General George McClellan would say things along those lines to Abraham Lincoln as excuses for not fighting.
An Army that does not fight until every last planning detail is absolutely perfect is an Army that will never fight a single battle.
Posted on 09/09/2004 6:36:18 AM PDT by Area Freeper
Republicans marched out of their convention intoxicated with the sensation of victory. President Bush, the "war president", was the most honest, moral, decisive, and strongest leader in the world. (The unvarying encomiums eerily echoed those of the brainwashed soldiers about the sleeper agent in The Manchurian Candidate: "Raymond Shaw is the kindest, warmest, bravest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.") After Bush's defiant speech - "Nothing will hold us back!" - his lead was reported by Time magazine to have climbed to 11 points, which was inhaled like pure oxygen by the Republican cadres. (Both John Kerry's and Bush's internal polls gave Bush only a four-point lead.)
Kerry seemed to be reeling in retreat. His disciplined campaign management had suppressed criticism of Bush, supposedly on the basis that swing voters are attracted by vague swirls of optimism. But the effect was that voters remained confused about the contrast between the candidates and Kerry's commitments. Kerry had delayed defending himself against the torpedoes of falsehood fired at his heroic military record by the Orwellianly named Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
Perhaps his gravest self-inflicted wound was replying to Bush's challenge to answer whether he would still have voted for the war resolution on Iraq, knowing what he does today. Kerry said he would and tangled himself in a thicket of sticky nuance.
Bush could hardly believe that Kerry had fallen for the gambit. This sucker would buy a bridge in Brooklyn. The triumphant Republicans felt unrestrained in delivering blows to the prone Kerry. Dick Cheney announced that a vote against Bush was tantamount to a vote for a terrorist attack: "If we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again."
On the day that former President Clinton had his heart surgery, Cheney attacked him as weak on terrorism, and for good measure set upon Ronald Reagan too. The venerated Reagan had served his purpose as an icon at the convention, but now he was unceremoniously thrown overboard.
Only Bush was tough enough. Bush, adopting the tone of the fraternity house president he once was, sarcastically derided Kerry: "No matter how many times Senator Kerry flip-flops, we were right to make America safer by removing Saddam Hussein from power."
In fact, on the third day of the Republican convention, Kerry had given a penetrating and highly specific speech on the war on terrorism and Iraq, detailing how Bush's strategy amounted to a series of catastrophic blunders. "When it comes to Iraq," he said, "it's not that I would have done one thing differently, I would have done almost everything differently."
Kerry's speech was pointedly ignored by Bush who, with Cheney, rained a steady fire of ridicule down on Kerry. Meanwhile, the report on Iraq by the Royal Institute of International Affairs was buried in the back pages. "Iraq could splinter into civil war and destabilise the whole region if the interim government, US forces and United Nations fail to hold the ring among factions struggling for power." Civil war, the institute said, was "the most likely outcome". Kerry remarked that because of Bush's errors "terrorists have secured havens in Iraq that were not there before". The New York Times reported that Fallujah and many other cities in the Sunni triangle are under the control of Islamist insurgents. But Bush steadfastly refused to engage Kerry in debate. A report chronicling the undermining of the war against terrorism by James Fallows in The Atlantic, in which numerous military officials described how Afghanistan became a "sideshow" as resources were siphoned to Iraq, received almost no attention. "Our strategy is succeeding," Bush told his jubilant rallies.
Bush campaigns before the faithful; distressing facts are dismissed with sarcasm and ideology is implacable. Yet at this moment of disdain a discovery that cast light on Bush's character suddenly emerged, having the potential to alter the momentum of the campaign.
On Wednesday, the Boston Globe published documents proving that Bush, whose spotty record in the National Guard was always mysterious, "fell well short of meeting his military obligation". Maj Gen Paul A Weaver Jr., who retired in 2002 as the Pentagon's director of the Air National Guard, was quoted: "It appears that no one wanted to hold him accountable."
That night, CBS's 60 Minutes broadcast the first interview with former Texas lieutenant governor Ben Barnes, who explained how he contrived to get young George his safe posting in the "champagne unit" of the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam war. The programme also revealed further documents showing he never fulfilled his service.
Abruptly, the Republican marchers stumble as Kerry is galvanised. "His miscalculation was going to war without planning carefully and without the allies we should have had," he said yesterday. Meanwhile in the White House, aides anxiously wonder how to explain the president's haunted past and his long years of hiding it and who will have the task of facing the cameras.
In Kerry's case the decision of the military (ie, a citation sKerry wrote but issued by the Navy) legitimizes it). In characteristic fashion, a document (Honorable Discharge) should be second-guessed.
