NationStates Jolt Archive

....why Kerry's war record has anything to do with anything. Who really cares? "I won three purple hearts!" Goody for you. I don't think that Kerry's war record should be what he is relying on so much. Three medals aren't going to make you a good president.

Agreed. They should focus on their records in government.

Well then, by that reasoning, everything that the Swifties have argued that he didn't deserve said medals shouldn't matter either.

Well then, by that reasoning, everything that the Swifties have argued that he didn't deserve said medals shouldn't matter either.

No, it shouldn't. The swifties are trash, and this is coming from a Bush supporter.

I believe Kerry's war record's relavence was summed up in the This Land parody quite nicely, as follows:


[Kerry]

You can't say 'nuclear';
That really scares me...
Sometimes a brain can
come in quite handy...
But it's not gonna help you...
Because I WON THREE PURPLE HEARTS!
This land'll surely vote for me...

Knowing how to fight a war and handle an M-16 means absolutely nothing to me. If that's the qualifier, a good number of the US Military can run for president on a lofty and firm platform. It does show Kerry's dedication to his country, however, that he voluntarily signed up. But I don't really care how many lives he saved or how many battles he won, because combat capability has nothing to do with presidential office. Just say that you're a proud war veteran and be done with it.

Suicidal Librarians! You took off 'Go Big Red!' from your sig! Don't tell me you've hopped off the bandwagon!

Well then, by that reasoning, everything that the Swifties have argued that he didn't deserve said medals shouldn't matter either.

No, is shouldn't. I wouldn't vote for a candidate because of their military record, I just don't think that arguements like that should hold any water in a campaign.

Well, the thing that gets me about the military records talk is this: Kerry seems to give off the impression that he doesn't want to fight, and would rather avoid conflict. This seems to be in conflict, as he keeps trying to bring up his 'positive' record, and trashing Bush's. He's sending some mixed signals there. But then again, that's just what it seems to me.

....why Kerry's war record has anything to do with anything. Who really cares? "I won three purple hearts!" Goody for you. I don't think that Kerry's war record should be what he is relying on so much. Three medals aren't going to make you a good president.

Because conservatives tried to paint him as weak in defense. Liberals said his record versus Bush's record proove the fallacy inthat logic. It snowballed.

It all statred with "Who do you think is a better commander-in-chief to lead the US to victory in their current war? A decorated Vietnam veteran or a draft-dodger with suspicious attendance record in the national guard?"

But then, both sides should get over it. The problem is when it seems the candidates want to speak of something else, some add like the swift-boat's bring the whole thing back in the media.

Because the pollseters have determined that the only issue that either side has any room to persuade significant numbers of voters is national defense (true or not, this is what the pollsters have concluded). Therefore to persuade voters to vote for either Kerry or Bush, one side must be shown to be better qualified on national defense, according to the pollsters. Kerry really has problems running on his record to convince the convincable (as does Bush), so Kerry strategists have determined to run Kerry as a man with wartime experience (how many times in Kerry's acceptance speach did he mention his time in Viet Nam?). There are other issues, and the pollsters are begining to say there are other issues, but the pollsters convinced the Kerry campaign that Defense was the only issue that put him in the lead or keep him back, and the GOP strategists have been happy to oblidge by arguing Kerry's defense qualifications.

Oh and while three purple hearts only means you got in the way of fire, but the silver and bronze stars do mean a bit about the charecter of the person who earned them.

I think the Kerry campaign misplayed the whole thing by making such a big deal about it, it would have been far better for Kerry to have gone with the Hero who's seen action and refuses to talk about the details or brag about it. The occasional "I know what's it's like to be surrounded by heavily armed people tying to kill you" or "Sometimes unpleasant choices have to made in war" would have been much better, let other people bring up the record and reluctantly admit to the medals.

People want a president to have seen war so they'll understand what their sending their pedople into and will do it with a little more restraint (hint hint).

I agree. The only thing that should be looked at is if they did their duty. I like how both sides are trying to make a big deal about their service. Just let everyone know that you got a honorable discharge and be done with it lol

People want a president to have seen war so they'll understand what their sending their pedople into and will do it with a little more restraint (hint hint).
Strange, because that's not what Kerry is saying. He has said on several occasions that he would have gone to war in Iraq, were he in Bush's position at that time. But then again, he's come out on every side of every issue, so voters have no real idea what he really thinks. The man is truly scary. Scary Kerry.

