat (designated PCF for Patrol Craft Fast), his second as an officer in a patrol boat (designated PBR, for Patrol Boat River) squadron

May 27, 1968 USS Gridley sets sail for the US

June 6, 1968 Kerry arrives in Long Beach the day after Senator Robert F. Kennedy is killed in Los Angeles

June 16, 1968 Kerry promoted to Lieutenant, Junior Grade

July 20, 1968 Kerry leaves Gridley for specialized training at the Naval Amphibious Base in Coronado, CA in preparation for service as commander of a Swift Boat. These unarmored, but heavily armed, fifty foot aluminum hulled patrol boats depended on speed and agility when engaging the enemy.

November 17, 1968 Upon completion of his training, Kerry reports for duty to Coastal Squadron 1, Coastal Division 14, Cam Ranh Bay, South Vietnam.

December 1968
through January 1969 Kerry commands PCF-44

December 2, 1968 Kerry experiences first intense combat; receives first combat related injury.

December 6, 1968 Kerry moved to Coastal Division 11 at An Thoi on Phu Quoc Island

December 13, 1968 Kerry moved to Coastal Division 13, Cam Ranh Bay

December 24, 1968 Kerry involved in combat during the Christmas Eve truce of 1968. The truce was three minutes old when mortar fire exploded around Lieutenant Kerry and his five-man crew. Reacting swiftly, John Kerry and his crew silenced the machine gun nest.

January 22, 1969 Kerry and other Swift boat commanders travel to Saigon for meeting with Adm. Elmo Zumwalt, Commander Naval Forces Vietnam (COMNAVFORV), and Gen. Creighton Abrams, Commander United States Military Assistance Command Vietnam (COMUSMACV)

Late January, 1969 Kerry joined his 5 man crew on PCF-94

Late January through
Early March, 1969 Starting in late January 1969, this crew completed 18 missions over an intense and dangerous 48 days, almost all of them in the dense jungles of the Mekong Delta. Kerry's crew included engineman Eugene Thorson, later an Iowa cement mason; David Alston, then the crew's only African-American and today a minister in South Carolina; petty officer Del Sandusky of Illinois; rear gunner and quartermaster Michael Medeiros of California; and the late Tom Belodeau, who joined the crew fresh out of Chelmsford High School in Massachusetts. Others rotated in and out of the crew. The most intense action came during an extraordinary eight days of more than 10 firefights, remembered by Kerry's crew as the "days of hell."

February 20, 1969 Kerry and crew involved in combat; Kerry receives second combat injury – Kerry earned his second Purple Heart after sustaining a shrapnel wound in his left thigh.

February 28, 1969 For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while serving with Coastal Division ELEVEN engaged in armed conflict with Viet Cong insurgents in An Xuyen Province, Republic of Vietnam, on 28 February 1969. Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry was serving as Officer in Charge of Patrol Craft Fast 94 and Officer in Tactical Command of a three-boat mission. As the force approached the target area on the narrow Dong Cung River, all units came under intense automatic weapons and small arms fire from an entrenched enemy force less than fifty-feet away. Unhesitatingly, Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry ordered his boat to attack as all units opened fire and beached directly in front of the enemy ambushers. The daring and courageous tactic surprised the enemy and succeeded in routing a score of enemy soldiers. The PCF gunners captured many enemy weapons in the battle that followed. On a request from U.S. Army advisors ashore, Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry ordered PCFs 94 and 23 further up river to suppress enemy sniper fire. After proceeding approximately eight hundred yards, the boats again were taken under fire from a heavily foliated area and B-40 rocket exploded close aboard PCF-94; with utter disregard for his own safety and the enemy rockets, he again ordered a charge on the enemy, beached his boat only ten feet from the VC rocket position, and personally led a landing party ashore in pursuit of the enemy. Upon sweeping the area an immediate search uncovered an enemy rest and supply area which was destroyed. The extraordinary daring and personal courage of Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry in attacking a numerically superior force in the face of intense fire were responsible for the highly successful mission. His actions were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.

March 13, 1969 For heroic achievement while serving with Coastal Division ELEVEN engaged in armed conflict with Viet Cong communist aggressors in An Xuyen Province, Republic of Vietnam, on 13 March 1969. Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry was serving as Officer in Charge of Patrol Craft Fast 94, one of five boats conducting a SEA Lords operation in the Bay Hap River. While exiting the river, a mine detonated under another Inshore Patrol Craft and almost simultaneously, another mine detonated wounding Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry in the right arm. In addition, all units began receiving small arms and automatic weapons fire from the river banks. When Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry discovered he had a man overboard, he returned upriver to assist. The man in the water was receiving sniper fire from both banks. Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry directed his gunners to provide suppressing fire, while from an exposed position on the bow, his arm bleeding and in pain and with disregard for his safety, he pulled the man aboard. Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry then directed his boat to return and assist the other damaged boat to safety. Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry’s calmness, professionalism and great personal courage under fire were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service. Lieutenant (junior grade) Kerry is authorized to wear the Combat “V”.

