Could the Press Grow a Spine?

Well, strictly speaking, Bush is a deserter.


You've been asked repeatedly for hard evidence of your assertions. You have
yet to provide any. Strictly speaking, all you've done here is prove you're
just another ignorant partisan.


This link shows Bush's chronilogical record of service. There's a 16 month gap:

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc10.gif

There's an entry on 26 May 72. The next entry is 10/01/73.

Walt

"WalterM140" wrote in message
...

This link shows Bush's chronilogical record of service. There's a 16 month
gap:

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc10.gif

There's an entry on 26 May 72. The next entry is 10/01/73.


That link shows a portion of a faded document. Thank you for proving my
point.

(B2431) wrote in message ...

The only ones that should be excluded from public office are Clinton and Dean
since he admitted to committing felonies: providing fraudulent medical
"evidence" to his draft board and smoking marijuana which was a felony at the
time.


I think that the right of th epeople to elect an admitted felon to
public office is far more important than your sense of propriety
calling for their disenfranchisement.

Would you argue that no one who admits to having comitted a felony
should be allowed to hold public office?

How about my friend's grandmother who was CONVICTED of a felony for
providing birth control literature to minor?

--

FF

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Fact: Kerry went to war. Bush didn't.


Fact: Kerry used an unearned Purple Heart to get out of Vietnam after
serving just a third of his tour. Bush didn't.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message thlink.net...
"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Fact: Kerry went to war. Bush didn't.


Fact: Kerry used an unearned Purple Heart to get out of Vietnam after
serving just a third of his tour. Bush didn't.

Show your evidence that Kerry didnt earn his third purple
heart, received in his second tour of duty.

ALso,

Show your evidence that Bush didn't get out of Vietnam.

Show why any of that is more important than what both men have
done since.

--

FF

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
om...

Show your evidence that Kerry didnt earn his third purple
heart, received in his second tour of duty.


I didn't say it was his third purple heart, I said he used an unearned
purple heart to get out of Vietnam after serving just a third of his tour.
I believe the award in question was the first one.

The following letter appeared in the USA Today "Letters" section on June
25th last, page 8A:



Criticism of Kerry's Purple Heart is just

Retired U.S. army colonel David Hackworth defends presidential
candidate John Kerry's Purple Hearts. He correctly notes that they are
awarded for a wound that necessitates treatment by a medical officer and
that is received in action with an enemy ('The meaning of a Purple Heart,"
The Forum, June 16).

I was the commanding officer to whom Kerry reported his injury on Dec.
3, 1968. I had confirmed that there was no hostile fire that night and that
Kerry had simply wounded himself with an M-79 grenade round he fired too
close. He wanted a Purple Heart, and I refused. Louis Letson, the base
physician, saw Kerry and used tweezers to remove the tiny piece of
shrapnel - about 1 centi*meter in length and 2 millimeters in di*ameter.
Letson also confirmed that the scratch was inflicted with our M-79.

We admire Col. Hackworth, but he, above all people, knows why it is
unac*ceptable to nominate yourself for an award. It compromises the basic
military principle that we survive together. To promote yourself is to
denigrate your team. I hope Col. Hackworth will rethink his characterization
of Kerry's swift-boat comrades as "grousers" passing on "secondhand bilge."
In our case, this is firsthand knowledge, and our integrity is unquestioned.

Kerry orchestrated his way out of Viet*nam and then testified, under
oath, be*fore Congress that we, his comrades, had committed horrible war
crimes. This tes*timony was a lie and slandered honor*able men. We, who were
actually there, believe he is unfit to command our sons and daughters.

Grant Hibbard, retired commander US. Navy, Gulf Breeze, Fla.

Louis Letson, M.D. Retired lieutenant commander Medical Corps, US. Navy
Reserve Scottsboro, Ala.



ALso,

Show your evidence that Bush didn't get out of Vietnam.


Evidence that Bush didn't get out of Vietnam? What the hell are you talking
about? Bush did not serve in Vietnam.



Show why any of that is more important than what both men have
done since.


