John Kerry - Draft Dodger?

From the Telegraph

Senator John Kerry, the presumed Democratic presidential candidate who is trading on his Vietnam war record to campaign against President George W Bush, tried to defer his military service for a year, according to a newly rediscovered article in a Harvard University newspaper.

Senator Kerry on the campaign trail in Iowa
He wrote to his local recruitment board seeking permission to spend a further 12 months studying in Paris, after completing his degree course at Yale University in the mid-1960s.

According to the Democratic Party's version of Sen Kerry's military history, he joined the Reserve Officer Training Corps at Harvard through eagerness to do his duty, and sailed with the Navy for combat as soon as he graduated in 1966...

"This means that Kerry didn't jump into all that heroic service until he was pushed, and it is a very nice piece of information," said Lucianne Goldberg, a prominent Republican campaigner.

Kerry says that his actions surrounding the Vietnam War speak to his qualities as president. Well, in addition to cutting and running out of Vietnam as quickly as possible, now it looks as if he tried to dodge going there in the first place. Not a very good example for fighting future conflicts...

Hmm... Paris or Vietnam... Paris or Vietnam... I can''t really blame Kerry on that decision. I don''t know about you guys, but finding out Kerry was two-faced on yet another issue isn''t really news to me any more. I''m focusing on 2008 since we should get two new candidates, one of which might even care about the issues that I care about!

I''m focusing on 2008 since we should get two new candidates, one of which might even care about the issues that I care about!

Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush?

Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush?

Ugh. Can we be considered a psuedo-Oligarchy when the same last names get 4 presidencies in a row?

I''m hoping that the Democratic party implodes and has to reform its message, actually. Their platform is too stale and similar to the Republican party as it is - especially after Bush''s spending spree.

Lets bring back the Whigs and Anti-Masons. The fact that both presidential candidates belong to the same society would really get them fired up.

Is it just me, or are the topics around here getting really stale? It''s like watching reruns of ""NewsRadio"" or something.

I thought it was my job to harp on the same topic over and over ad nauseum (Patriot Act, loss of privacy during the current administration).

Am I to take it that I''ve become your muse, Ral?

Am I to take it that I''ve become your muse, Ral?

Just following the news. But I''ll be happy to take requests

Is it just me, or are the topics around here getting really stale?

It''s an election year so I''d get pretty used to it. Also, everytime I see these topics I smile inside, because I know the Republicans are secretly in a panic.

"Elysium" wrote:
Is it just me, or are the topics around here getting really stale?

It''s an election year so I''d get pretty used to it. Also, everytime I see these topics I smile inside, because I know the Republicans are secretly in a panic.

Not me. Kerry is going to lose big time. He isn''t very nice, his wife seems to be a royal witch, and he doesn''t believe in anything but hating Bush.

You do not win on hate.

You win on love and Skittles! Taste the rainbow!

In actuality as I''ve said before, I despise negative campaigning. Hate it, loathe it, mudslinging sucks.

and he doesn''t believe in anything but hating Bush.

Someone turn off the record player, it''s broken.

"Elysium" wrote:
Is it just me, or are the topics around here getting really stale?

It''s an election year so I''d get pretty used to it. Also, everytime I see these topics I smile inside, because I know the Republicans are secretly in a panic.

Yep, we''re in a panic, and Kerry is gonna steamroll into the White House.

Keep thinking that, Ely. Spread the word!

"Elysium" wrote:
and he doesn''t believe in anything but hating Bush.

Someone turn off the record player, it''s broken.

It''s true. Free trade, taxes, the war, social secuirty, aff. action, etc. He is a political oppertunist to the max.

Kerry says that his actions surrounding the Vietnam War speak to his qualities as president. Well, in addition to cutting and running out of Vietnam as quickly as possible, now it looks as if he tried to dodge going there in the first place. Not a very good example for fighting future conflicts...

Very much like how Bush asked to be relieved of his remaining National Guard duties to attend an Ivy League graduate school, giving up on the lifetime vocation of flying he''d signed up for a few years ago.

Kind of pre-figures all the flip-flops we''ve seen from him in the last few years. Involvment in the Palestinian issue, failure to fund first responders, ""dead or alive"" becomes ""don''t know, don''t care"", developing a Homeland Security Department, deficits, nation-building, free trade, Iraq WMD investigations, negotiations with North Korea, CO2 emissions cuts, even gay marriage - he''s flipped and flopped his way through the last few years like a gaffed cod on a cold steel deck.

You want to find the political opportunist who actually did avoid service in Viet Nam, look no further than the White House.

Robear

Kind of pre-figures all the flip-flops we''ve seen from him in the last few years.

That''s a nice tactic, trying to apply your guy''s fatal flaw to his opponent. Maybe the Republicans should tell Kerry to come clean on the WMDs and ask him to quit wrapping himself in the flag...actually, both very good ideas.

By the way, you merely listing issues and alleging flip-flops isn''t the same as them really happening. I can post pages of quotes of Kerry debating with Kerry on just about any issue or statement he''s made. The same isn''t true of Bush.

You want to find the political opportunist who actually did avoid service in Viet Nam, look no further than the White House.

by the way, you''re missing the point. Finding out Kerry tried to avoid service but was unable to isn''t intended to make a blanket statement about those who avoided service, but rather to knock down Kerry''s credentials. He is a hypocrite, once again, who tries to have it both ways.

That''s a nice tactic, trying to apply your guy''s fatal flaw to his opponent.

I actually read an article this weekend where Bush''s attacks were theorized as being pre-emptive; that is, that he was doing exactly what you said, painting his weakness on his opponent trying to turn the tables. So, it could go either way.

He is a hypocrite, once again, who tries to have it both ways.

Nah, I got that. So''s Bush, if you want my opinion. My point is that this is just political rhetoric of the most topical sort. It could be said of either candidate, and next week, it''ll be another topic.

I mean, it''s all well and good to draw distinctions between Bush''s flip flops and Kerry''s, but really, neither is that important. It''s just a small part of the entire picture, and partisans are not going to be convinced on either side by it. The only thing we''ll learn is whether Kerry has the stones and smarts to stand up to this stuff in a way that keeps his base happy in California and New York.

Find something big, with meat in it, and then people are gonna change their mind. Kerry has not ridden his Dukakis tank yet, and much as I hate to admit it, Bush has not yet tanked either. So this is essentially handwaving spin, on both sides.

We''ve got 8 months of this breathless pointlessness left. Let''s not waste it on every little mud puddle that crops up. Much more fun to go head to head on something unique to one or the other candidate, not this trivial stuff.

Robear

Much more fun to go head to head on something unique to one or the other candidate, not this trivial stuff.

That''s harder to do this year, since Kerry voted for all of Bush''s policies...

But I agree with you, as fun as it can be to throw dingers out, the more substantial policy differences make for better debate.

But I agree with you, as fun as it can be to throw dingers out, the more substantial policy differences make for better debate.

And now that I''ve dialed back the sensitivity, yeah, it''s much more fun.

Robear