Bush, Kerry, and the VFW

[Jimmyeatworld]

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.co...rry_ohdk103.jpg

(see picture) "War veterans Jere Hill, middle, from Warham, Mass., and Robert Gibson, right, from Lexington, Ky., stand with their backs turned during Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's speech at the 105th Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Cincinnati on Wednesday, Aug. 18, 2004. Man in foreground is unidentified. Kerry received a polite if not overwhelmingly positive reaction from the VFW. But there was a clear divide, with scores of veterans sittings with their arms folded while others clapped."

I saw part of the speeches by both Bush and Kerry. I didn't catch all of either one, and actually saw more of Kerry's, but there was no contest here.

Bush was interrupted several times by long, loud ovations, including one standing ovation that I saw.

The word tepid comes to mind when I think of their response to Kerry. A few rounds of light, polite applause, though there were two instances that the applause rose a bit.

What was most glaring to me about Kerry's appearance were two things. First, the men sitting behind him on the stage. I don't think more than half of them applauded at any given time, and one looked like he would much rather be home watching Matlock re-runs or something. Maybe it would have helped if Kerry hadn't started 9 out of every 10 sentences with some reference to his military service. At that point, I think even the veterans were thinking, "Alright already! You served in uniform! We get it!"

 

[freeandfun1]

I noticed that Kerry had far FEWER veterans sitting behind him during his speech.

I also saw on the news that when it comes to "who is better to serve as Commander-in-Chief", 55% of the vets support Bush whereas 55% of the non-Vets support Kerry for CIC. Seems the non-vets believe his Vietnam service qualifies him more than the veterans do.

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

Ok. We'll try this then.

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20040818/capt.ohdk10308181644.kerry_ohdk103.jpg

 

[Annie]

It's kind of a slow news period, which scares me because I kept saying that the summer of 2001. (Remember Chandra Levy? Now we have Scott and Kobe). Here's an interesting take from Taranto:

BEST OF THE WEB

Cut It Out! No, Wait! Bring It On!
John Kerry is on the defensive over criticism of his Vietnam War record. The Associated Press quotes him:

"Of course, the president keeps telling people he would never question my service to our country. Instead, he watches as a Republican-funded attack group does just that. Well, if he wants to have a debate about our service in Vietnam, here is my answer: 'Bring it on.' "

Note how he flip-flops just in the space of three sentences. "Bring it on," he declares, immediately after whining that the president has brought it on. Of course, the president has not actually brought it on. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the "attack group," is an independent "527" organization, just like the pro-Kerry MoveOn.org. For the Bush campaign to coordinate with it--whether to call it off or to bring it on--would be against the law.

Here's another Kerry quote: "More than 30 years ago I learned an important lesson. When you're under attack the best thing to do is turn your boat into the attack. That's what I intend to do today."

Now, "turn your boat into the attack" may be good advice in a combat situation, but international relations require a good deal more subtlety and nuance. Can we really afford such reckless belligerence in the White House?

 

[adamsimpire]

I also watched both speeches, and you're right, George Bush got a much better response than Senator Kerry did, and I was so glad when Fox news reported that.

If you ask me, I think John Kerry is going to crash and burn from here on out.

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

I also watched both speeches, and you're right, George Bush got a much better response than Senator Kerry did, and I was so glad when Fox news reported that.

If you ask me, I think John Kerry is going to crash and burn from here on out.

Kerry is looking like he's starting to smolder a bit. This deal with the swift boat ad is going to end up hurting him the way he's dealing with it. He has come out and accused Bush of being behind the ad because some guy in Houston, that happens to be a Republican, donated $150,000 to that group. Or, as Kerry put it, "...hundreds of thousands of dollars".

First, even if it were hundreds of thousands of dollars, that's a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of money Soras has pumped into MoveOn.org.

If Bush is behind the ads just because the swift boat vets biggest supporter happens to be from the same state as him, does that same logic apply to Kerry? Can we blame Kerry for all the crap Ted Kennedy has done over the years? Maybe Kerry was the one driving that Buick. Hmmmm.

Oh, but I guess that's all off topic.

 

[musicman]

Gee - 527s were just dandy six months ago. Now, they're thinly veiled partisan messages. It can all be rather confusing, unless you factor in the inherent intellectual and moral superiority of Democrats. Then, you can see how mean-spirited the people who state facts about John Kerry really are. Conversely, you are then enlightened to the purity of the motives of concerned, ordinary citizens like George Soros who funded the endless Attack Bush ads. A 527 is only fair when it attacks George Bush.

Remember, kids - just like our moral tutors in Hollywood taught us:

Democrats - Good!

Republicans - Bad!