On 13 Sep 2004 07:59:24 -0700
sfgeorge@pacbell.net (George Grapman) wrote:

George Grapman wrote:

Who was the Congressman? have a

cite?

AHow about one for the "special
treatment"?

<nobody@nowhere.invalid> responded:

Any reasonably thorough biography
has it. For example:

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061703.shtml

He worked for the admiral after serving in
combat.

So what. Everyone was opposed to the war by
that time. Why was Kerry so clueless? He
actually tried to run for congress as a war
hero in 1970 and lost. When he found out just
how much the people despised Johnson and his war,
that is when he became anti-war and tried to
blame the whole thing on Nixon. Later when
everyone forgot about him, or thought he had
grown up, he managed to win election to the
Senate.

It turns out it was an admiral he was
assigned to. I do have some information
connecting him to a congressman, but I don't
want to share it. That is how he pulled the
stateside assignment.

Why not share it?

There are good reasons. Anyone can read the
biography and see that there must have been
influence to get that assignment.

Kerry went to Vietnam as a yoyo on a string.
He
knew he could come back any time he wanted.
The Johnson people wanted him in congress,
and they thought medals would help. But
when Kerry came back, the medals were a
liability. That was when he became an
obnoxious antiwar twit.

Tell us how those war supporters Bush and
Cheney served.

Obviously B&C are not professional military
people. I suppose that if Bush ever took violin
lessons, you would want all of us to listen to
tapes of him practising. They served. They were
honorably discharged. That should be enough for
anyone. If you think we are entitled to more
detail, then let's hear first about the atrocities
Kerry performed while he was in Vietnam.

I see B&C as being misled by aggressive
military careerists who want war. It was the
Democrats who were chomping at the bit for it.
They reformed the old Lyndon Johnson alliance
that killed fifty thousand of my generation for
nothing. They already had the Homeland Security
bill prepared. They wanted to have Army
run checkpoints all over the US just like
they taught the military in Argentina and Chile.
They tried to give the President the bums rush
with that bill, but W. stood firm until they made
it less odious.

One man who is now a high official in the
administration said something that made me
angry in 1998, but after thinking it over, I
decided he might be right.

"America is constitutionally incapable of
disarmament."

For those of us who want peace, this is a
frightening thought. Yet there have been too
many assassinations and suspicious deaths among
politicians who tried to limit our military.
Too many deaths to be accidental. Our elected
government rides a tiger, and the mayhem that
tiger causes is not entirely their fault.

I believe that civilian government, even
civilian government dominated by big
business, is preferable to military
government. I view with suspicion anyone
who runs for office wearing medals on his chest.

John Kerry never served his country. He
served his party. When the Republicans took
over, he cut his tour of duty short and ran
home to fight them.

Kerry waged a disinformation campaign that would
be the envy of any dictatorship. He demonized
Nixon by claiming the President wanted to
prolong the war, and he used his fluent
French to carry his lies to the farthest
reaches of the globe. By fueling the mistrust
of other nations *he* prolonged the
war, and he caused agony among our troops who
only waited for the news that they could come
home again.

Kerry thought he could blame the war on Nixon
and lead a Democratic comeback in 1972. Instead
Nixon steadily withdrew troops and announced
a peace treaty just before the election. Only
after Nixon was reelected in a landslide was he
able to make peace.

No thanks to Kerry.