March 17, 1969 The policy of Coastal Squadron One, the swift boat command, was to send home any individual who is wounded three times in action. After sustaining his third wound from enemy action in Vietnam, Kerry was granted relief under this policy.

Early April, 1969 Kerry departs Vietnam

April 11, 1969 Kerry reports for duty at the Military Sea Transportation Service, U.S. Atlantic Fleet in Brooklyn, NY.

January 1, 1970 Kerry promoted to (full) Lieutenant

January 3, 1970 Kerry requests discharge

March 1, 1970 Kerry’s date of separation from Active Duty

April 29, 1970 Kerry listed as Registrant who has completed service

[bnb]

Originally posted by rimrocker
Before doing the Swift Boat thing, Kerry served a full tour on the USS Gridley off the coast of Vietnam. His four month tour was the Swift Boat assignment.

thanks!

I did a quick google to see how long he was there as i understood it wasn't long. Four months didn't sound right, but its all i could find :)

I just wish we could get off this topic -- and i wish he hadn't done the ol' " reporting for duty" bit -- as it just ads fuel to the nonesense!

Shouldn't you be out fighting fires? Or are you on a well deserved rest?

EDIT --

August '66 to March '70. More extensive than i thought. See what these campaigns of misinformation can do!

[SamFisher]

Originally posted by bnb
[B. Yet Kerry's supporters trumpet his heroics (which nobody should dispute) and service to a much greater extent than is probably warranted. Not trying to belittle his service -- just pointing out, and acknowledging, that in terms of his past, he is, in my opinion, somewhat guilty of hyperbole.

[/B]

I doubt that; nearly every thread started in this forum at least about it usually has to deal with some aspect of the dubious Republican Tet offensive being waged against him.

Similarly, while Kerry alludes to Vietnam in general on the campaign trail and his campaign website, inter alia, prominently features it, he very rarely goes into details about the experience in most of his speeches.

Again, the fact that this is even contemplated as an issue and we even beginning to question his record next to that of the fake flyboy is a testament to the effectiveness of the right wing echo chamber and its various minions and their well stocked array of talking points.

[bnb]

Kerry does more than allude to his service. It's a cornerstone of his campaign's portrayal of his character. The 'reporting for duty' bit at the DNC was not ad-libbed. It was deliberate.

I'm just pondering here -- agreeing that his campaign does spend an inordinate amount of time on his service. A friend commented on the weekend that you would have thought he'd had a career in the military by his campaigns portrayal of him -- and i thought that that was a valid observation.

Not in any way validating the butchering of his service record by Bush and Co. Just food for thought.

By the way, I think you are being too kind in referring to the Bush mud-fest as a tet offensive.

[rimrocker]

Originally posted by bnb


Shouldn't you be out fighting fires? Or are you on a well deserved rest?


It's a really slow year... Alaska went nuts for awhile, but for everything else, the local folks seem to be handling things well. Our Prevention message seems to be working... major drop-off in human-caused starts...

[SamFisher]

Originally posted by bnb
Kerry does more than allude to his service. It's a cornerstone of his campaign's portrayal of his character. The 'reporting for duty' bit at the DNC was not ad-libbed. It was deliberate.

I'm just pondering here -- agreeing that his campaign does spend an inordinate amount of time on his service. A friend commented on the weekend that you would have thought he'd had a career in the military by his campaigns portrayal of him -- and i thought that that was a valid observation.

Not in any way validating the butchering of his service record by Bush and Co. Just food for thought.

By the way, I think you are being too kind in referring to the Bush mud-fest as a tet offensive.

I think the perception that all Kerry does is talk about his military service is not wholly accurate however and that such perception is the product of attack ads and talking points. ("Why won't Kerry talk about what he did in the Senate? blah blah blah, most liberal senator EVAR!1!!!!!!") Again, read his speeches; he make general allusions about service and sacrifice and the parlays it into a discussion of nationbuilding, etc.

