Posted on 01/14/2006 11:27:23 AM PST by Fenris6
"Former representative Don Bailey (D-Pa.) has apparently broken ranks and attacked the war record of fellow Democrat John Murtha"
"...The story was picked up by CNS, a conservative web site. In their report they also cited excerpts from The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 2002, and several quotes from political opponents in the 1990s that raised questions regarding Murtha's record."
"...But the quote used above comes from a Washington Post article that confirms many of the accusations in the CNS story. But before Murtha's political opponents begin jumping for joy, they had best take a close look at how the Post is spinning the story of blue on blue warfare:..."
"Beware of Greeks bearing gifts, they say. The Post dutifully notes the actual source of the accusations (Bailey) a few paragraphs into the piece, but leaves no doubt where this story is headed: House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, "The Swift Boat-like attacks on an American hero, Congressman Jack Murtha, are despicable and have no place in politics."
"Let me be clear: attacks on Murtha's Vietnam record are pointless. Murtha's latest statements against the success of US troops in Iraq speak for themselves; his current behavior renders his past insignificant. Democrats, grown tired of waiting for an attack on Murtha's war record from the Right, have created their own. He's painted as a victim now - of "right wing chickenhawk" contempt for real war heroes. But those serious about standing up to the current John Murtha would be well advised to let his fellow Democrats and the mainstream media keep this war "unilateral".
A trap for us?
I tend to agree with you. Anyway, we're on a roll just letting the Dims be themselves.
Even though a Democrat initiated this I'm having a bad feeling.
"A trap for us?"
Yes. I know independents who are angry with us for "questioning" Max Cleland's patriotism, even though thats not what really happened. The MSM is dying for Republicans to take a swing at this one too, so they can spin it the same way to the public.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200512020002 "A May 12, 2002, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article reported that "Marine Corps casualty records show that Murtha was injured in 'hostile' actions near Danang, Vietnam, on March 22, 1967 and May 7, 1967. In the first incident, his right cheek was lacerated, and in the second he was lacerated above his left eye. Neither injury required evacuation."
To what end? Bailey has nothing to gain.
Very suspicious indeed. Smart Republicans will steer clear of this nonsense. Murtha has no credibility, so nothing to lose. We all know Murtha's stunts have been staged and planned by his puppet-master Pelosi.
Remember dims got away with hitting Dukakis with Willie Horton and then blaming Republicans for being racists.
"Neither injury required evacuation."
Check my tagline ;)
I think this is the Left pre-empting the Swiftboat attacks against Kerry again in 08, and getting revenge for 04. They can't discredit the Swifties, but if we bite on this one and it blows up in our face, the Swifties will be marginalized in 08.
"To what end? Bailey has nothing to gain."
Perhaps Bailey is merely a patriot. There was a time when Dems were patriots.
Don Bailey's military service:
"After college he entered the US Army, serving with the 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions in Vietnam. He was awarded Silver Star, three Bronze Stars, two with the Valor device, one for meritorious achievement, Army Commendation Medal, with "V" for Valor, Air Medal, and a second Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service."
Don Bailey's military service:
"After college he entered the US Army, serving with the 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions in Vietnam. He was awarded Silver Star, three Bronze Stars, two with the Valor device, one for meritorious achievement, Army Commendation Medal, with "V" for Valor, Air Medal, and a second Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service."
Perhaps it would be telling to print the rest of the biographical information:
After a very contested primary and very close general election, Bailey was elected to the US House from PA-21 in 1978. He won an impressive reelection bid in 1980, despite the general Republican victory that year, garnering about 70% of the vote. Bailey served on the House "Ways and Means" Committee.
In 1982, after redistricting by the state legislature, Bailey's district was largely merged into the Twelfth Congressional District of Pennsylvania with fellow Democrat John Murtha, who had been serving since 1974. In a strongly fought primary, Bailey lost. Interestingly, when the Republican nominee for the seat withdrew the same year, Bailey was seriously considered as a replacement; he came in a very strong second at the Republican nominating convention held that year. This underscores that he was viewed as a conservative Democrat.
In 1984, Bailey, after yet another contested primary, became the Democratic nominee for Pennsylvania Auditor General that year; he handily won the General Election; he was the only Democratic nominee to win statewide that year. During his tenure as Auditor General, Bailey established the first work-site child daycare facility in Pennsylvania government, established minimum education standards for state auditors, and generally modernized auditing procedures.
Despite Bailey's electoral success in 1984, he lost a bitter primary battle with then Congressman Bob Edgar (D, PA-7) for the US Senate seat in 1986. In a close race in 1988, he lost his reelection bid for Auditor General to Barbara Hafer (her first statewide run).
Bailey ran for the Auditor General position again in 1992, and lost the Democratic primary. He also lost the Democratic gubernatorial primary to Ivan Itkin in 1998.
