With kerry’s combat lies he posted on his site, and his anti American activities, he’s soon going to have his plate full. Some democrats in the house are going to have to duck this one out.

Posted by: Al-Lat at April 23, 2004 12:33 PM

The thing is, the left made Bush’s record an issue. It was clear that Kerry didn’t want to do that, but hey here we are. It is possible that much of the Kerry record will be less than stellar or simply raise more questions.

Yet the man has run on his war record so we’re gonna look at it carefully. Bush never said “vote for me because I was a fighter pilot” but Kerry’s played this card, and we called his bluff.

Posted by: skip at April 23, 2004 12:53 PM

Records on medals spark questions

By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The military records that Sen. John Kerry posted on his Web site yesterday raise new questions about the actions he took to earn several prestigious war medals and whether he deserved them.
The Navy awarded Mr. Kerry three Purple Hearts, a Silver Star and a Bronze Star in just four months of commanding a gunboat along rivers in Vietnam. It’s an extraordinary record, say many veterans, and one that raises questions on its face.
[AD]
For example, those military records do not show Mr. Kerry ever missing a day of duty for injuries, there is conflict between some of the accounts and Mr. Kerry’s presidential campaign still refuses to release some records.
“The idea that John Kerry would have put in for three Purple Hearts during only four months in country is just ridiculous,” said Mel Howell from Evansville, Ind., a retired Navy officer who flew helicopters in Vietnam. “Most of us came away with all kinds of scratches like the ones Kerry got but never accepted Purple Hearts for them.”
Upon inspection of the government documents posted on the Massachusetts Democrat’s Web site, other questions arise such as the conflicting descriptions in official records of the injuries Mr. Kerry sustained on March 13, 1969. It was the commendations he earned that day — a Bronze Star and a third Purple Heart — that let Mr. Kerry request a transfer out of Vietnam and into a desk job eight months before his tour expired.
The Personnel Casualty Report from that day says Mr. Kerry “suffered shrapnel wounds in his left buttocks and contusions on his right forearm when a mine detonated close aboard” his boat.
But the citation for the Bronze Star that he was awarded for the same action described “his arm bleeding and in pain,” saying nothing about arm bruises or shrapnel wounds anywhere.
“I don’t want to say it’s a lie, but it isn’t true,” said Charles Kaufman, a retired Air Force captain whose job once was to submit military award requests.
“His Bronze Star medal citation appears to be based on an injury he did not receive,” said Mr. Kaufman, who now lives in Germany. “His arm was not bleeding. If the paperwork had said, ‘Kerry had a bruised arm,’ I wonder if he would have been given this medal for bravery?”
“They don’t quite jibe,” said James W. Doran, national service director of the advocacy group American Veterans. But he did not fault Mr. Kerry.
“Somebody up the command flowered it up,” Mr. Doran said. “They just made it pretty for somebody’s signature.”
Several requests for comment were not returned by the Kerry campaign yesterday.
During Mr. Kerry’s relatively short tour in Vietnam, he racked up a stunning record, based on the documents released by the campaign yesterday.
All of his performance evaluations rated him first or nearly first among his peers, and no evidence suggests he ever missed duty because of illness or injuries. He was credited with killing 20 enemy fighters.
“Intelligent, mature and rich in educational background and experience, Ens Kerry is one of the finest young officers I have ever met and without question one of the most promising,” wrote Capt. Allen Slifer, Mr. Kerry’s commanding superior aboard the USS Gridley before going into combat.
But some veterans say his record is too good to be true.
“Superhuman” is how Ray Waller, a combat medic in the Marines, described Mr. Kerry’s record of awards.
“I don’t remember anybody getting three Purple Hearts and leaving, even within six or eight months,” said Mr. Waller, who as a medic was responsible for determining whether injuries warranted Purple Hearts. “And if they did, it was very, very rare — not to mention the Silver Star and the Bronze Star.”
He also was surprised that Mr. Kerry never missed duty for the wounds that earned him Purple Hearts. Although Mr. Kerry has said one of the injuries caused him to lose two days of service, there is no evidence he ever lost time for any injuries.
“If he’s got shrapnel in his buttocks, he’s going to lose time,” Mr. Waller said. “It would be impossible to have three wounds and never have a loss of time.”
Though the campaign released more than 120 pages of Navy records yesterday, Mr. Kerry still refused to release medical records that more thoroughly describe the injuries.
Among the records that the campaign will not release is any explanation for the injuries that led to Mr. Kerry’s first Purple Heart, less than a month after going into combat.
Although the campaign won’t release one document, called a “Sick Call Treatment Record,” officials allowed the Associated Press to view it earlier this week. It said: “Shrapnel in left arm above elbow. Shrapnel removed and appl[ied] bacitracin dressing. Ret[urned] to duty.”
“If it only required bacitracin and a Band-Aid, it sounds like a piece of hot shrapnel that was flying around and may not have even broken the skin,” said Mr. Waller, adding that he’d never heard of a shrapnel injury that didn’t require a tetanus shot and time off leading to a Purple Heart.
It was Mr. Kerry’s first injury that already is the source of serious questions raised by his commanding officer at the time, Grant Hibbard.
Mr. Hibbard declined requests yesterday to be interviewed by The Washington Times, but he told the Boston Globe that Mr. Kerry’s injuries were too minor to qualify for a Purple Heart.
“He had a little scratch on his forearm, and he was holding a piece of shrapnel,” Mr. Hibbard said. “People in the office were saying, ‘I don’t think we got any fire,’ and there is a guy holding a little piece of shrapnel in his palm.”
But Mr. Kerry persisted and, to his own “chagrin,” Mr. Hibbard told the Globe, he dropped the matter.
“I do remember some questions, some correspondence about it,” Mr. Hibbard said. “I finally said, ‘OK, if that’s what happened … do whatever you want.’ After that, I don’t know what happened. Obviously, he got it, I don’t know how.”
One possible reason why Mr. Kerry racked up so many battle awards in such a short period of time might be the command structure. Because awards are generally recommended by superiors, Mr. Kerry’s bosses would have relied on accounts of the action from Mr. Kerry and his underling crew mates.
And because injuries warranting Purple Hearts are verified by medics — or corpsmen — it would have been a soldier inferior to Mr. Kerry who was in charge of determining the seriousness of his injuries.
“If the commander walks up to the corpsman and says, ‘I’m wounded,’ ” said Mr. Waller, “his corpsman isn’t going to say it’s just a scratch, he’s going to say ‘OK.’ “