As for it being the cornerstone as the portrayal of his character in particular -- I don't disagree with that; and I think that that area of his life is probably the most important in both the formation of his character and probably represents the expression of his core beliefs in an extreme situation -- I think if you had been through the same thing, you would agree. But that is but one aspect of his campaign.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by RocketMan Tex
I'm sorry Giddy, but exactly what the hell does this statement mean?????
It means that he entered the Navy rather than be drafted... because he thought the Navy duty to be less dangerous.

I think it is untrue that he volunteered to drive swift boats into enemy fire, although it is true that he volunteered for swift boat duty. The story I've heard is that the mission of the swift boats changed after he joined the Navy.

I'm not challenging his heroism for doing it period, just the notion that he chose such a dangerous duty voluntarily. BTW, that story doesn' jibe with his early departure from the Navy.

[FranchiseBlade]

Originally posted by giddyup
It means that he entered the Navy rather than be drafted... because he thought the Navy duty to be less dangerous.

I think it is untrue that he volunteered to drive swift boats into enemy fire, although it is true that he volunteered for swift boat duty. The story I've heard is that the mission of the swift boats changed after he joined the Navy.

I'm not challenging his heroism for doing it period, just the notion that he chose such a dangerous duty voluntarily. BTW, that story doesn' jibe with his early departure from the Navy.

If he wanted less dangerous duty he could have stayed on the vessel that wasn't even close to combat in Viet Nam. The fact that he volunteered for Swift boat duty would have put him closer to the action than he already was.

To say he only served 4 months is incorrect.

[rimrocker]

from the Washington Post, July 15, 1992...

The Bush reelection campaign today filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission against Floyd Brown, a conservative activist who produced the infamous Willie Horton ad in 1988 and recently has been digging for dirt about Bill Clinton.
...

Speaking in San Diego after a meeting with Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, Bush said, "We will do whatever we can to stop any filthy campaign tactics," and "we will do whatever we can ... to see that does not use my name for these nefarious purposes."

The 364 contributors listed on Brown's FEC reports have received letters from the Bush campaign informing them that Brown's "Citizens for Bush" is not affiliated with Bush/Quayle '92, according to a statement by White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater. [b]The same message -- and encouragement not to contribute to Brown's effort -- also went to 85,697 "major contributors" over the signature of the president's son, George W. Bush.

[basso]

Originally posted by rimrocker
from the Washington Post, July 15, 1992...

The Bush reelection campaign today filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission against Floyd Brown, a conservative activist who produced the infamous Willie Horton ad in 1988 and recently has been digging for dirt about Bill Clinton.
...

Speaking in San Diego after a meeting with Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, Bush said, "We will do whatever we can to stop any filthy campaign tactics," and "we will do whatever we can ... to see that does not use my name for these nefarious purposes."

The 364 contributors listed on Brown's FEC reports have received letters from the Bush campaign informing them that Brown's "Citizens for Bush" is not affiliated with Bush/Quayle '92, according to a statement by White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater. [b]The same message -- and encouragement not to contribute to Brown's effort -- also went to 85,697 "major contributors" over the signature of the president's son, George W. Bush.

and it's also great to see the dems distancing themselves in the same fashion from those who spew unfounded vitriol from the left...oh, wait...

[SamFisher]

Originally posted by basso
and it's also great to see the dems distancing themselves in the same fashion from those who spew unfounded vitriol from the left...oh, wait...

That's right; some guy posted a hitler-bush ad on moveon.org, so that excuses the past 30 years of sanctioned, official campaign mudslinging and racebaiting.

And I guess that unwillingness to dig into Clinton's past really set a tone back in 92, didn't it?

Nice, nice, nice.

[Deckard]

Originally posted by giddyup
It means that he entered the Navy rather than be drafted... because he thought the Navy duty to be less dangerous.

I think it is untrue that he volunteered to drive swift boats into enemy fire, although it is true that he volunteered for swift boat duty. The story I've heard is that the mission of the swift boats changed after he joined the Navy.

I'm not challenging his heroism for doing it period, just the notion that he chose such a dangerous duty voluntarily. BTW, that story doesn' jibe with his early departure from the Navy.

"It means that he entered the Navy rather than be drafted... because he thought the Navy duty to be less dangerous."
~giddy

Giddy, you've been reaching so much lately, I'm worried that you're going to pull a muscle. Did Kerry tell you that that was why he went into the Navy? You had a conversation with him? And, as you know quite well, and I haven't a clue whether this affected his decision or not... same as you, it is amazingly common for people up for the draft to enlist in a service that they prefer. They do it for a host of reasons... it offers a better opportunity to do something of interest, personally or in a future career. It gives them some choice about what they do in the military, instead of that being totally left up to chance. And on and on. The idea that Kerry did this because it was less dangerous is strictly something you pulled out of your hat. People have been joining the Navy, when they knew they were up for the draft, or joining the Marines, for the same reason, since WWII. I know veterans personally who chose the Navy and enlisted before they were drafted during WWII because they decided they wanted to and they could.

