NationStates Jolt Archive

http://benofmesopotamia.blogspot.com/2006/12/schaudenfraude-or-john-kerry-visits.html

I'll say this for John Kerry - at least he's a good sport, and had the balls to show up in Iraq after his inane comment.

It's also interesting to note that no one wanted to sit with him, and officers went out of their way to have their units "busy" so that they couldn't visit with him.

Not that in the grand scheme of things, the military vote counts for anything, but there it is.

http://benofmesopotamia.blogspot.com/2006/12/schaudenfraude-or-john-kerry-visits.html

I'll say this for John Kerry - at least he's a good sport, and had the balls to show up in Iraq after his inane comment.

It's also interesting to note that no one wanted to sit with him, and officers went out of their way to have their units "busy" so that they couldn't visit with him.

Not that in the grand scheme of things, the military vote counts for anything, but there it is.


It's good to know that the men and women who defend and serve this country can be so shortsighted spiteful and childish, while at the same time holding high powered rifles.

I don't much respect Sen. Kerry a whole lot, but frankly the jackasses responsible for this shouldn't be allowed to wear a uniform.

It's good to know that the men and women who defend and serve this country can be so shortsighted and spiteful, while at the same time holding high powered rifles.

Maybe they felt personally insulted.

It's good to know that the men and women who defend and serve this country can be so shortsighted spiteful and childish, while at the same time holding high powered rifles.

I don't much respect Sen. Kerry a whole lot, but frankly the jackasses responsible for this shouldn't be allowed to wear a uniform.

Look at how they're trained. Shortsighted and spiteful are practically the goals of Basic.

If that stupid joke keeps Kerry off the ballot in '08, I won't be crying. The Democrats need to get the message that Senators make lousy candidates, it's too easy to tar them with the "Washington insider" brush (of course, what else would a Federal legislator be, but logic doesn't apply in campaigns). We need a Southern or Sun Belt governor.

If that stupid joke keeps Kerry off the ballot in '08, I won't be crying. The Democrats need to get the message that Senators make lousy candidates, it's too easy to tar them with the "Washington insider" brush (of course, what else would a Federal legislator be, but logic doesn't apply in campaigns). We need a Southern or Sun Belt governor.

Isn't it usually a Southern man who wins (in recent memory)?

LBJ, Carter, Clinton, Dubya...

Isn't it usually a Southern man who wins (in recent memory)?

LBJ, Carter, Clinton, Dubya...

It has worked out that way, except for Dick Nixon. Southern California, though, but that's not quite the same thing.

It has worked out that way, except for Dick Nixon. Southern California, though, but that's not quite the same thing.

I cannot believe someone forgot Reagan. Sun-belt governor as well (California). Not that I was a fan, but he was a fairly important political figure...then again, as not a fan, I should be glad he wasn't mentioned.

Bush 41 tried to pass himself off as a Texan, and succeeded to the point where Houston's airport is named after him. But he was a Maine Yalie, no matter what they say.

I cannot believe someone forgot Reagan. Sun-belt governor as well (California). Not that I was a fan, but he was a fairly important political figure...then again, as not a fan, I should be glad he wasn't mentioned.

Ha, yeah, he did get left out (I suppose he was fairly important, wasn't he?). Another Californian.

I cannot believe someone forgot Reagan. Sun-belt governor as well (California). Not that I was a fan, but he was a fairly important political figure...then again, as not a fan, I should be glad he wasn't mentioned.

Bush 41 tried to pass himself off as a Texan, and succeeded to the point where Houston's airport is named after him. But he was a Maine Yalie, no matter what they say.

Considering that Yale has given us both Dubya and Kerri, if I were an alumnus, I would not admit it.

Maybe they felt personally insulted.

I don't give a shit. If one of my corporate board of directors showed up at the office and I was asked ot show him around, and I acted this way, I would be out on my ass by end of business. Why the hell should i expect LESS from our armed forces?

And when a senator, a man whose vote may well determine what you get paid, when you get home, and literally whether or not you live or die shows up and wants to look around, I don't give a shit how you personally feel, you suck it up and do your damned job.

They don't get to let to let their personal feelings disrupt their duty. That's what it means to be in the military, you do what you're fucking told when you're fucking told to do it.

They gave up the right to act on their personal feelings the day they joined the military. And as I said, if they are incapable of not letting their personal feelings get in the way of their JOB, then they don't deserve to wear that uniform.

Considering that Yale has given us both Dubya and Kerri, if I were an alumnus, I would not admit it.

Falls into the same catefory as Dick Cheney being "from" Wyoming. Somehow Bush 41 passing himself off as a Texan didn't bother me as much as 43 doing the same thing.

Considering that Yale has given us both Dubya and Kerri, if I were an alumnus, I would not admit it.

Frankly speaking, I'm none too happy to be associated with either of 'em.

I don't give a shit. If one of my corporate board of directors showed up at the office and I was asked ot show him around, and I acted this way, I would be out on my ass by end of business. Why the hell should i expect LESS from our armed forces?

And when a senator, a man whose vote may well determine what you get paid, when you get home, and literally whether or not you live or die shows up and wants to look around, I don't give a shit how you personally feel, you suck it up and do your damned job.

They don't get to let to let their personal feelings disrupt their duty. They gave up the right to act on their personal feelings the day they joined the military.

That would be a correct statement if the Senator were in the chain of command.

According to the Constitution, he most certainly is not, and holds no more rank than you or I in such matters (demanding respect).

I don't give a shit. If one of my corporate board of directors showed up at the office and I was asked ot show him around, and I acted this way, I would be out on my ass by end of business. Why the hell should i expect LESS from our armed forces?

And when a senator, a man whose vote may well determine what you get paid, when you get home, and literally whether or not you live or die shows up and wants to look around, I don't give a shit how you personally feel, you suck it up and do your damned job.

They don't get to let to let their personal feelings disrupt their duty. That's what it means to be in the military, you do what you're fucking told when you're fucking told to do it. This behavior is a disgrace to military heirarchy and I'll repeat, they don't deserve to wear a uniform.

They gave up the right to act on their personal feelings the day they joined the military.

Well said.

I have a close friend who came back from Iraq in 2005 and ran for state senate (look up Steve Hobbs, D-WA 44th District if you doubt) and won. He said that one of the hardest parts of being a soldier (and working his way up from buck private to captain in 10 years) was holding his tongue as a Democrat. If he did it, so should all these other assholes.

That would be a correct statement if the Senator were in the chain of command.