Posted by: Al-Lat at April 23, 2004 12:58 PM

It seems to me that Kerry served his country with honor. How can we argue with three purple hearts? There are many things that bother me about Kerry but he certainly did serve his country proudly and even though I am a Republican I cannot attack his military service record.

Posted by: Lincoln at April 23, 2004 02:53 PM

How can we argue with three purple hearts?

Are you blind? didn’t you read the preceding post?

Shrapnel removed and appl[ied] bacitracin dressing. Ret[urned] to duty

and

He had a little scratch on his forearm, and he was holding a piece of shrapnel,” Mr. Hibbard said. “People in the office were saying, ‘I don’t think we got any fire,’ and there is a guy holding a little piece of shrapnel in his palm.

Thats how you can argue with three purple hearts

Posted by: JB at April 23, 2004 03:07 PM

It is not right to challenge the service record of a decorated veteran. As a Republican I hold service to one’s country as very important. Kerry is too liberal for me on most every issue, but these attacks are not patriotic. There are many real issues to challenge Kerry on and it seems to me that with Bush’s rather suspect service record we should avoid bringing up this issue. Kerry can be beat but let’s not tear down our past and present soldiers.

Posted by: Lincoln at April 23, 2004 03:31 PM

Kerry’s war record doen’t really excite me. What really caught my eye was the article yesterday in the Wa. Post about Kerry’s release of his contacts with lobbyists.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32509-2004Apr21.html

Why would any smart politician do this - all he did was create a fertile opportunity for his opponents. Sample quotes from the article:

“The records highlight Kerry’s relationship with this city’s most influential Democratic lobbyists, such as Thomas Hale Boggs Jr. of the powerhouse firm, Patton Boggs, who was granted several personal meetings, and telecommunications, technology and banking companies. In 1999, for instance, Kerry, who was working on several telecommunications issues, met twice with Ivan Seidenberg of Bell Atlantic (now Verizon) and lunched with Gerald Cassidy, a top lobbyist who represented several companies affected by the senator’s actions on the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