Geez. This election cycle is getting beyond rediculous.

[basso]

Originally posted by SamFisher
That's right; some guy posted a hitler-bush ad on moveon.org, so that excuses the past 30 years of sanctioned, official campaign mudslinging and racebaiting.

And I guess that unwillingness to dig into Clinton's past really set a tone back in 92, didn't it?

Nice, nice, nice.

actually, i was referring to MM and his place of honor next to former ace nukular negotiator jimmy carter at the DNC...

[andymoon]

Originally posted by basso
actually, i was referring to MM and his place of honor next to former ace nukular negotiator jimmy carter at the DNC...

If you haven't heard the people in this forum disagree with MM and disavow his messages then you haven't been listening.

[basso]

Originally posted by andymoon
If you haven't heard the people in this forum disagree with MM and disavow his messages then you haven't been listening.

it's not the people in this forum i was referring to.

[SamFisher]

Originally posted by basso
actually, i was referring to MM and his place of honor next to former ace nukular negotiator jimmy carter at the DNC...

Well, granted, MadMax is a damned fool and a persistent agitator, and a known equine sympathizer, as well as a leap year crossdresser, but I wouldn't go so far as to cast aspersions on his character in the fashion that you just did.

[Rocketman95]

BTW, I love how pissed Clinton was last night. It's about time the Democrats stop acting like little pussies and fight back!

[mc mark]

Unfit indeed.

Anti-Kerry Book Author Sorry for Slurs

By JENNIFER C. KERR, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - One of the authors of a new anti-John Kerry book frequently posted comments on a conservative Web site describing Muslims and Catholics as pedophiles and Pope John Paul II as senile.

But as he prepared to launch the book, "Unfit for Command," Jerry Corsi apologized for the remarks in an interview with The Associated Press Tuesday, saying they were meant as a joke and he never intended to offend anyone.

In chat room entry last year on freerepublic.com, Corsi writes: "Islam is a peaceful religion — just as long as the women are beaten, the boys buggered and the infidels are killed."

In another entry, he says: "So this is what the last days of the Catholic Church are going to look like. Buggering boys undermines the moral base and the lawyers rip the gold off the Vatican altars. We may get one more Pope, when this senile one dies, but that's probably about it."

Corsi, who described himself as a "devout Catholic," said the comments are being taken out of context. "I considered them a joke," said Corsi, who owns a financial services company and has written extensively on the anti-war movement.

In a March posting, Corsi discussed Kerry's faith, writing: "After he married TerRAHsa, didn't John Kerry begin practicing Judaism? He also has paternal grandparents that were Jewish. What religion is John Kerry?"

Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, are Catholic.

"I don't stand by any of those comments and I apologize if they offended anybody," Corsi said.

The Kerry campaign called Corsi's Web chat postings disgusting.

"President Bush should immediately condemn this sleazy book written by a virulent anti-Catholic bigot. It says something about the smear campaign against John Kerry that it has stooped to enlist a hatemonger," said campaign spokesman Chad Clanton.

Terry Holt, a spokesman for the Bush-Cheney campaign, said neither the president nor his campaign has ever questioned Kerry's military service. "It's shameful for the Kerry campaign to suggest so by falsely associating us with this effort," Holt said.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=696&e=10&u=/ap/20040810/ap_on_el_pr/anti_kerry_book

[Rocketman95]

What a flip-flopper. :rolleyes:

[giddyup]

Originally posted by Deckard
[B]Did Kerry tell you that that was why he went into the Navy? You had a conversation with him?
... and you did? I can relate the unflattering version of events and you can relate the flattering version of events. The truth lay somewhere inbetween I would imagine.

[Rocketman95]

Originally posted by giddyup
... and you did? I can relate the unflattering version of events and you can relate the flattering version of events. The truth lay somewhere inbetween I would imagine.

Or you could maybe not assume the worst about someone who volunteered to go to Vietnam, unlike our current President. I'm sure Kerry would've been in the same position as Clinton, Bush, Cheney, list of numerous other Republican chicken-hawks who didn't go to Vietnam. It's not like he was a minority or poor kid who had no way of avoiding a draft.

[mc mark]

basso this should make you happy! Seems your little smear tact is working...

from Josh

I just saw a preview of a study that finds the Swift Boat ads quite effective among independents in raising doubts about John Kerry's war record. And that suggests that Karl Rove will want to send more money toward the group running the ad.