Dubya's National Guard service is kinda like Bubba's marital history. In both cases there were "blemishes" but most voters decided they didn't matter. The only voters ticked off about Dubya's guard service (i.e. how his dad pulled strings to get him in, how he apparently played "hooky" towards the end of his hitch etc.) will only offend those voters who'd never vote for him anyway, just as voters professing anger over Gennifer Flowers etc. would never have voted for Clinton.
re: "fell well short of meeting his military obligation"
Well, then I suggest you take it up with the Air Force who gave him an honorable discharge. You're beef is not with George Bush, it's with whoever approved an honorable discharge that was not warranted.
The President with face the cameras, as he always has, as he always will.
For Kerry, too busy windsurfing with the silly chastity belt looking windsurfing gear, the Spokesperson of the day will be sent out to remind us all once again of JFK's exploits during his three odd months on a boat in Vietnam.
The honorable discharge is just as legitimized as any other military issued document. Having been there for 15 years, there is no difference other than the issuer.
Bottom line-
Bush's unattractive service never hurt anyone.
Kerry's actions during and after the war are being taken as a personnal attack. Could change if he apologized though. This is Kerry downfall, HE DOESN'T GET IT!!
LOL! Fear, eh? I suppose the author of this column would also assert that: Saying you might get HIV if you have unprotected sex with someone having HIV -- is also fearmongering. Needless fearmongering. Or... that Dems disagreeing with Democratic party principles and candidate, and getting verbally abused for said disagreement... is senseless, groundless, excessive fearmongering. What a hoot!
General George McClellan would say things along those lines to Abraham Lincoln as excuses for not fighting.
An Army that does not fight until every last planning detail is absolutely perfect is an Army that will never fight a single battle.
That night, CBS's 60 Minutes broadcast the first interview with former Texas lieutenant governor Ben Barnes, who explained how he contrived to get young George his safe posting in the "champagne unit" of the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam war. The programme also revealed further documents showing he never fulfilled his service.
So, is George W. Bush a stalker, Sidney?
Oops, I referenced the wrong Talking Points sheet from Sid The Squid's Big Democrat Talking Points file. ;-)
If this doesn't prove that The Squid is part of a coordinated Kerry-Democrat Media hit, I don't know what does.
The real bottom line is why Kerry did what he did. (not the what he did).
1. Joined the Navy to keep from getting drafted-knew he would be placed in the marines or army (dangerous duty).
2. signed up for boat duty, knew it was safe off shore but then the navy changed the duties and kerry was placed in harms way.
3. medals had to be gotten to get away from vietnam as soon as possible.
4. valor medals he wrote em he got them, (enhanced his resume), just look at the 3 citations written and embelished for 1 medal.
5. VVAW membership good for political resume. Kennedy and Jane Fonda help. also went over good in Mass.
6. Gathered lies about servicemens actions that he knew were lies and testified before Congress under oath to aid the Communist North Vietnamese and make himself important.
7. Trip to Paris says it was just a visit. I am sure any one of us regular americans could have set up a meeting with the representatives of the NVA and Madame Bihn the Communist party represenative during the Peqace talks. (yeah right)
8. Support for the sandinistas in the 80's -got to help a fellow traveler
9. Normalization of relations with vietnam-had to get rid of that pesky POW issue and help my Forbes cousin get rights to Vietnamese property
Bottom line the Traitorous B--ch wants us to make him our leader.
BTW, it is worth pointing out that Sid coined the phrase "Vast Rightwing Conspiracy."
I was going to drop old Sidney a line, but then I thought, "Nah, it'll only make him think he matters."
Tony Snow interviewed a reporter on his program yesterday -- I wish I could remember his name now. This guy went back to the original source materials and concluded that Bush fully met his required 50 hrs/yr for his time in service in the NG. He also made the point, which was backed up by several other callers, including one who was a former NG unit commander, that granting people time off away from their duty stations was done all the time and was in no way uncommon or unusual. Further, he stated that during this time when he was alledgedly unaccounted for, he was stationed in Alabama, not Texas. Another caller, a former AF pilot, mentioned that, during this time in question, there were many pilots coming off active duty looking for NG slots, so the fact that W was looking for time away to work on an upcoming campaign fit right in with staffing requirements.
Then dims' arguments are so full of holes I could grow tumaters under 'em.
Syd Blumenthal est un Ver!
There'sno reason for Bush to squirm. He served and is proud of it. He's been totally gracious about saying Kerry's service was more admirable than his own because Kerry went to Vietnam.
Bush should go on Larry King tonight and address these stupid charges. Unlike Kerry, who has YET to answer the first question personally about his service. The more people see of Bush, the more they like him. Let him do his own talking.
Of course it is...my point is that when its in their favor the Democrats act like it is ridiculous and unpatriotic to question a military document, but when it involves their enemy there should be second-guessing as to whether the document (in this case the Honorable Discharge) was deserved.
Just pointing out the routime double standards the Democrats have long taken for granted as one of their "rights".
sorry my sarcasam detector was off
That won't work. According to Kitty Kelly (who ALWAYS tells the truth), Larry is a "toady" of the Bush family.
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.