According to the Constitution, he most certainly is not, and holds no more rank than you or I in such matters (demanding respect).

his vote is involved in approving the budget which determines what they get paid, does it not?

His vote can, with others, revoke the authorization to use military force which keeps them there, can it not?

While he is not directly in the military chain of command, he IS a senator, and his vote DOES impact what the military does.

And fine, change the situation, if a CEO of another corporation entirely showed up and wanted a tour, and I pulled that shit, you think the results would be ANY different?

his vote is involved in approving the budget which determines what they get paid, does it not?

His vote can, with others, revoke the authorization to use military force which keeps them there, can it not?

While he is not directly in the military chain of command, he IS a senator, and his vote DOES impact what the military does.

And fine, change the situation, if a CEO of another corporation entirely showed up and wanted a tour, and I pulled that shit, you think the results would be ANY different?

Soldiers are instructed from day one to only respect the chain of command.

If the chain of command ORDERS you to keep Kerry company, then you would have to keep him company. Just as if the CEO of your company said to make some other CEO welcome during a tour.

But if no such order came down...

You can bet that in the military, if there's no order to worship Kerry, no one is going to do it. The proof is in that picture of him eating alone - soldiers from his own state won't eat with him.

Soldiers are instructed from day one to only respect the chain of command.

If the chain of command ORDERS you to keep Kerry company, then you would have to keep him company. Just as if the CEO of your company said to make some other CEO welcome during a tour.

But if no such order came down...

You can bet that in the military, if there's no order to worship Kerry, no one is going to do it. The proof is in that picture of him eating alone - soldiers from his own state won't eat with him.

It is unclear to me whether this was truly optional, or whether some soldiers were conveniently trying to doge the order.

If they were trying to dodge a real order, then they should be kicked the hell out. If it were purely optional, it was their choice, however it does not ake me comforted to know that such petty asshattery and childish behavior can exist in our military.

Silly me for expecting more from the guys whose job it is to, you know, defend the country?

It is unclear to me whether this was truly optional, or whether some soldiers were conveniently trying to doge the order.

If they were trying to dodge a real order, then they should be kicked the hell out. If it were purely optional, it was their choice, however it does not ake me comforted to know that such petty asshattery and childish behavior can exist in our military.

You know, the guys whose job it is to defend the country?

I think you're unfamiliar with the concept of "chain of command" and "direct order" as it exists in the military.

Orders are usually written with a "what" in mind, not a "how". They probably ordered that Kerry be extended courtesy, which doesn't necessarily mean forcing men to meet him or eat with him. It is at the commander's discretion what "courtesy" means. So it probably means giving him food, water, shelter, an armed escort, and a tour - and that's it.

It's not asshattery IMHO. Hillary got a wildly enthusiastic reception.

Maybe it was Kerry's asshat remark.

I think you're unfamiliar with the concept of "chain of command" and "direct order" as it exists in the military.

Orders are usually written with a "what" in mind, not a "how". They probably ordered that Kerry be extended courtesy, which doesn't necessarily mean forcing men to meet him or eat with him. It is at the commander's discretion what "courtesy" means. So it probably means giving him food, water, shelter, an armed escort, and a tour - and that's it.

It's not asshattery IMHO. Hillary got a wildly enthusiastic reception.

Maybe it was Kerry's asshat remark.

If a commander interprets "courtesy" differently from one senator to the next, then that is personal.

And whether or not he made a stupid remark in no way allows a soldier to not do his duty.

It's sooo amazing to me that people are still after a guy who messed up a joke against duby, AND WASN'T EVEN RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION. The same people who defent verbal gaffs like "I've talked to many families who've died," can so virulantly attack another person for what was so obviously NOT a statement against anyone but the asshole in chief.

If a commander interprets "courtesy" differently from one senator to the next, then that is personal.

And whether or not he made a stupid remark in no way allows a soldier to not do his duty.

And what "duty" are they not performing?

If a commander interprets "courtesy" differently from one senator to the next, then that is personal.

And whether or not he made a stupid remark in no way allows a soldier to not do his duty.

Sorry, you have an odd view of military orders.

Commander's discretion is paramount, absent any specific wording in the order.

So is the chain of command.

As an example, Kerry, even as a Senator, is not in the chain of command. If he were to try to give an order, and any soldier in earshot obeyed that order, the soldier in question could be court martialed.

People have been shot in wartime for violating the chain of command - something as simple as taking orders from lower ranking people.

Sorry, you have an odd view of military orders.

Commander's discretion is paramount, absent any specific wording in the order.

So is the chain of command.

As an example, Kerry, even as a Senator, is not in the chain of command. If he were to try to give an order, and any soldier in earshot obeyed that order, the soldier in question could be court martialed.

People have been shot in wartime for violating the chain of command - something as simple as taking orders from lower ranking people.

As I said, it is unclear what was the order and what was the request, an obviously biased blog isn't a good indicator. It is not clear what the soldiers were ORDERED to do by superiors, and what was merely REQUESTED of them.

If it was an order, and they let their personal feelings get in the way, then that is blatantly unacceptable.

If it was a request, and they let their personal feelings get in the way, then it is a level of immature and childish conduct that I personally do not find acceptable in the institution that is designed to defend the country.

Maybe they felt personally insulted.

After the mudslinging campaign the Republicans did, and being that military people are not, indeed, the brightest and have to be vulnerable to propaganda (why else would they kill for an abstract concept such as a nation?), what's the surprise? Or, on another angle, could it not be that the military is stretched so thin by Dubya that they actually have this little free time and thus did not meet Kerry due to being busy (and stretched thin)? Yet another, could it not be that the higher-ups, being Republicans mostly due to Rummy's handpicking of said higher-ups, tried deliberately to make Kerry look bad by scheduling operations exactly at that time and/or unofficially telling soldiers not to greet Kerry?

Gee, lookie. I can use any and all thinly-veiled spin-doctored explanations as well.

Gee, lookie. I can use any and all thinly-veiled spin-doctored explanations as well.

People got their pics taken with Hillary just fine. They ate with her.

The pic there shows that no one wanted to eat with Kerry. And no one got a photo op with him, either.

Try spinning that.

People got their pics taken with Hillary just fine. They ate with her.

The pic there shows that no one wanted to eat with Kerry. And no one got a photo op with him, either.

Try spinning that.

Allow me: Republicans never found anything Hillary said that they were able to spin; Hillary was never dubbed a "flip-flopper" by Bush's massive campaign machine. And on. And on.

Easy.

On a side note, do you think that NO ONE AT ALL would go and meet Kerry unless there were threats of retaliation involved?