This of course is only the beginning. The temperature will get much higher in the next couple months since, as Charlie Cook, aptly argues this week, President Bush is in the process of losing this election unless there's a major change in the dynamic of the race.

-- Josh Marshall

[giddyup]

Originally posted by Rocketman95
Or you could maybe not assume the worst about someone who volunteered to go to Vietnam, unlike our current President. I'm sure Kerry would've been in the same position as Clinton, Bush, Cheney, list of numerous other Republican chicken-hawks who didn't go to Vietnam. It's not like he was a minority or poor kid who had no way of avoiding a draft.
I don't think I've assumed too much. In most instances, I've written something such as "I've heard.." or "I read.." I was throwing it out there for discussion and/or correction.

People keep correcting me but they source something as objective as JohnKerry.com. As I said, I think the truth lay somewhere inbetween.

[IROC it]

I'm sure Kerry would've been in the same position as Clinton, Bush, Cheney, list of numerous other Republican chicken-hawks who didn't go to Vietnam.

Great. Now Clinton's a "Republican chicken-hawk." :rolleyes: :p

[gwayneco]

What we know so far is that Kerry lied about Cambodia. Scoreboard Swift Vets for Truth.

[basso]

Originally posted by gwayneco
What we know so far is that Kerry lied about Cambodia. Scoreboard Swift Vets for Truth.

ahhh, but what you're missing is that it's not an important lie, just like clinton's lies. and republican focusing on lying and character issues just distracts from the real, important issues of this campaign, like whether W missed a check-in in alabama one night, or whether he showed to much deference to the sensibilities of small children on 9/11...

[andymoon]

Originally posted by basso
ahhh, but what you're missing is that it's not an important lie, just like clinton's lies. and republican focusing on lying and character issues just distracts from the real, important issues of this campaign, like whether W missed a check-in in alabama one night, or whether he showed to much deference to the sensibilities of small children on 9/11...

Or how he has gutted environmental regulation, or how his tax cuts have been a massive giveaway to the rich during time of war, or how he has stymied scientific research, or how he started an unjustified war based on "intelligence" given to us by an Irani agent, or how people in his administration have outed 2 anti-terror operatives, or how he has left children behind on education, or how he has increased spending more than Clinton ever did...

The list of criticism over real issues is a long one and one that has not been answered.

[mc mark]

That's not important Andy!

What's important is where Kerry spent Christmas 30 years ago!

Come on!

[basso]

Originally posted by andymoon
how he has stymied scientific research...one that has not been answered.

let's look at this one, shall we?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005467

--
The (Political) Science of Stem Cells
Far from banning research, Bush is expanding federal funding.

Thursday, August 12, 2004 12:01 a.m.

You might not know about it from listening to the news lately, [but] the President also looks forward to medical breakthroughs that may arise from stem cell research. Few people know that George W. Bush is the only President to ever authorize federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.
--Laura Bush

The First Lady was way too polite: The way stem cells have been reported, you'd think we were in a new Dark Ages, with government-backed religious inquisitors threatening scientists on the cusp of life-saving treatments.

Reinforcing this misimpression are the headlines and commentators talking up a "ban" on research. "First lady Laura Bush defends ban on stem-cell research" is how the Philadelphia Inquirer spun Mrs. Bush's talk. A sampling of other headlines shows the Inquirer is far from alone: "Rethink the stem-cell ban" (Des Moines Register); "Stem cell ban stays, despite Reagan pleas" (Newark Star-Ledger); "Kerry says he'd reverse stem cell ban" (The Grand Rapids Press); "Kerry 'would lift stem cell ban' "(BBC), and on and on. You get the drift.

The problem is that the drift is wrong. As Mrs. Bush gently reminded her audience in Pennsylvania this week, far from banning embryonic stem cell research, George W. Bush is the first President to expand federal funding for it. The nearby table shows that, as a result of his decision, federal funding went from zero in 2000 to nearly $25 million today--and this doesn't include the many tens of millions more being spent by the private sector. As Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson points out, the supply of embryonic stem cell shipments available is today greater than the demand.

In other words, this is not, as Ron Reagan characterized it during his prime time slot at the Democratic convention, a battle between "reason and ignorance." It's an argument about taxpayer money and how to draw the lines around it.

On the whole this would be a healthy debate for America to have. But the Kerry campaign seems more interested in politicizing the issue by continuing to advance claims for a ban that simply does not exist. Typical was the press release by the campaign Web site this week entitled "Edwards Calls for an End to Stem Cell Ban and a Return to Scientific Excellence in America." This is no slip: It's the same language Mr. Kerry used in his radio address when he declared he intends to "lift the ban on stem cell research." And it's the same language Hillary Clinton used during her own convention speech, drawing cheers when she invoked the "need to lift the ban on stem cell research."