I can't. I don't believe it is more important than what both men have done
since. But Kerry and the Democratic Party apparently do believe it is more
important than what they have done since. Since Kerry became the
frontrunner for their nomination Vietnam has been the key issue in their
campaign to defeat Bush. Note that Vietnam was not an issue when Howard
Dean, who spent much of the Vietnam war with a medical deferment for a bad
back but still managed to become a rather accomplished skier, was their
frontrunner.

Kerry's position on Vietnam has changed dramatically since early 1992, when
Bill Clinton, who avoided not just Vietnam but the military entirely, was
campaigning for the Democratic nomination for president:

" I am saddened by the fact that Vietnam has yet again been inserted into
the campaign, and that it has been inserted in what I feel to be the worst
possible way. By that I mean that yesterday, during this Presidential
campaign, and even throughout recent times, Vietnam has been discussed and
written about without an adequate statement of its full meaning."

"We do not need to divide America over who served and how. I have
personally always believed that many served in many different ways. Someone
who was deeply against the war in 1969 or 1970 may well have served their
country with equal passion and patriotism by opposing the war as by fighting
in it. Are we now, 20 years or 30 years later, to forget the difficulties of
that time, of families that were literally torn apart, of brothers who
ceased to talk to brothers, of fathers who disowned their sons, of people
who felt compelled to leave the country and forget their own future and turn
against the will of their own aspirations?"

Senator John Kerry, Jan 30, 1992

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message link.net...
"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
om...

Show your evidence that Kerry didnt earn his third purple
heart, received in his second tour of duty.


I didn't say it was his third purple heart, I said he used an unearned
purple heart to get out of Vietnam after serving just a third of his tour.
I believe the award in question was the first one.

Ok, thanks.


The following letter appeared in the USA Today "Letters" section on June
25th last, page 8A:


I have questions about some parts of the story below. They may have
reasonable answers, but we won't find out unless the questions are
asked.



Criticism of Kerry's Purple Heart is just

Retired U.S. army colonel David Hackworth defends presidential
candidate John Kerry's Purple Hearts. He correctly notes that they are
awarded for a wound that necessitates treatment by a medical officer and
that is received in action with an enemy ('The meaning of a Purple Heart,"
The Forum, June 16).

I was the commanding officer to whom Kerry reported his injury on Dec.
3, 1968. I had confirmed that there was no hostile fire that night and that
Kerry had simply wounded himself with an M-79 grenade round he fired too
close. He wanted a Purple Heart, and I refused. Louis Letson, the base
physician, saw Kerry and used tweezers to remove the tiny piece of
shrapnel - about 1 centi*meter in length and 2 millimeters in di*ameter.
Letson also confirmed that the scratch was inflicted with our M-79.

If there was no enemy fire, or at least enemies present, why was the
M-79 grenade fired?


We admire Col. Hackworth, but he, above all people, knows why it is
unac*ceptable to nominate yourself for an award.

If so, why was the nomination accepted?

It compromises the basic
military principle that we survive together. To promote yourself is to
denigrate your team. I hope Col. Hackworth will rethink his characterization
of Kerry's swift-boat comrades as "grousers" passing on "secondhand bilge."
In our case, this is firsthand knowledge, and our integrity is unquestioned.


For Mr Hibbard to have first hand knowedge of the incident he would have
had to witness it himself. He doesn't ocme out and say one way or the
other but it seems that his account is based on what he heard from others,
including Kerry, making it second hand, not firsthand.

Kerry orchestrated his way out of Viet*nam and then testified, under
oath, be*fore Congress that we, his comrades, had committed horrible war
crimes. This tes*timony was a lie and slandered honor*able men. We, who were
actually there, believe he is unfit to command our sons and daughters.


Mr Hibbard does not quote from Kerry's testimony. Therefor I cannot
be sure as to exactly what testimony he refers. But if he referes to
the testimony at the link I posted eslwhere in this thread then clearly
Mr Hibbard misconstrues Kerry's testimony to the extent that Hubbard's
statement is a lie and slanders an honorable man.


Grant Hibbard, retired commander US. Navy, Gulf Breeze, Fla.
Louis Letson, M.D. Retired lieutenant commander Medical Corps, US. Navy
Reserve Scottsboro, Ala.

Louis Letson, M.D. Retired lieutenant commander Medical Corps, US. Navy
Reserve Scottsboro, Ala.


