Question for Kerry Supporters

[Tom]

No crap-just honest answers, please.
Kerry has chosen to focus on his brief stint in Viet Nam as the basis of why he is qualified to be president.
My question is this,"How does s few months in the service in Viet Nam 30 years ago prepare Kerry to lead our nation?"
:confused: :confused:

[Secretariat]

Well, I think that Democrats are framed as weak on defense by Repubs and as a result of that, Dem's were going to select Clark or Kerry. I knew Dean would never survive.

One of the reasons for Kerry's win in the primary was his service to his country. Those members that were on his boat know what he did and stood behind him at the Dem Convention. I think Kerry's speech was to say, hey, I fought for my nation, and I will defend our nation just as well as a man who campaigned for a senator while in Alabama on National Guard. Repubs like to bring up issues of character and values. Kerry showed great courage in that war. THe kind of self sacrifice that americans should be proud of. That's why the ugliness of the SWV's thing is so distasteful.

Contrary though to the service issue, I don't think Kerry has been focusing on that issue as much as the Dem Natl. Committee. Most of Kerry's speeches have been about the economy. However, with the Swift Boat Ads coming out Kerry has been forced to address these charges, and hence, it brings up the Vietnam issue. Personally, I think this will be a disaster ploy by the Bush admin in the long run, as GW is no Norman Schwartzkopf and is extremely vulnerable on his service record. But in the short run, I think it keeps the Dems addressing the Nam issue.

Personally, I've been doing SAR most of the time now, and won't get back to this until after that meet. Thank God the Repub convention will be over by that time. Frankly, I'm not big on any of these conventions, Dem or Repub. They seem like a giant politcal ad for both parties. I'd rather see three months worth of actual debates.

[lsbets]

I said before that the first vets ad against Kerry meant nothing to me, and that it was his actions when he returned home that I had a problem with. The newest ad highlights what Kerry cannot dispute - the words he spoke in front of the Congress when he returned home, and the reason that I feel he is unfit to be Commander in Chief. Instead of addressing the issue, the Dems have attempted to smear a group of veterans who are rightly outraged by the actions of Kerry. I find the attacks against a large group of men who served honorably to be disgusting. Address the issues that they have brought up - I have. I don't care about squabbles over Kerry's awards, but his actions when he got home are repugnant. Take the issues on Dems, don't run away. Your man sold out his fellow soldiers, there is no honor in that.

[Tom]

Sec, So you don't think his military service actually prepared him to be president? I don't want to put words in your mouth, just understand your reply better.
BTW....will you be SAR for a while?
I hope to be there next week or week after...if you are there, would love to meet you in person (no guns! LOL)

lsBets....hard to dispute his own voice, isn't it?

[Secretariat]

Isbets,

I covered your issues in the PA Truth thread so I won't repeat all that here.

I suggest you look at this link in regards to the issues Kerry raised in 1971.

http://www.vvaw.org/commentary/?id=399

It is interesting that General David Shoup, USMC (Ret), who earned the Medal of Honor in WWII, publicly supported John Kerry after that 1971 speech. Good enough for a Medal of Honor speech to support Kerry.

I'll let this go since I wrote a long post about it on the other thread.

Tom,

I was in Albany Wednesday, and went up to SAR, but I'm back home now doing most of my bets online. Sorry, I didn't think you guys would want to be seen with a lib.

[Tom]

There are no libs or conservs at the track...only winners and losers. :D

[Lefty]

Tom, well said.

[Secretariat]

Kinda like the economy.

[Tom]

Can't let it go, can you? :rolleyes: