August 23, 2004

"You shut up."
"No, you shut up."

Posted by pete at August 23, 2004 12:11 PM

"Why don't you BOTH shut up:"

CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) -- Former Republican Sen. Bob Dole suggested Sunday that John Kerry apologize for past testimony before Congress about alleged atrocities during the Vietnam War and joined critics of the Democratic presidential candidate who say he received an early exit from combat for "superficial wounds."

Dole, the GOP candidate for president in 1996, also called on Kerry to release all the records of his service in Vietnam.

Appearing on CNN's "Late Edition," Dole said he warned Kerry months ago about going "too far" and that the Democrat may have himself to blame for the current situation, in which polls show him losing support among veterans.
...
Dole added: "And here's, you know, a good guy, a good friend. I respect his record. But three Purple Hearts and never bled that I know of. I mean, they're all superficial wounds. Three Purple Hearts and you're out."

Kerry wasn't lucky enough to fight in the Last Good War, like Dole. Then again, he made his Vietnam service a cornerstone of his campaign almost from day one, so ordinarily I'd say it's disingenuous to cry foul when the opposition calls you on it.

Ordinarily, but not in this case.

I respect the fact that Dole lost use of his arm thanks to wounds suffered in combat, but his Purple Heart was awarded for a scratch on his leg (caused, according to his own 1996 campaign bio, when he muffed a grenade throw). How badly would Clinton, who "creatively avoided" the draft, have been crucified if he'd attacked Dole's medal record during the 1996 campaign? Why does Bush, who used Dad's connections to keep from going to Vietnam and then bailed on that obligation, get a pass?

Reading about this anymore, I'm convinced that I've switched places with my Bizarro counterpart. I'm over here, living in a world where a dedicated group of liars is attacking the record of a man who volunteered to go to combat in Vietnam, while the record of the guy who couldn't even be bothered to show up to protect the Gulf Coast of Alabama from the VC hordes enjoys near immunity in the media. Meanwhile, back on the real Earth, Bizarro Pete stumbles around declaring, "Me can't wait for new Resident Evil movie. Me drink beer now."

And I was worried they'd start talking about the issues some time before the election. With any luck, Teresa Heinz Kerry will mouth off to another "reporter" and give us another week's worth of editorials once this swift boat BS dies down.

Senator Head-on-a-Tray wants Bob Dole to shut the hell up. And he's on the shit list of the ghost of Teddy Roosevelt.

Anybody who volunteers to serve in the armed forces has a large and well-stuffed nutsack. That is all.

--Posted by HWRNMNBSOL on August 23, 2004 1:05 PM

Its so disappointing to see Dole sink to these depths of partisan politics. I was never a fan of Dole's, but always respected him. Now, he's just another shill -- albeit one who is keeping the Republicans off message through yet another news cycle. Thankfully

--Posted by Tim on August 23, 2004 1:08 PM

I'm just surprised that there aren't more important issues to be discussed leading up to the presidential election of the world's last super power. What's that you say, there are? But then why would the Bush administration spend so much of their time on the tangential issue of Kerry's war medals at the expense of more substantive topics? Unless...

--Posted by denny on August 23, 2004 1:49 PM


The recent turning of the tables, i.e. Bush avoiding the Vietnam war entirely by pulling strings and getting into the National Guard--and
then going AWOL while Kerry went to Vietnam and earned FIVE decorations, has been spun to the extent that the conservatives are making an issue of Kerrys record! Why not say WAR is PEACE? Oh, they already do that. We live in very Orwellian times. Men loving men is greeted with irrational hysteria, men dropping bombs on men is considered very normal. We teach people not to kill and terrorize by killing and terrorizing them, then brag about how very christian we are. We need not read Alice in Wonderland anymore, we're all in the story looking for a way home.

--Posted by Nate on August 23, 2004 2:36 PM

I love this shit "superficial wounds". Superficial wounds are like a mild heart attack: their mild and superficial when they happen to somebody else.