Allow me: Republicans never found anything Hillary said that they were able to spin; Hillary was never dubbed a "flip-flopper" by Bush's massive campaign machine. And on. And on.

Easy.

Doesn't wash. Why would ZERO soldiers be nice to Kerry?

Doesn't wash. Why would ZERO soldiers be nice to Kerry?

I know, don't you find it weird, considering the amount of soldiers there? Almost looks like there were unofficial orders from the top - itself riddled with Republicans - down, doesn't it? Or you think not a ONE soldier was able to see through the massive "reinterpretation" of what Kerry said that the Republicans did?

I know, don't you find it weird, considering the amount of soldiers there? Almost looks like there were unofficial orders from the top - itself riddled with Republicans - down, doesn't it? Or you think not a ONE soldier was able to see through the massive "reinterpretation" of what Kerry said that the Republicans did?

Nope. Considering the reaction of troops who reacted to the "joke" before anyone could spin it, and considering the general solidarity of soldiers, it's not a "massive reinterpretation".

They know Kerry has said the same thing before, in Senate testimony during the Vietnam War. The exact same thing - soldiers are stupid and uneducated.

Nope. Considering the reaction of troops who reacted to the "joke" before anyone could spin it, and considering the general solidarity of soldiers, it's not a "massive reinterpretation".

They know Kerry has said the same thing before, in Senate testimony during the Vietnam War. The exact same thing - soldiers are stupid and uneducated.

They "know" because the Republican smear machine told them so. And if the notion of "camaraderie" of the US soldiers includes this much groupthink to the point of not one soldier disagreeing openly with the group, Abu Ghraib and its cover-up would be explained.

I'll say this for John Kerry - at least he's a good sport, and had the balls to show up in Iraq after his inane comment.

Yeah, how dare he fuck up a joke targeted at the asshat in cheif! Everyone knows that the AWOL-ass son of a bitch in the White House represents the military!

Frankly, if the military was stupid enough to be conned into beleiving the shit that the Rethuglicans spun into the issue, then maybe John Kerry (who actually served in combat, unlike our Coward in Cheif, who hid behind daddy's big name and went AWOL)'s accidental remark has ironically prooved itself to be true.

Which is a pity, I thought our troops were better than being petty, easily manipulated ideologues. Just one more reason not to join, I suppose. Not that their recruiters haven't been doing a good enough job of convincing High School Students that joining is the last thing they want to do.

Yeah, how dare he fuck up a joke targeted at the asshat in cheif! Everyone knows that the AWOL-ass son of a bitch in the White House represents the military!

Frankly, if the military was stupid enough to be conned into beleiving the shit that the Rethuglicans spun into the issue, then maybe John Kerry (who actually served in combat, unlike our Coward in Cheif, who hid behind daddy's big name and went AWOL)'s accidental remark has ironically prooved itself to be true.

Which is a pity, I thought our troops were better than being petty, easily manipulated ideologues. Just one more reason not to join, I suppose. Not that their recruiters haven't been doing a good enough job of convincing High School Students that joining is the last thing they want to do.

Maybe they made up their own minds, before anyone could spin it.

The photo of the troops with their sign came out within minutes of Kerry's comment - no time for Republicans to spin anything.

Of course, that contradicts your world view that all soldiers are stupid, ignorant automatons who wait for Republicans to tell them what to think...

Maybe they made up their own minds, before anyone could spin it.

The photo of the troops with their sign came out within minutes of Kerry's comment - no time for Republicans to spin anything.

Of course, that contradicts your world view that all soldiers are stupid, ignorant automatons who wait for Republicans to tell them what to think...

Nope. I have no worldview regarding our troops. Frankly, they aren't a part of my day to day life, and so I can't hope to judge them as a generality except for in their behaviour. I have to admit that if they were stupid enough to truly beleive that John Kerry was insulting them (perhaps it's just a case of "Methinks the lady doth protest to much", ne?), then, unintentional as the insult was, they deserved it.

Frankly, I don't buy for a minute the bullshit that you're pulling. The spin was happening the moment the clip became available. There was no pause, no time to stop, etc. Either way, if the troops truly chose, on their own, to beleive that a verbal mistake was an insult... Well, I've lost even more faith in the military, since their minds are now an important tool in combat, and they clearly have little skill at using them to analyse a simple remark.

However, I suspect that, like many Americans, they were pulled into the bullshit dialectic which the Rethuglicans created, which ignored the fact that Kerry's joke was targeted at the White House, and not at the troops.

Nope. I have no worldview regarding our troops. Frankly, they aren't a part of my day to day life, and so I can't hope to judge them as a generality except for in their behaviour. I have to admit that if they were stupid enough to truly beleive that John Kerry was insulting them (perhaps it's just a case of "Methinks the lady doth protest to much", ne?), then, unintentional as the insult was, they deserved it.

Frankly, I don't buy for a minute the bullshit that you're pulling. The spin was happening the moment the clip became available. There was no pause, no time to stop, etc. Either way, if the troops truly chose, on their own, to beleive that a verbal mistake was an insult... Well, I've lost even more faith in the military, since their minds are now an important tool in combat, and they clearly have little skill at using them to analyse a simple remark.

However, I suspect that, like many Americans, they were pulled into the bullshit dialectic which the Rethuglicans created, which ignored the fact that Kerry's joke was targeted at the White House, and not at the troops.

In light of Kerry's identical statements under oath during the Vietnam War, I hardly believe he was joking. It's part of his worldview that soldiers are dumb and stupid and uneducated.

http://benofmesopotamia.blogspot.com/2006/12/schaudenfraude-or-john-kerry-visits.html

I'll say this for John Kerry - at least he's a good sport, and had the balls to show up in Iraq after his inane comment.

It's also interesting to note that no one wanted to sit with him, and officers went out of their way to have their units "busy" so that they couldn't visit with him.

Not that in the grand scheme of things, the military vote counts for anything, but there it is.


What a little rat bastard (Jon Kerry). The .mil voting block is generally conservative/republican.

In light of Kerry's identical statements under oath during the Vietnam War, I hardly believe he was joking. It's part of his worldview that soldiers are dumb and stupid and uneducated.

Spin, spin, spin. I expect to see a link to transcript to support these claims and I want to see them in context, because anyone can take a quote out of context (which is why the bullshit about this particular quote has been perpetrated). I also expect that you should realize that, in context, during the Vietnam War, the poor bastards who got drafted into the army did tend to be undereducated, because the better educated either got their free pass bought by mommy and daddy (like the Coward in Cheif) or they were at college, and therefore not at risk of being drafted. The statement that the troops were (compared to the national average) undereducated, would have been true at the time.