BTW, Kerry brought up the issue of his military service, against the advice of some smart Democrats, including Bill Clinton. And Kerry thought he was soooooo clever with that "Reporting for duty" remark...LOL!

its "important" because democrats have a reputation of being soft. so if you have a democratic war hero, you run with it. too bad it turns out that only republican war heros count.

when someone who has never been president is running all you can do is look at their past experience to judge their future potential as president. so everything they have ever done is fair game. only the individual voter can decide just what points are important enough to them to make them vote for or against such a candidate.

when the incumbent president is running, however, only his record as president is really important. this is why no one really cares if bush finished his ang duty or not.

in many ways it IS a "vote for or against the president" situation. the 2 men are not equal. one is president. if the current president is OK with you, why would you vote him out just because some other guy is marginally better? if he is NOT ok with you then you have to decide if the other guy is OK enough to take his place (no sense going from the frying pan into the fire). so you vote for or against the current president.

....why Kerry's war record has anything to do with anything. Who really cares? "I won three purple hearts!" Goody for you. I don't think that Kerry's war record should be what he is relying on so much. Three medals aren't going to make you a good president.
I agree - Maybe someone should tell Kerry that since he is the one who brought it up in the first case and keeps bringing it up. Bush and Cheyney have never said anything other than Kerry served honorably - which is foar more gracious than anything Kerry said about Bush's service.

I agree - Maybe someone should tell Kerry that since he is the one who brought it up in the first case and keeps bringing it up. Bush and Cheyney have never said anything other than Kerry served honorably - which is foar more gracious than anything Kerry said about Bush's service.
Kerry makes the mistake of attacknig directly. Bush and Cheney, by relying on constituents to make the attack, keep themselves out of the mix and make themselves look better for it. This is a standard election tactic that has been going on a long time; it is not just a Bush-Cheney thing.

It's the Bush campaign that's making the big deal out of this. Hell, I haven't seen an ad in which the Bush campaign actually states the issues it intends to enforce -- eg, they only attack Kerry for his "flip-flopping" and war record. Remarkable. :rolleyes:

"I won three purple hearts!" Goody for you.

Spoken like someone who never served. :rolleyes:

Spoken like someone who never served. :rolleyes:

Well, no, I haven't served in the army. But I don't think war medals are something that a presidential candidate should brag about. He needs to be telling people a little more about what he plans to do when he becomes president, and stop reminding everyone of his war record.

Well, no, I haven't served in the army. But I don't think war medals are something that a presidential candidate should brag about. He needs to be telling people a little more about what he plans to do when he becomes president, and stop reminding everyone of his war record.
maybe bush should stop promising to do stuff he promised 4 years ago and hasnt doen shit about *see sig*

He needs to be telling people a little more about what he plans to do when he becomes president, and stop reminding everyone of his war record.

I agree entirely.

Nonetheless, that doesn't mean that your mocking tone concerning the service of veterans is something I'm going to like. Without the willingness of some to fight, to kill, to be wounded, even to die for the sake of the Constitution and the Republic, your ability to make smart-assed comments would be severely diminished.

I agree entirely.

Nonetheless, that doesn't mean that your mocking tone concerning the service of veterans is something I'm going to like. Without the willingness of some to fight, to kill, to be wounded, even to die for the sake of the Constitution and the Republic, your ability to make smart-assed comments would be severely diminished.

I didn't mean to sound like a smart aleck towards soldiers. I was just talking about Kerry. He went to war and I respect that, but I just don't think he should keep pointing his war record out, and depend on it so much. Sorry, I didn't mean to offend. I repeat, I'm sorry, I am not trying to put down soldiers or war veterans in any way and I'm sorry if it came across that way.

....why Kerry's war record has anything to do with anything. Who really cares? "I won three purple hearts!" Goody for you. I don't think that Kerry's war record should be what he is relying on so much. Three medals aren't going to make you a good president.

im glad im not the only one that thinks this really has nothing to do with the presidency besides the school yard "i am better than him because of....blah blah blah" thing.

It's the Bush campaign that's making the big deal out of this. Hell, I haven't seen an ad in which the Bush campaign actually states the issues it intends to enforce -- eg, they only attack Kerry for his "flip-flopping" and war record. Remarkable. :rolleyes:
Name one occasion where Bush attacked Kerry for his war record.

You cannot because it has not happened.

Lie elsewhere. I will call you on it here.