“Several lobbyists who met with Kerry, including John A. Merrigan of the law firm Piper Rudnick, have raised $50,000 or more for his presidential campaign. Merrigan has contributed $8,000 to Kerry campaigns since 1992 and Boggs, $5,000, according to Federal Election Commission data. The lobbyists who met with Kerry gave at least a combined $230,000 to his various campaigns over the last decade.”

and

“The Kerry list appears to be incomplete. Several lobbyists contacted say they had additional encounters with the Massachusetts Democrat over the years that are not listed on the report.

Robert E. Juliano, a Democratic lobbyist, says he remembers dining with Kerry more than once between 1989 and October 2003. He is listed as having dinner with Kerry only on July 21, 1999. “I couldn’t begin to tell you how many times” he dined with Kerry over that period, he said.”

Posted by: KH at April 23, 2004 03:39 PM

Lincoln “It is not right to challenge the service record of a decorated veteran…but let’s not tear down our past and present soldiers. Posted by Lincoln at April 23, 2004 03:31 PM

“They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam…”

“The country doesn’t know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence, and who are given the chance to die for the biggest nothing in history;”

Swarn Testimony before Congress by Senator Kerry, soon after his return from Vietnam.

Lincoln, despite the fact that I served with a Marine outfit that took heavy losses at Hué and on Haivon Pass, I saw NONE of the behavior mentioned by Senator Kerry. The monster that was created was long, black and over 58,000 voices cry out from that monster every day since it was erected in Washington. Some of those voices are my voices. I speak up for them because they did not do what Senator Kerry says they did on a ‘regular basis’, MOF, they didn’t do it at all.

Senator Kerry has chosen not to take back his words of thirty years ago, despite the fact that they can be proven to be lies. I would not stand for his lying then, and I will not stand for his lying now.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at April 23, 2004 04:49 PM

Kerry is a democrat but he is also a DECORATED WAR VETERAN. It is flat out unpatriotic to challenge him on this issue. I support our troops…past, present and future. I would expect more class from my fellow Republicans.

Posted by: Lincoln at April 23, 2004 05:10 PM

ron, Lincoln - “They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam…”

“The country doesn’t know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence, and who are given the chance to die for the biggest nothing in history;”

Swarn Testimony before Congress by Senator Kerry, soon after his return from Vietnam.

Just exactly who was questioning whose “War Record” thirty years ago, gentlemen?

You are both hypocrites.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at April 23, 2004 05:22 PM

I haven’t even commented and you’re calling me a hypocrite. Give me one example of my hypocrisy on this board.

You’re obviously very passionate about this issue, and I understand why given your service. My only point is that Senator Kerry is not the only one who has painted this picture of what happened in Vietnam, and that Kerry never asserted that all those who served in Vietnam were capable or committed such acts. I’m merely trying to be rational and understand all sides of the issue - I refuse to jump to judgement about Kerry (or Bush) on the basis of heresay regarding events that happened over 30 years ago. I will invest myself into understanding the situation as best I can, then make a judgement when I feel I have the facts. Don’t call my a hypocrite and jump to conclusions about my beliefs when you don’t even know me.

Posted by: ron at April 23, 2004 06:44 PM

Nothing Lincoln has said would make him a hypocrite either. He stated that he doesn’t agree with Kerry on most issues, and he never said he would vote for him. All he said was Kerry served his country, and based on his record he served it with distinction. And for that, Lincoln has respect for Kerry, and for all those who served this country. He doesn’t have to agree with him, but he can respect him.

Show me one example of hypocrisy there.

Posted by: ron at April 23, 2004 06:47 PM

ron Perhaps in your case I have mispoken, and I retract that you are a hypocrite. However, Lincoln is:

“It is not right to challenge the service record of a decorated veteran…but let’s not tear down our past and present soldiers.” Posted by Lincoln at April 23, 2004 03:31 PM

Every one of those 58,000+ whose names are on the wall have been decorated. They earned that decoration with their blood. To accuse them of the atrocities which he accused them of committing, knowing they were lies, has stained every soldier who has served our Country for over thirty years.