I heard the joke on one of the first broadcasts of the speach. For a while I was very puzzled by the response. It is so clearly a shot at GWB that I couldn't understand the outrage anyone felt. Even as it was said, it clearly targeted Shrubya.

Spin, spin, spin. I expect to see a link to transcript to support these claims and I want to see them in context, because anyone can take a quote out of context (which is why the bullshit about this particular quote has been perpetrated). I also expect that you should realize that, in context, during the Vietnam War, the poor bastards who got drafted into the army did tend to be undereducated, because the better educated either got their free pass bought by mommy and daddy (like the Coward in Cheif) or they were at college, and therefore not at risk of being drafted. The statement that the troops were (compared to the national average) undereducated, would have been true at the time.

I heard the joke on one of the first broadcasts of the speach. For a while I was very puzzled by the response. It is so clearly a shot at GWB that I couldn't understand the outrage anyone felt. Even as it was said, it clearly targeted Shrubya.

Yes, I guess you think Kerry was joking when he made this accusation:

“And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women….” – John Kerry on Face the Nation

Or these accusations he made - I guess he was just joking and I didn't get it:

“They told stories 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…. “– John Kerry Congressional Testimony

Let us note that his testimony has been proven false. Not a single claim of a war crime from the "Winter Soldier" investigation was ever borne out.

Sure, it's entirely possible that it was a joke taken out of context. But Kerry's drumbeat, whether during Vietnam, or during Iraq, is that US soldiers are ignorant monsters who commit atrocities on a regular basis - that ignorance and atrocities are the rule, and that soldiers are recruited from the dregs of society.

Maybe you need to read the whole Kerry transcript from the Winter Soldier investigation. You would find out what kind of lies he told and what he really believes.

Bush 41 tried to pass himself off as a Texan, and succeeded to the point where Houston's airport is named after him. But he was a Maine Yalie, no matter what they say.

And 43 is still managing to pass himself off as a Texan. New Haven, Connecticut born and back East educated does not a real Texan make.

http://benofmesopotamia.blogspot.com/2006/12/schaudenfraude-or-john-kerry-visits.html

I'll say this for John Kerry - at least he's a good sport, and had the balls to show up in Iraq after his inane comment.

It's also interesting to note that no one wanted to sit with him, and officers went out of their way to have their units "busy" so that they couldn't visit with him.

Not that in the grand scheme of things, the military vote counts for anything, but there it is.
That blog link has too much German in it.

What a little rat bastard (Jon Kerry). The .mil voting block is generally conservative/republican.
Like any voting block they vote for their paycheque. Republicans appear to be more likely to make wars (i.e. employment = cash) thus they vote Republican.

It's part of his worldview
What's a worldview?

Yes, I guess you think Kerry was joking when he made this accusation:

Yup. Haditha never happened. There is no record of military abuse of civilians in Iraq. None at all. Nope.

Or these accusations he made - I guess he was just joking and I didn't get it:


Well, let us not forget that things like that did happen during Vietnam, and we continue to see further evidence emerge of atrocities that were commited during Vietnam. Once again, this is not a claim against all soldiers as you would promote, but rather against certain ones.

Moreover, neither of them refers to lack of education or lack of knowledge. Strawman ftw.

Sure, it's entirely possible that it was a joke taken out of context. But Kerry's drumbeat, whether during Vietnam, or during Iraq, is that US soldiers are ignorant monsters who commit atrocities on a regular basis - that ignorance and atrocities are the rule, and that soldiers are recruited from the dregs of society.

I certainly see no proof of this in either quote you posted. Perhaps you need to just hop off of the Right Wing bandwagon for a moment. They seem to like to slander any liberal who has been in the military, because, after all, liberals can't also be patriots, we leave that bullshit duty to flag-waving moron members of the 101st fighting keyboardists.

http://benofmesopotamia.blogspot.com/2006/12/schaudenfraude-or-john-kerry-visits.html

I'll say this for John Kerry - at least he's a good sport, and had the balls to show up in Iraq after his inane comment.

It's also interesting to note that no one wanted to sit with him, and officers went out of their way to have their units "busy" so that they couldn't visit with him.

Not that in the grand scheme of things, the military vote counts for anything, but there it is.

Vote Libertarian/Independent, people.

Vote Libertarian/Independent, people.

No. They suck.

Well when you insult people, people usually have a tendency to not want to be with you or meet you.

Well when you insult people, people usually have a tendency to not want to be with you or meet you.

What has that got to do with John Kerry

- - - -

And, according to my dad, who is more into the blogosphere than I, Powerline's picture is doctored. It was taken in the U.S. Embassy, and not in a shared mess hall, as the writer claims.

In light of Kerry's identical statements under oath during the Vietnam War, I hardly believe he was joking. It's part of his worldview that soldiers are dumb and stupid and uneducated.

I'm forced by reason to agree with you.

I thought Kerry was a victim of the Republican smear machine in 2004. However, if you screw up a joke or some other statement -- and I mean GENUINELY screw it up -- you don't wait until AFTER it's taken out of context to try and fix it.

I don't know about anyone else, but I've told a lot of jokes in my time, and if I mess up the setup or punchline, I don't wait until my audience looks at me like dogs who've just been shown a card trick before I go back and say "oh, crap, I messed that part up -- the FARMER says..." or some such immediate retraction.

The fact that Kerry didn't even realize he'd made the supposed "gaffe" until it had been used to hang him tells me that it was no gaffe.

That's what I hate about Kerry. If you have a controversial opinion, state it clearly and then back it up. If you can't do that, you shouldn't be in office 'cause I'm not going to respect you enough to vote for you. I couldn't vote for Shrub, but I really didn't like voting for Kerry, and that's what sucked about that election.

If Kerry honestly believes that, as The Onion once satirically reported, that the "bottom 20% of graduating classes [are] ready to fight terrorists", then dammit, say it out loud and demostrate what you mean in clear, concise terms. If you think that the only option for those who don't do well in school is the military and that's what leads to shit like Abu-Ghraib because of the undereducated soldier's susceptibility to suggestion, SAY SO.

I can't say for sure one way or the other, because I've read and heard and seen much to both support and disprove that notion. But then again, I'm not a politician and I don't have the need to stand on issues and make it count.

Gee, who would a normal person despise more? "He called me stupid" Kerry or "He sent me to die an useless death" Bush? :p

No, really, one would think being called stupid is a lesser insult than being called expendable.

