John Kerry overplays the 'war record' card

Toronto Sun ^ | February 29, 2004 | Peter Worthington

[Clive]

Last week Georgia's Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss predicted John Kerry would have a tough time winning the Georgia Democratic primary because of his "32-year record of voting to cut defence programs."

Kerry quickly called a press conference. "No one is going to question my commitment to the defence of our nation," he said. "I don't know what it is ... these Republicans, who didn't serve in any war, have against those of us who are Democrats who did."

Wotinell does that response have to do with Kerry's spotty voting record?

What it does reveal, however, is the essence of what Kerry's campaign to be U.S. president is all about.

Kerry also sent an open letter to President George Bush, supposedly more in sorrow than anger, "that you would choose to reopen these wounds (of Vietnam) for your personal political gain." His letter mentioned Sen. Chambliss' attacks on his voting record.

Yet it's not Bush or the Republicans who are "reopening" Vietnam for "political gain," but Kerry.

No Republican - not the President, not Sen. Chambliss - has attacked Kerry's Vietnam war record. How can citing a senator's voting record be interpreted as denigrating his war record? Kerry's reaction to a legitimate issue seems a smokescreen and a phony issue designed to divert attention.

As for Chambliss, he went out of his way to wax loud, long and admiringly on Kerry's Vietnam service - which contrasts with his record of voting against defence and intelligence spending.

A question the mainstream media and political rivals seem reluctant to ask, is why Kerry keeps bringing up the Vietnam war.

Yes, he had a decent record, but he wasn't Audie Murphy. (For those too young to remember, Murphy won every American valour decoration in WWII and became a movie actor, but never aspired to be president.)

While Bush calls himself a "war president" against terrorism and seeks to bring democracy to Iraq, what has that got to do with Vietnam? Why does Kerry keep raising Vietnam when he gracefully declined to make it an issue when Bill Clinton - a guy who ducked even the National Guard - was president?

It's all he's got

I would argue that Kerry keeps Vietnam at the forefront of his campaign because it is just about all he's got.

It's a frail and risky strategy - which is why Bush and the Republicans would far prefer Kerry as the Democratic candidate than Sen. John Edwards, whose great assets are eloquence and likeability.

When (if) Kerry gets the Democratic nomination, his 1971 testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will be recalled. Saying he spoke for Vietnam vets, he deplored "war crimes committed ... not as isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with full awareness of officers at all levels of command."

He said soldiers had "personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot civilians, razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside ..."

We all know atrocities occur in war, but Kerry implied this was routine and widespread.

After returning from Vietnam, Kerry became a valuable ally in the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) whose most prominent supporter was actress Jane Fonda. She was on record vociferously denying that Hanoi mistreated American prisoners. When PoWs came home with tales of torture, Fonda called them "hypocrites and liars."

Maybe it's because he was with the navy, with a tenuous understanding of soldiers, that Kerry was so contemptuous of how Vietnam was fought. (Baby-killers indeed!)

Today, Kerry thinks his brief tour in Vietnam qualifies him to be president and commander-in-chief. But commanding a riverboat and leading a country are different.

While Bush has never commanded troops in the field, he performed admirably in rallying his country when it was attacked Sept. 11, 2001.

I'll bet Republicans would be more uneasy with John Edwards as the Democratic nominee than they are about John Kerry who, without Vietnam, is not much.

[Clive]

-

[cyborg]

Overplayed is an understatement!

[Defender2]

BUMP!!!!

[VadeRetro]

I'll bet Republicans would be more uneasy with John Edwards as the Democratic nominee than they are about John Kerry who, without Vietnam, is not much.

Ssshhhhhh!!!!! Not yet! Wait'll he's got it locked up!

[ServesURight]

While Bush has never commanded troops in the field

Bush learned to fly the F-102 Delta Dagger jet fighter and willingly wanted to serve in Vietnam.

[FormerACLUmember]

Overexposure? My gosh it is his only lame issue! He has the personality and character of an decaying cadaver!!

What is WRONG with Massachusetts? Are they psychotic?

[Redcoat LI]

"Wotinell does that response have to do with Kerry's spotty voting record?"

Wotinell,my new word for the day.

As in Wotinell am I doing still living in Massachusetts?

[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

Kerry was a reckless maniac during his four months in Vietnam.

The Navy was eager to send him home before he wrote himself up for the Medal of Honor.

[billb]

I believe Kerry's actions after returning from military service, his denunciation of the war and his votes against modernizing the military throughout his time in public office are the result of the trauma he encountered there and feelings of guilt about that experience, and that these actions are nothing more than self-flagellation. And his recent ranting about having his patriotism challenged when it in fact was not, is akin to being shell shocked. Even his wife Terry has said he has nightmares and flashbacks of Viet Nam. For these reasons, I believe he cannot be trusted to use the military properly in the defense of our country and, therefore, preclude him from becoming President.

[PeteFromMontana]

Did Kerry serve in Vietnam?




(sarcasm off:)

[Reagan Man]

John Kerry overplays the 'war record' card

Ya think so? ;^)

[Seeking the truth]

[Wolverine]

See...look at all these names...

Ask your Veteran friends what are THEY are going to do about Kerry's charges.

[Dan Zachary]

FactCheck.org has an article with many links to what he has done. link

[international american]

"What is WRONG with Massachusetts? Are they psychotic?"


Many there are:)

[OpusatFR]

Kerry is too fragile emotionally to be president. His voting record and obsession with Vietnam show him to be unable to move into the present and future, and unable to comprehend the enormity of America's responsibilities throughout the world militarily.

He's stuck in a time warp and can't get out. If four months in war created this post-traumatic syndrome and obsession, four years in the office of the most pressure-filled, crushing position in the entire world would create mental chaos in this man.

He is not fit to be president.

[cripplecreek]

"What it does reveal, however, is the essence of what Kerry's campaign to be U.S. president is all about."

I noticed that from the beginning.

[Betaille]

Does anybody know if the primary campaign is exhausting Kerry's campaign finances? Since Edwards hasn't attacked Kerry on anything and is basically joining him at aiming at Bush I doubt it, but i would like to see that the primaries are doing him some damage.