Let me add this up

Bush joined a unit that was sending pilots to combat duty in Vietnam, volunteered for that duty and then before he had completed the required training flight hours the Pentagon pulled not his unit but the AIRCRAFT from duty in a war zone.

Kerry according to his own interview with the Boston Globe in 86 applied for duty on the Swift Boats because they were NOT seeing combat but were being used for patrols off the coast and then 2 weeks after he joined the unit their mission was changed.

“Kerry initially hoped to continue his service at a relatively safe distance from most fighting, securing an assignment as “swift boat” skipper. While the 50-foot swift boats cruised the Vietnamese coast a little closer to the action than the Gridley had come, they were still considered relatively safe.

“I didn’t really want to get involved in the war,” Kerry said in a little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published in 1986. “When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that’s what I thought I was going to be doing.”
http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061603.shtml

But two weeks after he arrived in Vietnam, the swift boat mission changed — and Kerry went from having one of the safest assignments in the escalating conflict to one of the most dangerous. Under the newly launched Operation SEALORD, swift boats were charged with patrolling the narrow waterways of the Mekong Delta to draw fire and smoke out the enemy. Cruising inlets and coves and canals, swift boats were especially vulnerable targets.
******************************************
Looks like Kerry was just not a very good dodger. ;-)

Posted by: Dan Kauffman at September 3, 2004 08:46 AM

Does he know what a draft dodger is?

Anyway, I thought it was good to be a draft dodger. It was when Clinton was running. Double standard John?

I wish he could pick an issue and talk about it. Too bad he has none.

Posted by: jones at September 3, 2004 09:05 AM

Yes, somebody should trot out the quotes from Kerry when he rose in defense of the then democrat standard bearer, Mr Clinton.

As I recall it went exhorted us to put aside the divisiveness of the Vietnam War and focus on the business at hand.

As the Great govenor Moonbeams of California (Jerry Brown) once said: that was then, this is now.

Posted by: skip at September 3, 2004 10:01 AM

Yeah, I’m not sure “draft dodger” applies to Bush. His “Champagne Unit” duty seems to be usual silver-spoon-white-boy-nepotism than anything else. Such is the way of the privileged. What troubling is that he appears to have had trouble completing even this plum assignment.

What about Cheney? For such a hawkish neo-con, no one seems able to explain his (lack of) service. The last I heard was that he had “other priorities” during Vietnam. What the heck does that mean?

ok, ep

Posted by: elvispresley2k at September 3, 2004 10:04 AM

Why is the DoD checking on Kerry’s Medals? Because tampering with Military Records is a Federal Crime.

—==—

Steal this sig:

Why did John Kerry meet three times with the representatives of the Viet Cong and Communist North Vietnam?

Some times it takes a while to sell out your country.

New Soldier html

What is the War Hero Afraid of?
Form 180. Release ALL the records

Posted by: M. Simon at September 3, 2004 10:07 AM

Apparently, these guys aren’t aware that people are watching them besides the pliant mainstream media and are recording what they say? To put it in terms they can understand: they are terrible witnesses. They constantly erode their own credibility and paint themselves into corners that they have to skewer themselves to get out of.

I don’t care where they went to school or how financially succesful they’ve been (even if only parasitically so), these guys are dumbasses with very poor judgment.

Posted by: TL at September 3, 2004 10:10 AM

How old are you, ep2k?

I thought we were discussing DraftDodgers here. In my ‘vulnerable’ years, that meant someone who made his way north to Canada, or somehow avoided the draft in an unseemly manner.

I’d give you the benefit of the doubt on your argument if it weren’t for the fact I’ve seen your line before…

Kerry’s Bona Fides are in LYING. Certified. Wanna spend Christmas in Cambodia getting your brain seared???

ok, ep…

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at September 3, 2004 10:14 AM

I spent a fair amount of time searching the web for the quote from Kerry that speaks directly to the issue of Viet nam service.

Here it is:

“The race for the White House should be about leadership, and leadership requires that one help heal the wounds of Vietnam , not reopen them; that one help identify the positive things that we learned about ourselves and about our Nation, not play to the divisions and differences of that crucible of our generation.
We do not need to divide America over who served and how. I have personally always believed that many served in many different ways. “

This is Kerry urging the democrats and others to give Clinton a break about viet nam service.

When will the Kerry supporters see this guy for who he is? he’s an egregious opportunist, pure and simple. When it pays for Kerry to “Heal the wounds of viet nam” then he’s all for it.

When it pays for Kerry to “divide America over who served and how” well he’ll bring it on.

Don’t you leftie hypocrits see this? don’t you understand who you’re supporting here? So stick a baguette in it OK?

You lefties are asking us to support a person with a principled bone in his body. Why would we do that? Why would we follow someone who’s theme song should be “Any way the wind blows”?

Posted by: skip at September 3, 2004 10:56 AM

Cap’n:

I’m not sure why you’re so angered?
In the post above, I fully acknowledge that Bush is/can’t be a “draft dodger”. He served (at least partially) without distinction (as far as I know).