Gee, who would a normal person despise more? "He called me stupid" Kerry or "He sent me to die an useless death" Bush? :p

The difference is, Bush is the Commander in Chief, and is in the chain of command.

He can order the troops to be nice to him, even if they don't like him. So he has a guaranteed nice audience.

If Kerry visits, he can't give anyone any orders.

The difference is, Bush is the Commander in Chief, and is in the chain of command.

He can order the troops to be nice to him, even if they don't like him. So he has a guaranteed nice audience.

If Kerry visits, he can't give anyone any orders.

I sure hope you're not saying such a state of affairs is reasonable.

I sure hope you're not saying such a state of affairs is reasonable.

It has been that way since the Constitution was first written. You know, Commander in Chief, and chain of command (for the military).

No Senator is in any position to give any orders, not even to the lowliest private, unless they too are in the military, and only then if they are directly in that private's chain of command.

It has been that way since the Constitution was first written. You know, Commander in Chief, and chain of command (for the military).

No Senator is in any position to give any orders, not even to the lowliest private, unless they too are in the military, and only then if they are directly in that private's chain of command.

Appeal to tradition means nothing. Are you or are you not saying that the commander in chief having control over EVERY detail of the soldier's lives is reasonable?

Appeal to tradition means nothing. Are you or are you not saying that the commander in chief having control over EVERY detail of the soldier's lives is reasonable?

Yes, it's reasonable, considering that they're in the military.

Yes, it's reasonable, considering that they're in the military.

I don't remember anywhere in the military code saying you sell your soul to the president when you get in.

I don't give a shit. If one of my corporate board of directors showed up at the office and I was asked ot show him around, and I acted this way, I would be out on my ass by end of business. Why the hell should i expect LESS from our armed forces?

And when a senator, a man whose vote may well determine what you get paid, when you get home, and literally whether or not you live or die shows up and wants to look around, I don't give a shit how you personally feel, you suck it up and do your damned job.

They don't get to let to let their personal feelings disrupt their duty. That's what it means to be in the military, you do what you're fucking told when you're fucking told to do it.

They gave up the right to act on their personal feelings the day they joined the military. And as I said, if they are incapable of not letting their personal feelings get in the way of their JOB, then they don't deserve to wear that uniform.

Actually we have every right in the world to our own personal feelings even in uniform. We also are not required to follow orders blindly, we have a moral and legal obligation to disobey any order which is illegal. And for you to decide if I have any right to wear my uniform show me your DD214. Until then I have the right personal right to not listen to your uninformed opinion of what you have no clue of.

Actually we have every right in the world to our own personal feelings even in uniform. We also are not required to follow orders blindly, we have a moral and legal obligation to disobey any order which is illegal. And for you to decide if I have any right to wear my uniform show me your DD214. Until then I have the right personal right to not listen to your uninformed opinion of what you have no clue of.

I do not beleive anyone is contesting your right. They are merely contesting your professionalism. If you are so unprofessional as to behave that way, then perhaps you ought to consider what would happen to you if you were not in the army. If you were not in the army, you would be fired in a second for not being courteous to a member of the Board of Directors, who, even though they have no direct power, are still making the rules by which you function as a company. This does not mean that you should break your orders to do so, but merely that you should show some respect.

Of course, the army is full of young people, and partisan, infantile tantrums may just be a normal thing, who knows.

If a commander interprets "courtesy" differently from one senator to the next, then that is personal.

And whether or not he made a stupid remark in no way allows a soldier to not do his duty.

It is not MY duty to be nice to John Kerry. It is My duty to protect his and your freedoms...which include your bashing soldiers for excerciseing their own freedoms. And even include his freedom to insult me and other soldiers if he so chooses, but I do not have to like him for it and I do not "have" to do anything other then being polite to him.

What has that got to do with John Kerry

- - - -

And, according to my dad, who is more into the blogosphere than I, Powerline's picture is doctored. It was taken in the U.S. Embassy, and not in a shared mess hall, as the writer claims.

He called the soldiers idiots in his "botched" joke.

He called the soldiers idiots in his "botched" joke.

Even worded how it was, it was obvious that he was speaking about President Bush.

He called the soldiers idiots in his "botched" joke.

No. He called the Coward in Chief an idiot. Claims to the contrary are just partisan posing and sniping. The slaverring dogs in spin alley made an issue of this non-issue, and conservatives continue to exploit it as they continue to use character assassinations against John Kerry.

It is shameful the way that the Republicans assault the characters of Democrats who are veterans. Their constant need to proove that only a Republican could ever be a good soldier is an insult to thousands of our nation's troops.

You should be ashamed.

Like any voting block they vote for their paycheque. Republicans appear to be more likely to make wars (i.e. employment = cash) thus they vote Republican.


What's a worldview?

Hey you may want to rethink that statement......as a soldier I get paid wether I am at peace or at war....it is not much mind you ....the overpaid politicians see to that(ie read as repubs and dems) but I still get paid no matter what the circumstances. So your statement is completely off the mark. Try again.

They gave up the right to act on their personal feelings the day they joined the military. And as I said, if they are incapable of not letting their personal feelings get in the way of their JOB, then they don't deserve to wear that uniform.

No. Nope. Oh, and hell f*g no.

Soldiers still have the right to act on their personal feelings, with only a couple of exceptions. When it violates a direct, legal order. Or when it would put others in danger.

Unless the soldiers were given a direct order to attend the Senator, it was their CHOICE to greet him or not greet him. Now, generally, when someone like a Senator comes to visit a military base or operation, commanders give the soldiers orders to attend them. In this case, they chose not to. And the commanding general, who could have given the order to the commanders to have the troops attending...chose not to. And the President, who could have given the commanding general the order to give the commanders the order to...you get the idea, chose not to.

Therefore, there was no violation of a standing order. There was no danger. The soldiers were given the option of attending or not attending. And they chose not to.

Seems fairly simple. Kerry pissed off the armed forces. Really, really pissed them off. I'd fault the military in Iraq if Kerry was in danger of his life and they deliberately failed to save him. But I applaud their decision not to make him feel welcome.

As for the cute, and yet naive, assumption that Kerry has control over the military's budget...well, that's just absurd. He has a vote, yes. One vote. Out of how many? Do you really think the rest of Congress & the Senate are going to go out of their way to piss on the military (and associated military family, friends, and people who just plain support the military) and listen to a whiny little idiot who can't figure out when to keep his mouth shut? Probably not. :)

Jennifer, who was in the military and has first-hand knowledge.

Soldiers still have the right to act on their personal feelings, with only a couple of exceptions. When it violates a direct, legal order. Or when it would put others in danger.