What did Kerry do (challenging the record of decorated veterans)? THAT is hypocracy, to say that it is wrong to challenge the record of Kerry, when indeed that is what Kerry did to over 58,000 soldiers who gave their all.

No greater gift can a man give than to lay down his life for his fellow man.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at April 23, 2004 09:26 PM

I have not even mentioned the fact that Senator Kerry discussed the assassination of Congressmen with a group which he LED in his anti-war effort as well.

Do some research, Ron. I’m associated with no organized group that opposes Senator Kerry’s efforts to be President. I oppose his being elected to an office which requires someone who is morally and ethically fit to perform the awesome task of leading this Country. I say that Senator is morally bankrupt. His own words, which he will not retract prove my assertions.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at April 23, 2004 09:33 PM

“Show me one example of hypocrisy there.”

The fact that Lincoln says its not right to question Kerry because he’s “decorated”, but doesn’t respond to cap’nDOC’s point that Kerry himself went way past questioning decorated soldiers in that he accused them of the most horrific of crimes. It certainly looks hypocritical to suggest that Kerry be allowed to attack decorated soldiers with the most vile of accusations with virtually zilch evidence but should be immune from even having his records challenged simply because he’s decorated.

Its incredibly naive to say that just because someone is decorated, no-one should pursue these inconcistencies, many of the real war criminals would have been highly decorated.
Medals don’t mean a free pass from questions, particularly when those questions are directly related to the actual circumstances of the awarding of the medals. There would be no questions about his purple hearts if they had been awarded for serious injuries, but, they weren’t, at least one of them was for an injury that going by what his own Commanding officer has said, children everywhere get every day without even going to see a doctor.

As others have pointed out, Kerry is the one who made Vietnam an issue. Fair enough, it may have been Michael Moore who really turned on the floodlights with his Bush is a deserter line but Kerry did very little to try and reign it in and no-one should be suprised now that the floodlights have swung around onto Kerry.

Slightly OT but I can’t get over the irony of the fact that if Kerry does lose to George Bush, Michael Moore will probably deserve at least part of the credit, if these weren’t such serious times I would call that the ultimate delicious irony.

Posted by: JB at April 23, 2004 09:49 PM

Five medals in four months, then the “hero” turns over into Hanoi John, and we are not permitted to raise questions.

Sounds like Clinton’s “personal business” to me.

Sounds like a nerve has been struck.

Since “oders” regarding what I can question usually have the opposite effect on me, expect that nerve to become a regular target.

Posted by: jeffers at April 23, 2004 11:59 PM

I admire John Kerry for sering his country admirably. If he indeed did so.

I question his post Viet Nam service to his country. Its very clear from anyone who can read, Kerry turned his back on the men still in Nam.

That is why John Kerry is not a hero. Heros work to help and implore all people to support any conflict that fellow comrades are still a part of.

The greatest thing that bothers me about Kerry is his testimony before Senator John Fulbright, D. (ARK). Fulbright voted to give Lyndon Johnson all that he asked for. Fulbright later realized he had help give Johnson to much authority.

John Kerry testified before Fulbright and his committe because Fulbright has the entire thing arranged. Fulbright needed someone who could convince others that Johnson’s war was a huge problem.

He saw this young Navy junior officer as the very person that he had been looking for. A silver star, bronze star, and three purple heats was as good as he could ever hope for.

I will not question Kerry in serving his country. I do question the anti war actions that Kerry began as soon as he got back to the states. Its almost as if he planned the entire thing on his swift boat in Viet Nam.

The other thing I question is why the secrecy about his first purple heart. What does Mr. Kerry have to hide. I personally would be honored to reveal all commendations which help me receice a purple heart.

Something is not right. That little, I am very certain of.

Posted by: Eugene at April 24, 2004 02:07 AM

To me, it seems like this:

Kerry served his country in Vietnam, perhaps not with the zeal, vigor, and fortitude that should have garnered him four or five medals over four months, but he did serve and he did put himself in harm’s way for a war this country chose to fight.