All these people know better. The issue is federal subsidies. The need for a Presidential decision arose from an appropriations rider passed by Congress in the mid-1990s forbidding federal funding for any research that creates, injures or destroys human embryos.

What Funding Ban?
Amount spent by the National Institutes of Health on stem cell research, in millions.
2001 2002 2003
Human Embryonic $0.0 $10.7 $24.8
Human Non-Embryonic 151.6 170.9 190.7
Non-Human Embryonic 40.5 71.5 113.5
Non-Human Non-Embryonic 113.9 134.0 192.1
Total 306.0 387.1 521.1
Source: Office of Management and budget.

The President's answer was that there ought to be no restrictions on the private sector but that federal subsidies should be limited to lines that had already been harvested and should not be used to encourage the destruction of embryos. In short, it was a reasonable middle ground. It's worth noting that other countries, such as Germany, Ireland and Austria, ban even the private sector from creating embryos for stem cell research.

The potential for embryonic stem cells is that they are malleable and can differentiate themselves into needed cells. That gives them tremendous potential, but it also presents a liability because we can't yet control what these cells will turn into. In one animal study, a fifth of the mice injected with embryonic stem cells developed brain tumors.

Which helps explain why we still have not had a single human trial for embryonic stem cells. And it means that political claims that cures for diabetes or Parkinson's are just around the corner are cruelly raising false hopes.

Meanwhile there is another alternative we don't hear much about in the headlines: adult stem cells. Unlike embryonic research, adult stem cells do not get us into questions about the destruction of human life. In addition, a report in the journal Nature this summer suggests that adult stem cells may have a broader differentiation potential than previously thought.

Plainly this is one of those subjects that involves clashes of goods, in this case the sanctity of human life versus the needs of scientific research. The best way to resolve the issue of taxpayer funding is to let the American people make that decision themselves, through their elected representatives. And dealing, we hope, with the science--not just the Kerry campaign sound bites.

[IROC it]

Did someone order a seven and a half footer with skills?

[andymoon]

Originally posted by basso
let's look at this one, shall we?
The (Political) Science of Stem Cells


I was talking about far more than just stem cells.

New York Times:

"Although the Bush administration is hardly the first to politicize science, no administration in recent memory has so shamelessly distorted scientific findings for policy reasons or suppressed them when they conflict with political goals. This is the nub of an indictment delivered last week by more than 60 prominent scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates. Their statement was accompanied by a report published by the Union of Concerned Scientists, listing cases where the administration has manipulated science on environmental and other issues.

President Bush's supporters promptly denounced the statement and the report as an overdrawn and politically motivated work issued in an election year by an advocacy group known for its liberal disposition. Tellingly, however, neither Mr. Bush's friends nor the White House denied that any of the incidents listed in the report — all had been reported before in newspapers, trade magazines and scientific journals — had occurred. The best they could muster was a lame rejoinder from Dr. John Marburger III, Mr. Bush's science adviser, who said that these were disconnected episodes reflecting normal bureaucratic disagreements, none of them adding up to a "a pattern" of distortion or disrespect for science.

We respectfully urge Dr. Marburger to look again. On global warming alone, the administration belittled, misrepresented, altered or quashed multiple reports suggesting a clear link between greenhouse gas emissions and the burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil. A study detailing the impact of mercury emissions from power plants was sanitized to industry specifications. Another study suggesting that a Congressional clean-air bill would achieve greater pollution reductions than Mr. Bush's own plan, at approximately the same cost, was withheld. It does not take much effort to find a pattern of suppressing inconvenient facts that might force Mr. Bush's friends in the oil, gas and coal industries to spend more on pollution control."

The Globe and Mail:

"Some of the most influential scientists in the United States have gone public with disquieting accusations that the Bush administration has suppressed and distorted scientific findings, manipulated research and stacked government advisory panels to suit its political objectives. "When scientific knowledge has been found to be in conflict with its political goals, the administration has often manipulated the process through which science enters into its decisions," the Union of Concerned Scientists said last week after releasing the results of its investigation into the alleged abuses.

Politicians often must weigh conflicting scientific claims or inconclusive evidence when setting policy, and they may ignore scientists' recommendations for any number of reasons. But it is quite another matter to interfere blatantly in their work and misuse their results on the scale cited by the scientists' group. Among the examples provided: A report on high mercury levels in women of child-bearing age was delayed; antibiotic research that could have had an adverse effect on major hog producers was squelched; and a committee examining lead poisoning in children was filled with researchers connected to the lead industry.