If you at your place of work knew that a member of the board of directors was in your workplace, but had been given no directions regarding his treatment, would it be professional to ostrasize him and make him feel unwelcome? No. So, as a soldier, you have the right to act that way, but it still makes your actions infantile and unprofessional, and, if I was your boss, I'd have a hard time justifying giving you any new resposibilities in the workplace.

Seems fairly simple. Kerry pissed off the armed forces. Really, really pissed them off. I'd fault the military in Iraq if Kerry was in danger of his life and they deliberately failed to save him. But I applaud their decision not to make him feel welcome.

As for the cute, and yet naive, assumption that Kerry has control over the military's budget...well, that's just absurd. He has a vote, yes. One vote. Out of how many? Do you really think the rest of Congress & the Senate are going to go out of their way to piss on the military (and associated military family, friends, and people who just plain support the military) and listen to a whiny little idiot who can't figure out when to keep his mouth shut? Probably not. :)

Well, A) Kerry isn't just a Senator, he's a big player amongst U.S. Senators. You may have noticed that when he ran for President.

and

B) I am disgusted that you applaud the members of the military for allowing themselves to be manipulated by talking heads who blew this issue out of proportion. It is spin and political hackery, and I question the observational skills of anyone who buys the tripe that the MSM (oh the Liberal Media :rolleyes: ) and Right Wing hacks spread on the issue. It was just a way for the MSM to sell more news in the election cycle. It was clear to those of us who heard the speach without any commentary before hearing the complaints that Kerry was talking about the Coward in Chief.

I do not beleive anyone is contesting your right. They are merely contesting your professionalism. If you are so unprofessional as to behave that way, then perhaps you ought to consider what would happen to you if you were not in the army. If you were not in the army, you would be fired in a second for not being courteous to a member of the Board of Directors, who, even though they have no direct power, are still making the rules by which you function as a company. This does not mean that you should break your orders to do so, but merely that you should show some respect.

Of course, the army is full of young people, and partisan, infantile tantrums may just be a normal thing, who knows.

Actually I have 15 years in the military I served all over the world and I am also an engineering major in college. I vote Rep and dem and I am also a parent. I also have a job in the outside world being that my military duty these days is in the guard. And I also hold a job besides college and the military and I deal in customer relations..... I show people respect all day long and many of them I do not like, but it does not mean I have to do more then be respectful.
And as I returned from Iraq earlier this year I am quite sure all the soldiers Mr Kerry ran into were respectful of his position as a US senator, but it does not mean they have to give up what little free time they have to allow him to pose for the press shaking hands or even eating with them. I am sure they had better things to do like maybe calling home or even writing home to their families. Those who chose to spend time with Sen. Clinton made that choice themselves, and they and those who chose not to spend time with Sen Kerry, chose it themselves and should not be talked bad about or degraded by people who are not there. These people choose to put their lives on the line and shed blood so you can decide what you want to do , please give them the same courtesy and let them choose what they want to do.

If you at your place of work knew that a member of the board of directors was in your workplace, but had been given no directions regarding his treatment, would it be professional to ostrasize him and make him feel unwelcome?

It's patently clear that you have no idea how the military works, or how the funding and budgeting for the military works. In the case of Kerry's visit, it wasn't a visit from a "member of the board of directors". Congress and the Senate simply do not have that much control over the military. All they can do is stifle the budgets when they come through, and that leads to a whole heap of dog-doo they really try to avoid. Soldiers ostracizing one pathetic little Senator isn't going to affect their paychecks in any way, period.

Well, A) Kerry isn't just a Senator, he's a big player amongst U.S. Senators. You may have noticed that when he ran for President.

Oh, yeah, I noticed that. I also noticed he couldn't beat Dubya. Let's face it, anyone who could lose to Dubya is little more than a zit smear on the mirror of this country's politics. Let's hope the Democrats show some common sense and pick a real candidate this time.

B) I am disgusted that you applaud the members of the military for allowing themselves to be manipulated by talking heads who blew this issue out of proportion.

I'm disgusted that you have personally decided that the troops should have no say or right to their personal feelings, whatever they might be. As stated in my first post, there are only a couple of situations in which a soldier is duty-bound to ignore his personal feelings. Ignoring a pipsqueak like Kerry doesn't break any rules in the military.

I'm also disgusted that you believe a left-wing wacko like Kerry when he frantically tries to backtrack on statements he very clearly made. Talk about spin.

It's patently clear that you have no idea how the military works, or how the funding and budgeting for the military works. In the case of Kerry's visit, it wasn't a visit from a "member of the board of directors". Congress and the Senate simply do not have that much control over the military. All they can do is stifle the budgets when they come through, and that leads to a whole heap of dog-doo they really try to avoid. Soldiers ostracizing one pathetic little Senator isn't going to affect their paychecks in any way, period.

Er... yeah, Congress and the Senate basically have all the control in the world over the Executive branch... They do, y'know regulate it. The military is a part of the Executive branch. It's not their paychecks I care about. It's their unprofessional behaviour. If they are going to be a "Professional" army, they need to act like it.

Oh, yeah, I noticed that. I also noticed he couldn't beat Dubya. Let's face it, anyone who could lose to Dubya is little more than a zit smear on the mirror of this country's politics. Let's hope the Democrats show some common sense and pick a real candidate this time.

All I'm saying is that he isn't politically as insignificant as you'd like to think.

I'm disgusted that you have personally decided that the troops should have no say or right to their personal feelings, whatever they might be. As stated in my first post, there are only a couple of situations in which a soldier is duty-bound to ignore his personal feelings. Ignoring a pipsqueak like Kerry doesn't break any rules in the military.

They have the right to their personal opinion, they just have to act like professionals while they are on the job. Things like the "Please sign this" with the "Halp us jon Cary" picture were just immature and innapropriate behavior for a professional.

I'm also disgusted that you believe a left-wing wacko like Kerry when he frantically tries to backtrack on statements he very clearly made. Talk about spin.

The only spin is the attempt to make into an insult that which was purely a flubbed joke. In context, Kerry was making jokes about our president and the situation we have. To assume that he is A) stupid enough to say something like that or B) Going to change topic in mid-speech to attack an institution he was a member of is sheer idiocy. If anything, if the military really assumes that he called it stupid so universally, perhaps his flub was ironically correct, eh?

And if you're gonna talk about "Left-wing whacko"s, do us all a favor and pick a real left-wing whacko. May I suggest Fidel Castro or DHomme? Both of them are real left-wingers. A moderate like Kerry is no liberal outside of the smear of the Neo-conservative far-right camp.