As for Cheney, I guess it’s obvious he wasn’t anxious to see to fight commies or see combat, but I’ll withhold judgement until he (or someone) divulges what “other priorities” might mean.

ok, ep

Posted by: elvispresley2k at September 3, 2004 11:07 AM

Sorry! Should read “isn’t/can’t be”.
ep

Posted by: elvispresley2k at September 3, 2004 11:13 AM

Edwards comment about hate coming from the podium matched my own feelings. I couldn’t watch the convention for the obnoxious comments that were being made. I wouldn’t have watched the Democrat convention either if they had stooped as low as the Republicans last night.

One of my greatest lessons in life has been to discover that such hateful comments are made by people whose only defense is attack which means they are standing on incredibly shaky ground. The only way they can appear to be steady is to distract with smoke and fire. The sad part is they and we get burned in the process. There is no winner in this kind of campaign. Even if he wins the election, Bush has already lost. I can’t respect him when he has little or no ethics, no compassion, no respect for anyone but his supporters (that is if he does respect his supporters or just use them), and no understanding of the damage he has done to himself and us in relationship to the rest of the world.

Posted by: Zhap at September 3, 2004 11:39 AM

I know this is sort of off-topic, but it definitely relates to the ongoing liberal attack in the media and media outlets:

From Brit Hume’s Political grapevine:

Personal Attacks Permitted
Just days after Amazon.com announced that, despite a policy against it, it would let the public write personal attacks in their online book reviews of the anti-Kerry book “Unfit for Command,” and only that book, scores of Amazon customers are now calling for a boycott and threatening to cancel their accounts.

One customer says, “the hypocrisy and blatant liberal bias Amazon has shown is irritating and insulting.” Another says, “Can’t wait to see the stock plummet.”

But at least one customer has had the opposite reaction, saying, “See ya, crybaby Republicans! … I’m buying from [Amazon] forever.”

…I’ve already sent my customer suggestion, which included the fact that I’d be letting my fellow bloggers know.

Posted by: jackhammer at September 3, 2004 11:41 AM

Has anyone else noticed, that by Presidential candidate John Kerry choosing to attack Vice-President Dick Cheney’s Vietnam-era military decisions, and completely ignoring each and every salient point from President Bush’s speech on Thursday, Senator Kerry has tacitly conceded the matter to President Bush?

Point and game to Bush.

Kerry had better remember who he is up against, and what is the issue, or he will not only lose, he will lose very badly.

Posted by: DJDrummond at September 3, 2004 11:47 AM

Zhap

Nice kumbya sentiments but do you actually believe them? The whole tone of both conventions was different… Dems were doom gloom America is going to hell and GW lead it there… Republicans were we’ve suffered, we aren’t perfect, but we are damned happy and proud to be Americans and like always we’ll get through this.

Doing a “ooo ooo look at the hateful comments” schtick is way too close to the morally bankrupt “zero tolerance” policies of many “public” schools.

Posted by: Darleen at September 3, 2004 12:21 PM

DJDrummond, I noticed the same thing.

From the original post:

US Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry hit back at George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and the Republican National Convention today by labelling the President and Vice President draft dodgers.

From Zhap’s 11:39 am comment:

One of my greatest lessons in life has been to discover that such hateful comments are made by people whose only defense is attack which means they are standing on incredibly shaky ground.

Posted by: Tomorrowist at September 3, 2004 12:25 PM

Kerry’s locked into a full-blown flame-out-at-40,000-feet ego panic. The biggest problem that this is going to cause for him is that most Americans never serve in the military, both now as well as during the Vietnam conflict, and many of these folks may just infer that Kerry is calling is calling them “draft dodgers” too.

What an instructive look at this guy in action under pressure.

:jackson

Posted by: jackson zed at September 3, 2004 12:48 PM

Can anybody give me a cogent explanation why this Kerry strategy isn’t 100% abso-fricking-lutely insane?

I mean, here’s Kerry, his campaign in a state of panic after the Swift Boat stuff seems to have made a serious impact. Dems agree - something needs to change! Radical reevaluation of course, bring in new people!

And… this is what they come up with? They’ve decided the problem is simply that Kerry hasn’t talked ENOUGH about Vietnam? That moldy old insinuations about Bush’s National Guard service (long ago seen, digested, and excreted by the electorate) are a silver bullet issue to destroy Bush?

I’m baffled that this is something the Democrats’ top political minds could come up with.

Posted by: David C at September 3, 2004 01:01 PM

But I thought after Kerry collected his medals and got his ticket punched and made a bee-line to the US Congressional hearing, he was encouraging draft dodging.

Posted by: TexasGal at September 3, 2004 01:14 PM

Posted by: skip at September 3, 2004 10:56 AM SPOKEN by Kerry!
“The race for the White House should be about leadership, and leadership requires that one help heal the wounds of Vietnam , not reopen them; that one help identify the positive things that we learned about ourselves and about our Nation, not play to the divisions and differences of that crucible of our generation.
We do not need to divide America over who served and how. I have personally always believed that many served in many different ways. “

don’t forget THIS:

“In a sense, there’s nothing that says more about your career than when you fought, where you fought and how you fought,” Kerry told the Boston Herald.