However, it also seems to me that once Kerry came back to America he used the anti-war movement to springboard himself into politics - which I don’t necessarily hold against him if he honestly felt as he did. But if he spun and exaggerated it to outrageous proportions to position himself as an ardent anti-war spokeman for political purposes, then it’s not his war record that I question.

This is something all those considering voting for Kerry, as I am, have to inform themselves about. My biggest dilemma is that I find myself on the opposite side of the issue with Bush more often than not. I feel like it’s 2000 all over again, where I’m going to end up deciding for the better of two poor candidates.

Posted by: ron at April 24, 2004 10:32 AM

I said in earlier posts that the fake issue about George Bush’s military service would eventually be used to examine John Kerry. It is starting to happen now!!!

We will never allow the American people to forget what this Anti-American “war criminal” said and did when he returned from Vietnam. Either what he said is True of HIM and HIS COMPANIONS (from his own restimony before Congress) or it was a TOTAL LIE from the start. I believe that his testimony is being shown to be a LIE.

The stench of fabricated “wounds” is coming out. A 30 year record of wind-shifting and self-serving moral inconsistency is is being shown to America. America will decide Hanoi Jonn’s political fate in November.

Posted by: leaddog2 at April 24, 2004 10:51 AM

This is something all those considering voting for Kerry, as I am …

By this I mean I am considering voting for Kerry, not that I am definitely voting for Kerry.

I have to stop writing ambiguous statements. Or just capitalize on it by going into politics. haha

Posted by: ron at April 24, 2004 10:52 AM

Ron - “I feel like it’s 2000 all over again, where I’m going to end up deciding for the better of two poor candidates”. You ain’t alone, sir. I wasn’t particularly pleased either.

The issues of Kerry’s post VN conflict activities is sad, and also sad that there are some who would utilize doctored photos to make him appear more blatantly anti-American than he really was. He did however, lead a group that chose to display pictures of Mao, NVA flags, himself chose to display on the cover his book a parody of the Iwo Jima flag raising with our flag flying upside-down, and the same group discussed the potential assassination of seven Congressmen.

One of the men who raised that flag on Iwo Jima was a Hospital Corpsman. To sully his memory and the memories and service of the Marines who raised that flag does him no honour, and dishonors the service of every military man and woman in or out of uniform.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at April 24, 2004 12:01 PM

The Iwo Jima flag and what it represents is important to me. My Uncle was one of a very few who survived that first wave at Iwo.

Posted by: leaddog2 at April 24, 2004 02:37 PM

On CNN.com Friday. Is he admitting to being a liar?

“I think the way I characterized it at that time was mostly the voice of a young, angry person who wanted to end the war,” Kerry told CNN’s Candy Crowley in an interview broadcast on Thursday’s anniversary of his Senate testimony.

“I regret any feeling that anybody had that I somehow didn’t embrace the quality of the service. But I have always said how nobly I think every veteran served.”

The senator concedes he wouldn’t say the same things in the same way today, that talk of “atrocities” back then was over the top. Yet, he insists he’s still proud he stood up against the war. While he has regret for the words he chose, he defends the legitimacy of the sentiment he so starkly articulated.

“They were honest expressions of the passion that we brought to the cause,” said Kerry. “I’m older, I’m wiser. I’m farther from it. But they were the words that came out of my gut at that time, based on the anger and frustration that I felt back when it was happening.”

Posted by: SLC at April 24, 2004 04:08 PM

SLC I agree that we all change. I opposed the VN conflict on religious grounds before I went, and I opposed the war upon my return. I went a 19 year old kid and I came back an old man. I never got to enjoy being a kid. I shared the mud and the blood with younger than myself.

When I swear before God and Man that I speak the truth, I speak it. When Kerry spoke in the same manner, my brothers’ voices spoke to me. His voice was not that of his brothers nor my brothers.

His words “They were honest expressions…” were rather dishonest. He did not speak with truth. Some would say he did not walk in truth either. I cannot believe what he says today, no matter the message. He is driven by the wind of the moment. There were other ways to speak and other messages to voice. Those of my generation who walked the walk and were scorned for our participation in that conflict were despoiled of our garments. Our ‘uniform’, the one we shared with those who paid with their blood (and often our own) were made to feel small and cheap and inconsequential. Senator Kerry played no small part in how we were viewed, how we were heard, and how we were treated.

