My Feelings on the Swift Boat stuff...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by insein, Aug 6, 2004.

  1. insein
    Offline

    insein Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    6,096
    Thanks Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
    Ratings:
    +356
    The recent swift boat vets against Kerry book is turning into nothing more than a Michael Moore equivalent attack against Kerry. Thankfully Bush has stated that he has no ties with this group and doesnt condone anything they say. There in lies the difference between Republicans and Democrats.

    This type of attack is wrong. What Kerry did during his time of war should not be the issue here. Kerry's record as a senator should be the main focus here. Some people are losing sight of the issues when they are attacking ones character. This in my opinion is on the same level as most of Dems attacks on Bush. They scream all day about every imperfection he has without offering legitimite criticism or any ideas on how to fix things.

    My hope is that people will steer clear of the BS from the fringe elements on both sides and focus on the issues at hand. Kerry's record as a senator is more than enough to show that he is unfit to serve as President. Bush's record as president shows ample evidence that he deserves to be reelected.

    Lets focus on that people. After all, everyone does dumb things when they were young. ITs how you learn to grow and better yourselves in life that makes you a good person.
     
  2. Merlin1047
    Offline

    Merlin1047 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,500
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    AL
    Ratings:
    +450
    Insein I really have to take issue with you on this one. In my opinion, character is a far more critical issue than any other single aspect of a candidate for public office. Character, or lack thereof, defines a person. For example - Bill Clinton COULD have been a great president. He was an excellent communicator, he was outgoing and likeable, he was intelligent. But he lacked character and that is why he will never rank among the great leaders of this nation. That is why he embarrassed this country and degraded the office of President of the United States.

    Joe Lieberman is waaaaay too liberal for me. But he is forthright, honest and sincere. His character is such that he inspires trust. I would listen to Lieberman's opinions because I know that he believes them and that his positions have been filtered through a reliable set of ethics.

    Lack of character is why I despise kerry. Yes, I thoroughly disagree with his politics, but worse than that, I am SUSPICIOUS of his politics. I am suspicious because I believe kerry to lack character. I believe he is a thoroughly reprehensible, self-serving, opportunistic liar who will say and do anything to achieve his goals.

    When both candidates are of good character, then issues should be the only topic for discussion. But when a candidate is as lacking in character as kerry, then it needs to be trumpeted to anyone who will slow down to listen. Because not only is character an issue, it is THE issue that defines a president and therefore will define the nation during his term in office. For proof of that assertion, one need look no further than the Clinton administration.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. insein
    Offline

    insein Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    6,096
    Thanks Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
    Ratings:
    +356
    Let me rephrase it then. Personal attacks based on a person's actions. Like calling Bush stupid for not being able to speak well. Comparing Bush to hitler for his actions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Calling Kerry a murderer for killing enemy combatants of any age.

    Admittedly, the whole Vietnam thing would NOT be an issue if KErry hadnt brought it up. Thats why i tolerate it to a point. I draw the line on any questions of what he did in battle. War is hell. Many things that humans normally wouldnt do under NORMAL circumstances, do them during war.

    Personally, i feel that attacking Kerry's character by showing points where he has contradicted himself works well. Calling him a murderer for killing a young boy armed with a grenade launcher during a war is where i draw the line.
     
  4. freeandfun1
    Offline

    freeandfun1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,201
    Thanks Received:
    295
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +296
    I haven't heard ANYBODY call Kerry a murderer. But they are questioning his medals and such based on the fact, for example, that he PUT HIMSELF in for his Silver Star, no Silver Star investigation, as required, was conducted and there were no statements from the minimum two witnesses as required. Furthermore, his own commander at the time says that HE disapproved Kerry's request for his first Purple Heart and so, Kerry then went around HIS CHAIN OF COMMAND and submitted the request directly to the personnel office in Saigon.

    Those two issues alone give me pause and make me question his character. I spent 8 years on active duty and spent quite a bit of time in troublesome spots of the world as an Infantryman. I cannot even fathom putting myself in for an award. If he truly deserved the awards, why did HE nominate himself? Why didn't his chain of command or fellow soldiers (as is the NORMAL case) do it instead? Truly heroic actions, I am confident, would have been recognized if merited.

    Just the opinion of a vet.
     
  5. insein
    Offline

    insein Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    6,096
    Thanks Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
    Ratings:
    +356
    those kinds of things yes. I have no problem with that because Kerry brought it on himself. However, i have heard people call him a murderer (not on here but other places). I draw the line there because that dives into Michael Moore territory. There's plenty to attack Kerry's character with that he generates. There's no need to push half-truths.

    I just don't want to see Republicans stoop to Democratic tactics.
     
  6. Merlin1047
    Offline

    Merlin1047 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,500
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    AL
    Ratings:
    +450
    Oh, very well. I can agree with that. :bye1:
     
  7. freeandfun1
    Offline

    freeandfun1 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    6,201
    Thanks Received:
    295
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +296
    I agree. Look, I have been in combat, albeit limited, and I have seen people shoot people and vehicles where I am sure, some would question their actions (in particular, I was involved in the Rumalia Oil Field battle during GWI and our entire Division was charged, by Seymour (see more bullshit) Hersh with war crimes over that battle and the "highway of death". So I don't throw around the term "murderer" when it comes to combat easily and I won't do it here with Kerry.

    Here is an arial photo of the "Highway of Death".

    [​IMG]
     
  8. krisy
    Offline

    krisy Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,919
    Thanks Received:
    112
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +112
    My opinion on this one is...if Kerry wouldn't have thrown his service in everyone's face constantly,this wouldn't happen to him. These veterans are doing nothing more than telling their side,which they say is the truth. If they are telling the truth,Kerry deserves what he is getting. We have listened day and night to him talking about his service as if he were the only man ever in combat.He is using it to get elected,and I personally see nothing wrong with these men using it to keep him fron getting elected,if they are telling the truth. This is politics and I think Kerry's comment about Bush on 9-11 was far more dirty than anything I have seen from the Republicans thus far.
     
  9. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I guess without more info, I'm tending towards the position that Insein is taking. I certainly have problems with Kerry, such as his positions and flip flops. Found an interesting column by Max Boot. As President, especially during wartime, do we want a leader or follower? Bush, for better or worse, whatever you take, has led. He convinced Congress to grant him the powers, he stated what he needed from UN and got the first resolution. When they failed to act; he acted, leading 19 partners in a coalition. Bowing to the UN or France is NOT leading:

    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion...,2066460.column?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

     
  10. MtnBiker
    Offline

    MtnBiker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,327
    Thanks Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Ratings:
    +230
    I very much agree Insein, and I'm sure that is what the Bush campaign will be doing.

    Whatever experience or leadership ablilities Kerry may try to put forward it still does not compare to being the CIC.
     

Share This Page