Hmmm.. lost an election to Murtha, was proposed as a Republican candidate.. Can we say "unbiased" without choking?
John Glenn comes to mind. He will forever be remembered not as a Air Force Colonel, space pioneer or distinguished Senator; but, as Bill Clinton's plant to derail the investigation into Chinese money connections.
Leon Panetta may have been President himself one day, but for dumping his morals and ethics to be point man for the Clintons.
Lieberman dumped all of the convictions he had stood on for decades to be Algore's foil.
Then there's Sandy Berger, shredding secret documents appearantly at the behest of Hillary. Or, Susan Estrich deciding rape was no big deal to work for Hillary and attack Juanita Broderrick shortly after going public about allegedlybeing raped herself.
... several others are escaping meat the moment.
Was he a Dem or not?!
John would not be proud of you....he was in the Marine Corps
I'm not a hunter ...and obviously not a typist either. That's a mistake that spellcheck doesn't catch.
Well, that emphasizes what I was saying about diminishing his career. Besides, I'm not proud of him either.
John Glenn was a Marine.
Which is why he is not remembered as an Air Force Colonel.
Maybe they don't see him as a disgrace... at least he isn't on national tv calling for surrender like Murtha.
Muthra's not fit to spit shine Glenn's flight boots.
Its hard to imagine what it would take to get a man who dedicated his career to the Corp to help cover up a covert operation to sell missile guidance technology to Communist China.
Arkinside.
Yeah.. like Zell Miller is a democrat.
IIRC it was none other than our favorite loon AlGore who dredged up old Willie in the RAT primaries.
Maybe the party left him like Yell. Are you really born again?...You seem to be "Swift boating" Mr Bailey's military service.
Are ya trying to say the libs tried to set us up???
Gee .. why am I not surprised
I have posted on a few threads that I think we should stay far away from this story. It worked, attacking Kerry's record, because he was so public with his anti-war rhetoric, he is unlikable and overbearing and he was running for the presidency, so the stakes were higher.
We have nothing to gain by attacking Murtha, imo. And that a trap might have been set wouldn't surprise me in the least.
I'd love to know what the book Stolen Valor has to say about Murtha. Their research was excellent about people who got medals who didn't deserve them.
It's not neccessary, anyway. Murtha's arguments are not winning. Defeat the idea, ignore the person.
I thought the story smelled when I first read about it
Ditto. And even if there is truth behind it, it's political suicide for us to pursue this. Murtha is an older man and isn't running for higher office and we should just leave him alone.
He's making his legacy by giving the jihadists hope and soldiers like the guy who stood up to him last week at a public forum does more for our side than anything we could ever do to him, imo.
Try remembering Klintoon appointing John-the brown noser-Glenn to the geezer in space expierment. Gen'l Chuck Yeager gave Glenn the brown noser label years ago and laughed about his hero status for accomplishing the same task a monkey first completed.
All I know is that when I take a good look at Murtha, all my gut instincts tell me, "don't ever let this turkey cover your ass".
Having survived a long time, by listening to the little voices in my head, and gut, I see no reason to change course now.
Well, its SOP for the lefties - spray paint your own car, and slash your own tires and claim that you were attacked by right-wing thugs.
I agree, don't do anything. Just let it sit and stink, we don't have to pick it up now.
As have I. I've been saying we can't afford to go down that road.
Murtha will take care of Murtha.
"Ditto. And even if there is truth behind it, it's political suicide for us to pursue this. Murtha is an older man and isn't running for higher office and we should just leave him alone.
He's making his legacy by giving the jihadists hope and soldiers like the guy who stood up to him last week at a public forum does more for our side than anything we could ever do to him, imo."
Peach, and I'm trying to see your point. I would counter that when you say it's political suicide and then follow with Murtha making his legacy by giving the jihadists hope, I must state I feel it's not just political suicide at risk here. We're talking about our military's suicide more at risk precisely by your point about giving the jihadists hope.
That said, are you advocating that the need for 'republicans' to remain silent is greater than the need to protect our troops? Honest question. No sarcasm. If the answer is yes...why? I ask, because this takes me right back to the 'silent majority' that did as much damage if not more, to our troops, than the anti-war left in the 60's. I know that if you've got a point, it's a pretty good one, I just don't get it in this situation.
Words of Wisdom from 2 fellow Vets
usmcobra and river rat
I can understand someone who has never served being uncomfortable with calling someone's service into question. I have those inclinations as well. But when numerous vets that I admire and respect do so, I know that it is the right thing to do.
BTTT
Freema was responding to Peach in post 41.
I know -- I was pinging her as someone I respect and trust! :o) And because I agree with her. ;o)
You're right. They do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.