--Posted by cacafuego on August 23, 2004 3:51 PM

"W " is a coward--always has been, always will be. He ran away from service and he's running away again from this debacle his patsies, er, cronies created. The man can't string a cogent sentence together, he's one synapse away from brain dead and he has the gazungas to attack a man who served with distinction?! If it wasn't so disgusting and frightening it would be funn...actually, it would never be funny. God help us.

--Posted by babyjane on August 23, 2004 10:38 PM

Bush questioning *Kerry's* record is like the pot calling the china black.

--Posted by citygod on August 24, 2004 2:57 AM

Quoth Pete: I respect the fact that Dole lost use of his arm thanks to wounds suffered in combat, but his Purple Heart was awarded for a scratch on his leg (caused, according to his own 1996 campaign bio, when he muffed a grenade throw).

To clarify, Dole would have also earned another Purple Heart for the wounds that cost him the use of his arm, too.

However, the harping on the award of the PH for "superficial" wounds sickens me. In combat, the difference between a superficial wound and a fatal wound is merely where the bullet, piece of shrapnel, etc., managed to hit the wounded soldier/sailor. If Kerry had been hit in his eye, for example, by one of those pieces of shrapnel, nobody would dare call his wound "superficial"; in fact, they may have called it "fatal", and Kerry's parents would have received a "deeply regrets" letter or telegram. The fact that Kerry was in a combat zone to receive a "superficial" wound is a much more impressive fact, to me, than George W. Bush's "service" in Alabama playing pool volleyball with ambitious secretaries and getting drunk and (probably) tooting coke during that period of his life.

--Posted by Len Cleavelin on August 24, 2004 8:45 AM

Let's say there's this country... its leader never bothered to serve in its military, using his powerful father to avoid actual combat. Then, that leader manages to make his military records "disappear," while no one is able to remember him serving in his alleged unit.

Further, this "leader" relies on a group of well-funded henchmen with barely concealed ties to him... these henchmen go out and lie through their teeth about the combat record of the "leader's" opponent, shouting down history with histrionics and whining that one man is not a patriot because he didn't get hurt "enough," while the leader remains above question despite having hid in a province during the same war.

Also in our hypothetical example, the regime squleches dissent... showing up to protest the leader can get you fired or even arrested. In fact, you don't even have to directly protest the leader, all you have to do is suggest that his policies are wrong. Whether you are an employee of a graphics design company who protests at one of the leader's appearances, or a teacher who refuses to remove a student's art work that implies disagreement with the leader's policies... or a popular artist who speaks out against the leader... you can lose your job or economic livelihood if you dare speak up.

Let's further stipulate that the leader heads an illegitimate regime -- that not only does it squelches dissent and try to assassinate the character of anyone who gets in its way, but it never was elected by the people in the first place... instead, powerful friends of the leader's father -- who was also at one time the leader -- hand-selected and installed this leader despite his having LOST a semi-free election (during which the votes of thousands of ethnic minorities were thrown out, and there were credible reports of initimdation and fraud to keep many others from even voting at all.

Were this regime in power in any other country in the world, we'd be calling its leader a borderline despot.

Look out, my friends. By George W. Bush's criteria of "protecting democracy" and "freeing peoples from evil regimes," the next country he's going to invade... is us.

--Posted by Curmudegon on August 24, 2004 8:50 AM

A comment from a "Wisconsin State Journal" columist, Bill Wineke:
http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?ref=wsj:2004:08:23:383398:DAYBREAK

"What I care about is that these ads are suggesting to our young people that all military service is dishonorable. Is any election really worth that?"

Nope. Just like HWRN said, anyone who volunteers is worthy of respect.

--Posted by Rich on August 24, 2004 10:47 AM



Trackbacks

Manually ping this entry: http://www.whiterose.org/MT/mt-tb.cgi/4115