If the complaining scientists were simply diehard Democrats opposed to the administration's conservative agenda or a few cranks upset by cutbacks in research funding, their claims would be easy to dismiss. But this is a group of more than 60 respected academics, a dozen of whom are Nobel laureates and most of whom rarely speak out on political topics. Their fields of expertise include molecular biology, particle physics, biochemistry, environmental, ecological and climate issues, medicine, nuclear weapons, engineering and agriculture. Not even the White House is disputing their credentials, only their conclusions."

http://www.onrelease.org/index.php?p=79770340

[andymoon]

Originally posted by IROC it
Did someone order a seven and a half footer with skills?

I did, but this is the wrong forum for that kind of talk. Keep your basketball jabbering in the GARM.

:D

[Rocketman95]

[Jeff]

I hate this forum.

RM95: That was WAY out of line, man. You know you can't do that if you expect anyone else not to do the same.

[rimrocker]

Moe's Tavern's Patrons for Truth
Did they really expect the Democrats not to respond?
By Steve Young

August 9, 2004 -- HOLLYWOOD (apj.us) -- Just as the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth have released their torrid commercial and book attack on John Kerry's Vietnamwar record, another group has stepped forward with an altogether different take.

They are all members of one of George Bush's favorite hangouts during his National Guard duty. They will soon be launching their new commercial.

Troy McClure: "You may remember me from such Vietnamera war films such as Texas...The Real Frontline, I Never Did Cocaine, But I Sure Liked The Smell and Danger, Danger, We're About To Run Out Of Beer. Bush never showed up for any of the actual filming but I'm pretty sure I saw him at the wrap party. But...if you have any question about what George W. Bush is made of, just spend 3 minutes with the men who served him."

Moe Szyslak: "I served George Bush."

Sam Malone: "I served George Bush."

Barney Gumble: "George W. Bush has not been honest about what happened in the National Guard (buuu-u-u-u-r-rp)."

Principal Seymour Skinner: "To this day with his grades I have no idea how George got into Yale or the National Guard . It was almost like he knew someone."

Mayor Joe Quimby: "Okay. I might have pulled a few strings, but with the son of George Bush, string-pulling is prerequisite It's not like that idiot Boston prep school kid who volunteered who got shot at. Now that guy obviously didn't know anyone."

Carl: "He is lying about his record. I was there that night. He says he downed 45 Singapore Slings which would be one more than Barney's all-time mark. Bush had no more than 20 before he drove home."

Apu Nahasapeemapetilon: "Thank you. Come again."

Dr. Julius Hibbert: "I know George W. Bush is lying about his first drunk because I treated him for that hangover. He also had one of Moe's two-year old pretzels stuck in his throat. He-he"

Lenny: "George W. Bush lied to get that DUI... I know, I was there, I saw what happened."

Herschel "Krusty" Krustofski: "His account of what happened and what actually happened are the difference between night and day...or day and night. I can't be sure. I was pretty loaded too"

Reverend Lovejoy: "George W. Bush has not been honest. I personally spoke to God-uh and He told that the only God-uh Bush spoke to was the porcelain one."

Robert "Sideshow Bob" Terwilliger: "He betrayed his fellow alcoholics. When he testified in front of that office and said that he was not drunk and neither were his drinking buddies, I nearly cried."

Dr. Nick Rivera: "When the chips were down, you could not count on George W. Bush to ever pay for a single round."

Lionel Hutz: "I represented Bush that night to the best of my ability and I have apologized to him for that."

Duff Man: "We had to close down the brewery the day he got sober and put thousands of Duff workers into the unemployment line. George W. Bush can't be trusted."

Nelson Muntz: "Ha-ha."

Chief Clancy Wiggins: "Oh yeah. Remember the night well. Pulled Bush out of that ditch. Heh-heh. Kinda slurred that he wasn't at fault. Said he just came back to save the tree his car he ran into."

Moe Szyslak: "I served George W. Bush. I still got the $5000 tab to prove it."

Moe Szyslak: (off-camera): "George W. Bush cannot be trusted."

George W. Bush: "D'oh."

Montgomery Burns: "Moe's Tavern's Patrons For Truth is responsible for the content of this advertisement and was paid for by www.moveonplease.org. Ex-cellent!"

http://www.americanpolitics.com/20040809Young.html

[Rocketman95]

Originally posted by Jeff
I hate this forum.