Did you see this in USA TOday, or did you get it from somewhere else?



ALso,

Show your evidence that Bush didn't get out of Vietnam.


Evidence that Bush didn't get out of Vietnam? What the hell are you talking
about? Bush did not serve in Vietnam.

Oh, so Bush did get out of serving in Vietnam. Smart move, IMHO.




Show why any of that is more important than what both men have
done since.


I can't. I don't believe it is more important than what both men have done
since.

Me neither.

But Kerry and the Democratic Party apparently do believe it is more
important than what they have done since. Since Kerry became the
frontrunner for their nomination Vietnam has been the key issue in their
campaign to defeat Bush.

I have seen only a handful of ads for Kerry and do not recall them
even mentioning his service in Vietnam.

You can check out his website he
http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html

I see no mention of his military service at all on the frontpage and
only two sentences devoted to it in his biography.

Ofhand, I'd have to say that your statement "Vietnam has been the
key issue in their campaign to defeat Bush." is completely unfounded.
AFACT, Iraq has been the key issue in their campagn to defeat Bush.

--

FF

"Fred the Red Shirt" wrote in message
om...

If there was no enemy fire, or at least enemies present, why was the
M-79 grenade fired?


You'd have to ask John Kerry.



If so, why was the nomination accepted?


Unknown. The records have not been revealed.



For Mr Hibbard to have first hand knowedge of the incident he would have
had to witness it himself. He doesn't ocme out and say one way or the
other but it seems that his account is based on what he heard from others,
including Kerry, making it second hand, not firsthand.


Hibbard spoke with other crewmwmbers, who indicated there was no enemy fire.
Their information is first hand.



Did you see this in USA TOday, or did you get it from somewhere else?


I saw it in USA Today. Except for an accompanying photo of Kerry and it's
caption, it's a direct scan.



Oh, so Bush did get out of serving in Vietnam. Smart move, IMHO.


Mine too.



I have seen only a handful of ads for Kerry and do not recall them
even mentioning his service in Vietnam.


I have seen more than a handful and many have touted his Vietnam service.



You can check out his website he
http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html

I see no mention of his military service at all on the frontpage and
only two sentences devoted to it in his biography.


Do you know if it was more prominent before the questions about his first
Purple Heart were raised?



Ofhand, I'd have to say that your statement "Vietnam has been the
key issue in their campaign to defeat Bush." is completely unfounded.
AFACT, Iraq has been the key issue in their campagn to defeat Bush.


But you indicated you've not seen many of his ads. I have.

Fred the Red Shirt wrote:


I was the commanding officer to whom Kerry reported his injury on Dec.
3, 1968. I had confirmed that there was no hostile fire that night and that
Kerry had simply wounded himself with an M-79 grenade round he fired too
close. He wanted a Purple Heart, and I refused. Louis Letson, the base
physician, saw Kerry and used tweezers to remove the tiny piece of
shrapnel - about 1 centi*meter in length and 2 millimeters in di*ameter.
Letson also confirmed that the scratch was inflicted with our M-79.


If there was no enemy fire, or at least enemies present, why was the
M-79 grenade fired?



I can not say this for certain, but it has been stated in other
threads that the grenade was fired during what is often termed
"reconaissance by fire." That is to say, if there MIGHT be an enemy
hiding in a tree line, or behind that haystack, or in those woods,
a grenade is a relatively cheap and (usually) safe way for you to
find out- and potentially avoid an ambush if there are in fact bad
guys there intent on doing you harm. If there isn't actually an
enemy around, then you've spent a grenade for peace of mind (and
a small shrapnel wound in the case in question- got to watch how
close you set off things that go boom).

Mike Williamson

"Jarg" wrote:

I think you are wasting your words. Walt's postings are about creating left
wing propaganda, not facts.

Jarg

What a mental midget you are Jarg. There are alien traitors here,
like Minyard and Irby. There are passive, pliant betamales aplenty
too many to mention. There are servile knee-benders like Rasimus, and
hysterical shriekers like Ferrin &. You are are the thickest brick on
the block, though. No wonder they laughingly use you dumb ass as a
race-traitor. Moron.

Grantland