He is no hero. He marched under the banner of the NVA. He spoke under the portrait of Mao. He ripped off his medals and cast them aside. He lied about those who had already died, and he abandoned those who suffered the fate of being left behind.

You cannot keep your skeletons in a closet, nor hide your past in box, all wrapped up nice and neat in your attic.

There is at least one man in uniform right now who is being held as a ‘hostage’. In truth, he is a POW. Will Senator Kerry abandon him if Kerry becomes President and this soldier remains a captive?

You tell me.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at April 24, 2004 06:05 PM

Kerry has backed off from nothing. He called his brother soldiers war criminals. Saying his comments were “over the top” is by no means a retraction and an admission that he slurred them and caused millions of veterans to be tarred unjustly for decades.

He is despicable and unfit to be the C-in-C.

“Honest expression of the passion that we brought to the cause”?

Great, John. But you aren’t some nameless radical. You’re a US Senator and a candidate for the Presidency.

This man is a disgrace.

Posted by: RMcLeod at April 24, 2004 06:14 PM

Let’s be honest here. John Kerry is a decorated veteran and our candidate left the Natonal Guard early on rather unusual circumstance. A handful of his supervisors even believe that he never finished his obligation. George W is no George I, and when it comes to military service he falls short of both his father and John Kerry. America runs on freedom and that includes freddom of speech. Who can deny the depth of Kerry’s post-Vietnam speech to congress and what “do you tell the last soldier who dies?” I disagree with Kerry on most issues but I ashamed at the tactics of my fellow Republicans. It is both a strategic mistake and an ethical lapse. When we grandstand with ridiculous comments like “he is despicable and unfit to be the C-in-C” it should make any and every self respecting Republican blush. Kerry served and our man didn’t. Why bring up an issue where we fall short?

Posted by: Lincoln at April 24, 2004 07:06 PM

Let’s be honest here. John Kerry is a decorated veteran and our candidate left the Natonal Guard early on rather unusual circumstance. A handful of his supervisors even believe that he never finished his obligation. George W is no George I, and when it comes to military service he falls short of both his father and John Kerry. America runs on freedom and that includes freddom of speech. Who can deny the depth of Kerry’s post-Vietnam speech to congress and what “do you tell the last soldier who dies?” I disagree with Kerry on most issues but I ashamed at the tactics of my fellow Republicans. It is both a strategic mistake and an ethical lapse. When we grandstand with ridiculous comments like “he is despicable and unfit to be the C-in-C” it should make any and every self respecting Republican blush. Kerry served and our man didn’t. Why bring up an issue where we fall short?

Posted by: Lincoln at April 24, 2004 07:06 PM

Let’s be honest here. John Kerry is a decorated veteran and our candidate left the Natonal Guard early on rather unusual circumstance. A handful of his supervisors even believe that he never finished his obligation. George W is no George I, and when it comes to military service he falls short of both his father and John Kerry. America runs on freedom and that includes freddom of speech. Who can deny the depth of Kerry’s post-Vietnam speech to congress and what “do you tell the last soldier who dies?” I disagree with Kerry on most issues but I ashamed at the tactics of my fellow Republicans. It is both a strategic mistake and an ethical lapse. When we grandstand with ridiculous comments like “he is despicable and unfit to be the C-in-C” it should make any and every self respecting Republican blush. Kerry served and our man didn’t. Why bring up an issue where we fall short?

Posted by: Lincoln at April 24, 2004 07:06 PM

Let’s be honest here. John Kerry is a decorated veteran and our candidate left the Natonal Guard early on rather unusual circumstance. A handful of his supervisors even believe that he never finished his obligation. George W is no George I, and when it comes to military service he falls short of both his father and John Kerry. America runs on freedom and that includes freddom of speech. Who can deny the depth of Kerry’s post-Vietnam speech to congress and what “do you tell the last soldier who dies?” I disagree with Kerry on most issues but I ashamed at the tactics of my fellow Republicans. It is both a strategic mistake and an ethical lapse. When we grandstand with ridiculous comments like “he is despicable and unfit to be the C-in-C” it should make any and every self respecting Republican blush. Kerry served and our man didn’t. Why bring up an issue where we fall short?