RM95: That was WAY out of line, man. You know you can't do that if you expect anyone else not to do the same.

I've lost any expectation of others not doing that. When in Rome, eh, I'll delete my post.

Sorry.

[mc mark]

LOL!!!

Moe's Tavern's Patrons for Truth!

:D

[Deckard]

Originally posted by giddyup
... and you did? I can relate the unflattering version of events and you can relate the flattering version of events. The truth lay somewhere inbetween I would imagine.
No, you related your unflattering "version" of events, without a bit of support, and I laid out what people actually did during the war, which both of us are old enough to remember. You saying, "The truth lay somewhere in between, I imagine." implies just that, something you imagined.

[rimrocker]

If you look at the last two pages of threads, here's what we have...

Anti-Kerry Threads...

Did Kerry commit Treason?
John Kerry Crushes Dissent
John Kerry's Blue Ties aren't dark enough
Kerry flubs a throwaway line
Kerry and THK have shouting match
Kerry Lied about Cambodia
Kerry is unfit for command

Anti-Bush threads...

Job growth is weak
Plame Investigation
Republican plans to go negative at the convention
Chalabi and son charged with counterfeiting and murder
Iraq developments
Exposure of Al-Q double agent
Torture in Iraq
Bush's statements on Tax policy
1990's video of Bush drunk at wedding
Cost of Iraq War
WMD's
Bush's economic policy

Pro-Kerry Threads...

The Kerry Rally
Protestors at rallies

Pro-Bush Threads...

Media bias moves a voter towards bush
Why Chance will vote for Bush

(There are others that could fit into a category, but these were the most obvious. Some, like the debate thread really favored no candidate.)

A comparison between the negative threads are most telling...

[Oski2005]

Excellent summary rim.

[giddyup]

Originally posted by rimrocker
A comparison between the negative threads are most telling...
That's because one guy is the president of the United States and the other guy as an absentee senator in the campaign trail.

[mc mark]

giddy that doesn't even make sense

[giddyup]

Originally posted by Deckard
No, you related your unflattering "version" of events, without a bit of support, and I laid out what people actually did during the war, which both of us are old enough to remember. You saying, "The truth lay somewhere in between, I imagine." implies just that, something you imagined.
Here's my major post on this topic:

"I heard that when Kerrry volunteered for the swift boats, they were assigned duty off the coast of Viet Nam. In the interim, their duty changed to one more dangerous and hazardous on the delta.

Is that not true? I'm only asserting that that is what I heard.

And what about the volunteerism... so he wouldn't be drafted. Is that a lie or possibly the truth?"

<b>How in the world is this my unflattering version of events? I count 2 "I heards" and 2 distinct requests for validation.</b>

[giddyup]

Originally posted by mc mark
giddy that doesn't even make sense
How not? Kerry is doing nothing but campaigning. What else is there to criticize?

[mc mark]

Originally posted by giddyup
How not? Kerry is doing nothing but campaigning. What else is there to criticize?

I don't know? His 19 year senate record?

[Rocketman95]

Originally posted by giddyup
And what about the volunteerism... so he wouldn't be drafted. Is that a lie or possibly the truth?"

How in the world is this my unflattering version of events? I count 2 "I heards" and 2 distinct requests for validation.

Again, why would you assume the worst about it? Do you not think Kerry had the same means as Cheney, Dubya, Clinton, or <insert any conservative chickenhawk name here> to avoid the draft?

It's telling that you'd dismiss someone's volunteering to go to Vietnam for political reasons. It's disgusting, as is this entire smear campaign against Kerry. I've lost respect for so many people due to this, you being one of them.

BTW, between his vacation days and the days he and his Vice-President have been campaigning (more like preaching to the choir since they're pussies and don't allow anyone in without a pledge), I'd say you can't really criticize Kerry for campaigning.

[Oski2005]

Originally posted by giddyup
Here's my major post on this topic:

"I heard that when Kerrry volunteered for the swift boats, they were assigned duty off the coast of Viet Nam. In the interim, their duty changed to one more dangerous and hazardous on the delta.

Is that not true? I'm only asserting that that is what I heard.

And what about the volunteerism... so he wouldn't be drafted. Is that a lie or possibly the truth?"

<b>How in the world is this my unflattering version of events? I count 2 "I heards" and 2 distinct requests for validation.</b>


Uh, that's a perfect example actually because it shows some excellent spin. If you were in the Navy and not a pilot, how else would you get anywhere near Vietnam if not via swiftboats? The way you word it, talking about being off the coast and what not, makes it seem like he volunteered for a job that would keep him out of harms way. By not talking about his other option