I'm disgusted that you have personally decided that the troops should have no say or right to their personal feelings, whatever they might be. As stated in my first post, there are only a couple of situations in which a soldier is duty-bound to ignore his personal feelings. Ignoring a pipsqueak like Kerry doesn't break any rules in the military.

I'm also disgusted that you believe a left-wing wacko like Kerry when he frantically tries to backtrack on statements he very clearly made. Talk about spin.

If I pulled that shit at my job I'd be fired. Why the hell should I expect different from our military? Frankly I am disgusted that the individuals who hold such a paramount job can't be bothered to act as a professional.

And frankly, when a group of people choses to act in such a childish, immature, blatantly unprofessional and, frankly, stupid mannor, they really don't get to be offended when someone, intentionally or not, tells them they're stupid.

In short, if you get your panties in a twist because someone calls you stupid, the logical thing would be, don't act like fucking morons. Otherwise you're just proving him right.

Since nobody responded to my earlier post -- which is telling, mind you -- I'll repeat the gist of it here.

There's no way that was a "flubbed joke." When you mis-tell a joke, you can tell. I don't know about any of you, but I don't need a room full of people the next day, or even the next MINUTE to know I screwed up a joke. And what happens when I DO screw one up in the telling? I IMMEDIATELY correct the missed detail in order to clarify the joke I was going for. Kerry did no such thing. He either meant what he said, or is so clueless that his claims of intellectual superiority to Bush are greatly overstated.

One thing straight -- I voted against Bush by way of voting for Kerry in 2004. I'm sick of the lesser of two evils, but I made my choice. That doesn't mean I have to like the man, and I don't -- but I like Bush even less.

Since nobody responded to my earlier post -- which is telling, mind you -- I'll repeat the gist of it here.

I didn't respond to it because I didn't want to waste the energy in lecturing you regarding the way political machines work.

There's no way that was a "flubbed joke." When you mis-tell a joke, you can tell. I don't know about any of you, but I don't need a room full of people the next day, or even the next MINUTE to know I screwed up a joke. And what happens when I DO screw one up in the telling? I IMMEDIATELY correct the missed detail in order to clarify the joke I was going for. Kerry did no such thing. He either meant what he said, or is so clueless that his claims of intellectual superiority to Bush are greatly overstated.

1. I still hold that listening to the joke, it was quite clearly about Bush and not about the troops. I saw the video before I heard any comments, and so when I first started hearing shit I was totally confused. I think that only in the politically charged climate of America could anyone even suspect that Kerry, a former member of the military and an effective, if not exceptionally effective politician would make such a joke purposefully.

2. Here's the technical response: In politics, you don't draw media attention to your slip-ups. You do your best to hope they will be ignored, and if they aren't, you own up to them. Avoiding negative TV exposure by not making it an issue (which, to be fair, it really wasn't one anyway) is a tactically better solution.

I think the question is: Why do you think that Kerry is actually stupid enough to say something like that in a speach? I mean, it would take a real level of idiocy to say something like that. That would be like walking up to a co-worker and shouting "HEY, THE BOSS IS DUMB!" Do you honestly think Kerry is that stupid?

I didn't respond to it because I didn't want to waste the energy in lecturing you regarding the way political machines work.

Lecturing me? Please. If your misplaced superiority weren't so laughable it would be very, very sad. Pray tell, exactly what experience do you have in any political "machine" besides a handful of blogs?


1. I still hold that listening to the joke, it was quite clearly about Bush and not about the troops. I saw the video before I heard any comments, and so when I first started hearing shit I was totally confused. I think that only in the politically charged climate of America could anyone even suspect that Kerry, a former member of the military and an effective, if not exceptionally effective politician would make such a joke purposefully.

2. Here's the technical response: In politics, you don't draw media attention to your slip-ups. You do your best to hope they will be ignored, and if they aren't, you own up to them. Avoiding negative TV exposure by not making it an issue (which, to be fair, it really wasn't one anyway) is a tactically better solution.

I think the question is: Why do you think that Kerry is actually stupid enough to say something like that in a speach? I mean, it would take a real level of idiocy to say something like that. That would be like walking up to a co-worker and shouting "HEY, THE BOSS IS DUMB!" Do you honestly think Kerry is that stupid?

Yes. Yes I do. Look at the way he failed to handle the Swift Boat horseshit. The man is incapable of defending himself and wouldn't take a shit without consulting a poll. Nuance is necessary, but Kerry is all nuance, and that's too much.

You honestly believe that after all the misquoting and spin-cycles he was subjected to in 2004 that he wouldn't immediately clarify his statement? He's not smart or savvy enough to realize what he said and how it could have been heard, and waits until THE NEXT DAY to amend himself? Sorry, but you're view of how "the political machine" works is what cost Kerry the election in 2004.

One more time -- I voted for Kerry, but he blew it. He needs to either practice his speeches (notice how "speech" is spelled, by the way), or he needs to just STFU and stop stumping altogether.

Oh, and I suppose I'll thank you for "wasting your time" to enlighten me to precisely nothing. Thanks a heap.

Lecturing me? Please. If your misplaced superiority weren't so laughable it would be very, very sad. Pray tell, exactly what experience do you have in any political "machine" besides a handful of blogs?

I'm actually not all that heavy a blog reader. I prefer to stick to book study. Blogs are good for up-to-date arguments and all, and if you want to keep a finger on the pulse of politics, it's best to have a couple to read, but they aren't good for the technical side of things.



Yes. Yes I do. Look at the way he failed to handle the Swift Boat horseshit. The man is incapable of defending himself and wouldn't take a shit without consulting a poll. Nuance is necessary, but Kerry is all nuance, and that's too much.

You honestly believe that after all the misquoting and spin-cycles he was subjected to in 2004 that he wouldn't immediately clarify his statement? He's not smart or savvy enough to realize what he said and how it could have been heard, and waits until THE NEXT DAY to amend himself? Sorry, but you're view of how "the political machine" works is what cost Kerry the election in 2004.

Listen, Kerry is, like most Dems at the moment, very cautious, and rightfully so. The game that the Republicans have played since '94 is one that has left the Democratic leadership very wary of making waves. I sense that you feel a certain amount of bitterness towards this, but careful management of resources is very important. Kerry's carefulness is not stupidity, it is ingrained caution. 20 years in the woods have left the Dems a sadder and wiser party, but the cost of that is that many Dems have "Lost spine"

I'm actually of the opinion that Kerry should have just kept his mouth closed and let it all blow over. A simple "I misspoke, that's all there is to it." was more than the spin-meisters even deserved. You have been played by a media noise machine into the false dichotomy they created to boost ratings in what would have otherwise been a boring last week of the election. Kerry should not have even dignified the bullshit being slung with a response.