Posted by: Lincoln at April 24, 2004 07:06 PM

Kerry’s military service has nothing to do with his qualification to be CinC. Truman, the veteran was a disaster as CinC in the Korean War. Kerry’s perfomance after he left the service is despicable.

Posted by: old doggie at April 24, 2004 07:58 PM

And I’m ashamed of how J. K. acted when he returned to the states. For the record, I was spat in the face by one of the thousands of anti-war protestors on my return to the states.

And the former junior officer Kerry was in bed with Jane Fonda, imposters, and radicals who spewed forth venom. Disagree with a war. Don’t allow your disagreement to harm other fellow soldiers.

I admire Officer Kerry more than you can realize. He did indeed serve his country with honor. I salute him. I do not admire any person who clashes with one who gave his sweat and blood to free the peoples of South Viet Nam.

That is what the mission was all about. The political leaders of that era tied the hands of American Commanders on the ground in Viet Nam. And that is the reason there were 58,000 deaths. I am not attacking John Kerry.

I am with great respect crying out for John Kerry to step forward and tell the truth. I do the same to G.W. Bush. This is not a matter of taking up for either person.

I am confident that G.W. Bush was not behind the anti war protestors of the era. One whom spat in my face. My blood boils when I see John Kerry running for Commander In Chief. The same John Kerry who had a great impact on how many POWs were treated by the VC.

I admit that all people make mistakes. John Kerry was a very smart man. His statements that he made at the time were those of a rebellious man. Very few men could have spoken as eloquent as J. K. did before Senator Fullbright and his commission.

Posted by: Eugene at April 24, 2004 08:16 PM

Lincoln Senator Kerry is morally bankrupt. He lied. We know he lied. He would rather be a wordsmith and play WordGames. He will never have my vote. President Bush may have served in the National Guard, and may have little evidence to prove that service. I don’t like having to speak up against any man who would go half way around the globe because he was asked to serve his Country. But the moment he stained the uniform of all of us, he doomed himself to carry the lie. He can make excuses but what he ought to be doing is taking back his words in some meaningful way. Instead, he continues to live and justify the lie. So be it.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at April 24, 2004 11:07 PM

How can anyone other than a Democrat claim that 5 medals, falsely achieved in four months, then used to cut a twelve month tour down to four months in the field is “honorable service” to his country. Sorry, but invoking scratches to gain Purple Hearts on a technicality, which then allows another technicality to cut two thrids off of his tour smacks of extreme cowardice in the face on the enemy. Uhhhhh…what’s the penalty for that particular crime, BTW?

Posted by: jeffers at April 24, 2004 11:08 PM

Hate to hit folks with a clue bat, but just how do you take shell fragments from an attack you’re boatmates don’t even remember? Bad guys using slingshots?

Posted by: jeffers at April 24, 2004 11:11 PM

Is it True that the date of the “wound” for Kerry’s first Purple Heart is claimed to occur while he was supposed to be the Commander of Swift Boat 94 in early January?

Since he took command of Boat 94 only on January 29th after the previous Commander was sent to the hospital, I would like to find the date of that citation. Does anyone know where to look?

Posted by: leaddog2 at April 25, 2004 01:35 AM

leaddog2 It’s a form that is part of his permanent record that Kerry will not release. Every time a sailor enters a Sickbay, a corpsman fills out that form. Every time. The reason those forms are made part of your permanent record is so that if ‘job-related’ injuries lead to complications, there is a record of previous potentially related injuries. I believe that so far, everything BUT those forms has been made available.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at April 25, 2004 08:09 AM

Jeffers,
You think those silver and bronze stars were given out like lollipops and hershey bars?

You think the crewmember who Kerry pulled out of the water during a firefight (while wounded), would classify Kerry’s service as “extreme cowardice”?

How then would you characterize Bush’s service?

ok, ep2k

Posted by: elvispresley2k at April 25, 2004 10:17 AM

Cap’n Doc,

Thanks! I knew that but was wondering if that record is available somewhere else.

ep2k…. No on Silver and Bronze Stars in response to your question.

However, it is MY PERSONAL BELIEF that John Kerry’s first “so-called wound” resulted in a Purple Heart being granted for some action in early January.