“If you wind up being less than what you’re pretending to be, there is a major confrontation with value and self-esteem and your sense of how others view you.”
“Is it wrong? Yes, it is very wrong. Sufficient to question his leadership position? The answer is yes, which he clearly understood,” Kerry told the Herald.

Kerry also spoke with the Boston Globe.
“The military is a rigorous culture that places a high premium on battlefield accomplishment,” he told the paper. Of Boorda and his apparent violation, Kerry said: “When you are the chief of them all, it has to weigh even more heavily.”

See skip, it’s ONLY OK if it is coming FROM Kerry’s mouth…NOT slapping him in it!

Posted by: DevilDoc at September 3, 2004 02:58 PM

Exactly, these guys just can’t take a punch. It’s a contest, a competition, a battle. If this were a hockey game Kerry would be the guy who’s always whining to or about the referees.

It has become unseemly at this point and Bush’s silence in response to all the batterings the left have visited on him now speaks volumes about his strength and determination.

Posted by: skip at September 3, 2004 03:41 PM

Cheney didn’t dodge the draft. He just had Other Priorities.

Dubya didn’t dodge the draft. He got himself put into a NG outfit where there was never any danger of going to war.

Clinton didn’t dodge the draft either. He simply avoided it — as many people did at the time.

Had Any of these individuals served in Viet Nam, it wouldn’t have changed one damned thing.

Posted by: Don at September 3, 2004 08:09 PM

elvispresley2k,

George Bush did not “partially” serve, or “without distiction”, according to an article by NRO’s Byron York.

http://www.nationalreview.com/flashback/york200408261025.asp

Posted by: phile at September 3, 2004 10:30 PM

Don, ep2 and others:

Here are some web sites that provide the information on the F-102 Delta Dagger that the President flew. It was a key part of the nation’s air defense command during the 60s and 70s guarding against Soviet attacks in the Cold War.

http://www.warbirdforum.com/f102.htm

When he started flight training to join that unit, it had been scheduled to rotate over to Viet Nam as part of the Combat Air Patrol to protect Saigon against any suprise air raid by MIGS coming down from NVN. Dan is correct on the volunteer mission called, “Palace Alert.”

The Texas Air Guard along with other units were flying their butts off back here in CONUS covering for the F-4 squadrons that were being sent over to Viet Nam. The F-4 was a fairly good Close Air Support aircraft while the F-102 was not as it could not carry bombs and handled like a big rig truck at low altitudes.

The Air Force cancelled all F-102 deployments in 1969 and slowly began to phase out the F-102 aircraft throughout the 70s.

I do not think even Lt. Bush’s daddy could have orchestrated all of this before hand and it was a closely guarded decision made back in the Pentagon that surprised many of the Air Guard units when it was made.

Posted by: steve at September 4, 2004 12:03 AM

The FACT is, Bush put in YEARS of service, and completed them, and this is proven beyond any doubt, despite the DENIAL of the loony left.
Kerry on the otherhand, literly had to be dragged into service, and he did everything possible to avoid anything dangerous. Then when he couldn’t, he quicky faked “wounds” if you can call them that, and got out after only 4 months.
He then met with the enemy on three occasions. He was involved in a plot to assasinate senators.
He lied at a congressional hearing under oath.

As far as the swift boat guys go, they aren’t the only ones disputing kerry’s medals and how he fraudulanly obtained them, so are some of his commanding officers.

Then, after kerry and the lefty camp spend a year trying to bash Bush’s service record, they cry “no fair” when Kerry’s comes into question.

Kerry cries that the 527’s are unfair, yet he directly is involved with many of his own.

To say the loony left are hypocrates is an understatement. They are in complete denial of truth.

It’s patheticly clear to anyone that kerry’s record is a fraud. there is nothing that can be defended.

Kerry can simply come clean and release all records and journals.

Some of the stuff kerry released PROVES That he is less than honest.
Kerry knows he can’t release his records, You can put money on it that he won’t.

The man belongs in prison for the diservice he did to the country, and who knows, maybe that might just happen yet.
How can anyone defend Kerry and call themselves a patriot? A patriot does not sacrifice his country, just because they hate a republican president.
A patriot would not put a obvious fraud, a man who isn’t a patriot in the most powerfull position in the world.
Kerry is finnished, and he did it to himself, that’s the beauty of it. Liars always get caught up in their own lies eventually, and kerry has 30 years of them that he knows are impossible to keep track of.

Posted by: Grand Ayatollah Nathan at September 4, 2004 11:08 AM

One correction, Nathan.

It cannot be proven for a fact that Senator Kerry took an oath before he gave the Winter Soldier testimony in 1971. Because it cannot be proven, we also can’t claim he perjured himself.

Suffice it to say that he lied (as you point out), and continues to perpetrate the lies to this day.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at September 4, 2004 07:24 PM