Oh, and I suppose I'll thank you for "wasting your time" to enlighten me to precisely nothing. Thanks a heap.


Hey, I never said a thing about enlightening you. I couldn't give a fuck less how enlightened you are or not. I just didn't want to waste my time trying to convince someone who was already convinced. I have better uses of my time than that, no offense to you meant.

I'm actually not all that heavy a blog reader. I prefer to stick to book study. Blogs are good for up-to-date arguments and all, and if you want to keep a finger on the pulse of politics, it's best to have a couple to read, but they aren't good for the technical side of things.





Listen, Kerry is, like most Dems at the moment, very cautious, and rightfully so. The game that the Republicans have played since '94 is one that has left the Democratic leadership very wary of making waves. I sense that you feel a certain amount of bitterness towards this, but careful management of resources is very important. Kerry's carefulness is not stupidity, it is ingrained caution. 20 years in the woods have left the Dems a sadder and wiser party, but the cost of that is that many Dems have "Lost spine"

I'm actually of the opinion that Kerry should have just kept his mouth closed and let it all blow over. A simple "I misspoke, that's all there is to it." was more than the spin-meisters even deserved. You have been played by a media noise machine into the false dichotomy they created to boost ratings in what would have otherwise been a boring last week of the election. Kerry should not have even dignified the bullshit being slung with a response.




Hey, I never said a thing about enlightening you. I couldn't give a fuck less how enlightened you are or not. I just didn't want to waste my time trying to convince someone who was already convinced. I have better uses of my time than that, no offense to you meant.

Well stated, no offense taken.

I'll just agree to disagree -- Kerry's utter collapse under the blatant falsity of the Swift Boat charges was more than just cautious spinelessness.

Well stated, no offense taken.

I'll just agree to disagree -- Kerry's utter collapse under the blatant falsity of the Swift Boat charges was more than just cautious spinelessness.

What makes you think I dissagree with that? I just don't attribute it to stupidity. I attribute it to running a man who was utterly unprepared for a Presidential campaign for President and then compounding that mistake by not pulling out all the stops for him. Kerry most certainly should have acted quickly to stymie the Swiftboat ads, but I have, in retrospect, begun to see that Kerry was only one of the failed links.

No, what makes me mad is that through and through, at every level of leadership in the Democratic party, the level of organization and effort made was, frankly, a joke. The Dems have, for almost 20 years, failed to even try to catch up to Republican fundraising (This year, for the first time in forever, the Dems have caught up to the 'Pubs, a less visible reason for their success in the election), and have, as a party, kept reorganizing conventions and party structures, leaving the whole setup less than smoothe.

I think that some of Howard Dean's actions have helped to get the Dems caught up, but there is still a lot of distance to catch up on. With political disallignment being the prevailing political wind in American politics, the last thing that the Dems need is to let the Republican machine (which is well-oiled and streamlined) continue to be better than it. I think that more than anything else, that really hurt Kerry. I also think that some of the ramifications of McCain-Feingold that no one thought of played hell with both National Conventions. History, however, may show me to be wrong.

What makes you think I dissagree with that? I just don't attribute it to stupidity. I attribute it to running a man who was utterly unprepared for a Presidential campaign for President and then compounding that mistake by not pulling out all the stops for him. Kerry most certainly should have acted quickly to stymie the Swiftboat ads, but I have, in retrospect, begun to see that Kerry was only one of the failed links.

No, what makes me mad is that through and through, at every level of leadership in the Democratic party, the level of organization and effort made was, frankly, a joke. The Dems have, for almost 20 years, failed to even try to catch up to Republican fundraising (This year, for the first time in forever, the Dems have caught up to the 'Pubs, a less visible reason for their success in the election), and have, as a party, kept reorganizing conventions and party structures, leaving the whole setup less than smoothe.

I think that some of Howard Dean's actions have helped to get the Dems caught up, but there is still a lot of distance to catch up on. With political disallignment being the prevailing political wind in American politics, the last thing that the Dems need is to let the Republican machine (which is well-oiled and streamlined) continue to be better than it. I think that more than anything else, that really hurt Kerry. I also think that some of the ramifications of McCain-Feingold that no one thought of played hell with both National Conventions. History, however, may show me to be wrong.

If history shows you wrong, it will at least show that you made a very educated guess. My apologies for my earlier petulance.

If history shows you wrong, it will at least show that you made a very educated guess. My apologies for my earlier petulance.

You had every right to be petulant. I was being obnoxious and contrary.

Doesn't wash. Why would ZERO soldiers be nice to Kerry?
A few thoughts:
Maybe the photo (of Kerry dining alone) was taken at a time no soldiers were around to break bread with him and was only published in a feeble attempt to mock Kerry and delight feeble minds;

Maybe they weren't officially ordered to ignore him, but were made damn sure that's exactly what was expected of them by the asshats further up the chain who petty-minded republican diehards;

Maybe some did want to, but either 'bystander effect' kicked in or just simple fear of getting on the wrong side of their platoon buddies stopped them from heading over. Someone posted earlier about their mate, a democrat, who had to hold his tongue throughout his entire service.
Considering the ignorance and bile spewed forth just on this forum by ppl not even in the military (or retired from it), can you imagine what some in the army would be like? Show your support of someone who's been absolutely villified and ended up as a focus of hatred amongst some military would be a real dumb idea.
Anyone here want to be in Eut's platoon and tell him you support Kerry and want to eat with him?

Oh, yeah, I noticed that. I also noticed he couldn't beat Dubya. Let's face it, anyone who could lose to Dubya is little more than a zit smear on the mirror of this country's politics. Let's hope the Democrats show some common sense and pick a real candidate this time.
You obviously didn't notice that more people voted for John Kerry than anyone else in US presidential history, bar one.
You also didn;t notice that that presidential race will (hopefully) go down as the nastiest, most smeary, downright dispicable race in history. With nearly all the smear and mud-flinging coming from the GOP side too, I might add.

http://benofmesopotamia.blogspot.com/2006/12/schaudenfraude-or-john-kerry-visits.html

I'll say this for John Kerry - at least he's a good sport, and had the balls to show up in Iraq after his inane comment.

It's also interesting to note that no one wanted to sit with him, and officers went out of their way to have their units "busy" so that they couldn't visit with him.

Not that in the grand scheme of things, the military vote counts for anything, but there it is.

That's.. well... low.