1) Since he was not on Swift Boat 94 in early January as has been stated in several places, I would like to know where such a combat activity took place, if it did?

2) If (as I suspect) such a reported activity on Swift Boat 94 is NOT A VERIFIABLE statement, then Kerry’s use of the 3 and out rule was also False from the beginning!

3) That means ALL of his subsequent statements with VVAW are also false. I know his Senate testimony was.

4) John Kerry has NOTHING to recommend him except his war record. Did he fabricate it from the beginning, or did he come to believe his own illusions from repeatedly telling them to others? That is what America needs to know.

Posted by: leaddog2 at April 25, 2004 12:58 PM

Leaddog:
Kerry was the on boat 44 (not 94), November 17, 1968. He was wounded on December 2, 1968 (and awarded the first purple heart).
January 1969 he went to the next boat.
These facts seem rather uncontroversial.

Are you saying that the action on December 2 never took place? Or are you disputing the validity of his injuries for this first purple heart?

Perhaps you meant to type third instead of “first”. Which would mean you’re disputing the validity of his injuries for the 3rd purple heart.

ep2k

Posted by: elvispresley2k at April 25, 2004 01:54 PM

I just want to know “what took place, when” that Kerry received medals for. Some of it is open to discovery, some of it is not. What is Kerry hiding?
Who knows, but since Democrats ask such questions all of the time…. I am also asking. I want to know what John Kerry is hiding and why?

I have not found anyone else who received 5 medals in 4 months in Vietnam. Maybe they did ????I have not seen any information on that but this seems VERY FAST to me?

Posted by: leaddog2 at April 25, 2004 04:44 PM

Very fast indeed—like someone was in a hurry to establish a legacy and get the heck outta there…

Posted by: keefer at April 25, 2004 06:00 PM

“You think those silver and bronze stars were given out like lollipops and hershey bars?”

By no means. You either have to earn those, or pull some very, very, heavy strings.

One thing is for sure. We’ll know which it was before the election. Bank it.

Posted by: jeffers at April 25, 2004 10:04 PM

Leaddog2:
I agree we should be skeptical of any politician. For what it’s worth, I’m not much of Kerry supporter.

Jeffers:
The guy Kerry saved is still alive, working in in L.A. as a cop IIRC. Kerry got the Bronze star for saving the guy. I doubt any strings needed to be pulled.

As for the other medals, I’d love to some evidence that Kerry “pulled strings”, otherwise it’s just conspiracy theories and misinformation.

ok, ep2k

Posted by: elvispresley2k at April 26, 2004 12:42 PM

Leaddog2:
I agree we should be skeptical of any politician. For what it’s worth, I’m not much of Kerry supporter.

Jeffers:
The guy Kerry saved is still alive, working in in L.A. as a cop IIRC. Kerry got the Bronze star for saving the guy. I doubt any strings needed to be pulled.

As for the other medals, I’d love to see some evidence that Kerry “pulled strings”, otherwise it’s just conspiracy theories and misinformation.

ok, ep2k

Posted by: elvispresley2k at April 26, 2004 12:42 PM

well I guess the sniveling detractors of Kerry’s service also think hald the purple hearts awarded in World War Two and Iraq are BS as well.

then we have the comments speculating “strings” were pulled on the Silver and Bronze stars. Please tell me of ONE CASE where this has been alleged elsewhere.

Some real jackwads are jsut making things up that are an insult to all of Americans Combat Veterans.

As a Republican the idiots denegrating Kerry’s service make me sick.

Posted by: oldman at April 27, 2004 08:50 PM

oldman EXCUSE ME? - Some real jackwads are jsut making things up that are an insult to all of Americans Combat Veterans.

You just called your Senator Kerry a jackwad. Only Kerry was very specific about the Combat veterans (and those still inCountry) that he was insulting.

Do you need a link to that testimony that Senator Kerry gave UNDER OATH, or are you willing to admit you just painted him with the same brush?

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at April 28, 2004 11:28 PM

To Whoever Jackwad is, there is at least one marine serving in fallujah iraq who just got his 3rd purple heart and of course is staying in country- whats your REAL point old man?.

Posted by: hound at April 29, 2004 11:02 AM