For the record, I don’t think the biographical questions about Kerry -- or Bush -- are irrelevant sideshows that obscure the great debates of the day. I think they’re important to voters. They’re important to me. I want to know if Kerry lied a little about throwing away his medals, or why he wouldn’t 'fess up to a youthful exaggeration if he did. I want know if Bush really did blow off months of his National Guard stint.Isn't it amazing how Bush's NG record, which the liberals and their media monkeys claim is inconsequential as it does not have the Vietnam combat stamp of approval (which didn't exist for Clinton), is important enough to splash all over the front pages of liberal newspapers and the blighted nightly news?
Yet Kerry, lying about atrocities, claiming to have committed his own, and lying about nearly everything else in his military career, topping it off with bugging out of Vietnam, leaving his so-called "band of brothers" behind, is relegated to the inconsequential.
Yep, no bias here!
It just dawned on me we now have a great argument when the left tries this argument, as they do on a daily basis. We can say, so what you're saying is that those soldiers in Iraq that mistreated the prisoners are fit to be commander-in-chief since they have served in the military and no one dare call then unpatriotic!