John Kerry Trashes Our Troops -- Again

[Logan13]

John Kerry Trashes Our Troops -- Again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLuMWiQ6r2o

Kerry posted a statement about this on his websight, but says that his words have been skewed, so watch it for yourself........you be the judge.

[biglouie250]

i dont think he trashed our troops. he made the mistake of making a generalization which is gonna piss people off. it is not untrue that most of the enlisted troops are uneducated and/or are from poor neighborhoods. there was a TV special that followed Marine Recruiters in poor neighborhoods and how they basically said its easier to get the kids that arent going anywhere in life.

[biglouie250]

still he could have worded it better, he sounded like a douche.

[biglouie250]

kerry's response:

"This is the classic GOP playbook," Kerry said in a harshly worded statement. "I'm sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did. I'm not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium."

yeeesssh sounds like he grew a pair of balls 2 years too late!

[RA]

I honestly hate that mother****er. While giving his speech he should have worn a turbin and held up an ak-47. The terrorists are cheering every time he and his ilk talk. Notice we are having more attacks right now? hmmm, I wonder why.

[Logan13]

yeeesssh sounds like he grew a pair of balls 2 years too late!

It doesn't take balls to call people names. He is just pissed that he has been backed into a corner, again, and we have the video to prove what he said.

[biglouie250]

It doesn't take balls to call people names. He is just pissed that he has been backed into a corner, again, and we have the video to prove what he said.

lol yea i guess. it does take balls to go to nam tho.

[Logan13]

lol yea i guess. it does take balls to go to nam tho.

Yes it does, but I honestly believe that he went into the military for no reason but to set up his political career. Have you researched the shit that this man did and said back in the day during/after the war? My dad was in Vietnam as well, he remembers Kerry all to well.........

[Logan13]

lol yea i guess. it does take balls to go to nam tho.

Remember John McCain was there as well, in a prsion camp. He went after Kerry for saying this shit also. Now McCain may have an "R" after his name, but he is by no means a conservative, in fact he was one of the few that stood up for Kerry during the 2004 race.

[Mike Dura]

I don't believe that Kerry intended to trash our troops. I think it was intended to trash the administration and it's poor policy making that led us into this quagmire and self-defeating war.

I think this kind of impassioned talk is going to anger pro-republicans and inspire pro-democrats.

Yet, I think that saying, "if you don't study hard you'll end up in Iraq" can be interpreted as saying that our soldiers are undereducated (which is probably true).

I think anyone who by now can't see that this thing over in Iraq was a bad idea and ultimately cannot be won needs more information and greater sense. No doubt, you've been duped by a good political strategist who cares little for you and your socio-economic class.

[Logan13]

I don't believe that Kerry intended to trash our troops. I think it was intended to trash the administration and it's poor policy making that led us into this quagmire and self-defeating war.

I think this kind of impassioned talk is going to anger pro-republicans and inspire pro-democrats.

Yet, I think that saying, "if you don't study hard you'll end up in Iraq" can be interpreted as saying that our soldiers are undereducated (which is probably true).

I think anyone who by now can't see that this thing over in Iraq was a bad idea and ultimately cannot be won needs more information.

This has nothing to do with Iraq. It has to do with Kerry badmouthing troops who volunteer for duty for his own political gain. He has been held accountable, as well he should have been. Yes, the percentage black population of our armed services(22%) is almost double what the US black population percentage(13%) is. And it is true that many who enlist do so for lack of a better future, but this has never changed. Is isn't as though this is all of a sudden the case, and Kerry knows this. Regardless, it is a career opportunity for many across the economic spectrum.

[biglouie250]

you are skating on thin ice anytime to make any remark that may be perceived as troop bashing. kerry fell through the ice here. i dont think he hates the troops tho, i think we can all agree on that lol!

and i love mccain, he should have been our president. politics suck becuase after what bush did to him in the primaries in the real world he would have got shived in the kidney tai style. instead he has to defend the president because of that R.

[biglouie250]

but I honestly believe that he went into the military for no reason but to set up his political career.

the same could be said of bush joining the national guard. i dont see anything wrong with that tho. not everyone enlists for the sole purpose of defending ones country. many join because its a job, many join because it pays for college. others like you said see the political benefits of joining. i dont think that military service should be a prerequisite for higher political office although it is sometimes frowned upon when you dont serve. i wonder what will happen in 20 years when iraq 2 vets run for president. will they have a leg to stand on by fighting in a war that most americans disagree on?

[Logan13]

the same could be said of bush joining the national guard. i dont see anything wrong with that tho. not everyone enlists for the sole purpose of defending ones country. many join because its a job, many join because it pays for college. others like you said see the political benefits of joining. i dont think that military service should be a prerequisite for higher political office although it is sometimes frowned upon when you dont serve. i wonder what will happen in 20 years when iraq 2 vets run for president. will they have a leg to stand on by fighting in a war that most americans disagree on?

I agree with the Bush comment, but he is not the one bad-mouthing our troops. Everyone during the 2004 campaign kept commenting on how Kerry was so inteligent, it seems that this quality did not help him explain his position this time. Fact is, he meant what he said.

[RA]

you are skating on thin ice anytime to make any remark that may be perceived as troop bashing. kerry fell through the ice here. i dont think he hates the troops tho, i think we can all agree on that lol!

and i love mccain, he should have been our president. politics suck becuase after what bush did to him in the primaries in the real world he would have got shived in the kidney tai style. instead he has to defend the president because of that R.

He bashes the troops all the time. It just doesnt get this amount of attention. He said before our troops were killing and raping innocent civilians, torture, blah blah blah. Guys 100% asshole

[Mike Dura]

I disagree with a number of things you said. First, Kerry's statement does relate to Iraq as that is the context in which we are speaking of the soldiers.

What is more, if a person enlists as a soldier at this time it implies that he or she has bought into the message that the war in Iraq is "the war on terrorism." If a person believes that, he or she is vulnerable to the persusion and marketing tactics of this administration. An educated person, by contrast, is less likely to be mislead because he or she has a relatively greater critical faculty through their training and their attitudes. An educated person is more likely to "see through" the message and the tactics because they are more aware of the machivellian ways of leaders.

The common idea that Kerry "bad-mouthed" the troops is merely an interpretation of Kerry's statement. Instead of saying that Kerry "bad-mouthed" the troops, it may be more precise to say that Kerry is bad-mouthing the mentality that leads people to be persuaded by the administration's message (i.e., that the war in Iraq is the war on terrorism). Ignorance of this type costs lives and that's a pity because I'm sure many of the soldiers have good intentions dispite their innocence.

Secondly, it's probably not to Kerry's political gain to make that statement. In fact, it probably puts him and the democrats at a potential disadvantage because most of the people out there will interpret the statement in the way that you did, namely, that "Kerry is bad-mouthing the troops." That's not in good timing with the election coming up and I can't imagine how his statement gains anyone but the republicans. On the other hand, maybe it does in the sense that the polls suggest that people are leaning towards the democrats.

I think it's risky action however and it seems more likely that it was a mis-statement made in an unguarded moment.

You made a reference to the black population and you seem to imply that there is less education in the black community. I'll tell you that there are plenty of white people (or people in general) who are uneducated and many of these people are in the military. I don't think it's as much as a race distinction as it is a socio-economic distinction. In fact, the military target those of lower-socioeconomic status because where there is less education and less opportunity, there is more vulnerability to persuasion by authority figures. Sadly, the socially and the economically disadvantaged are paying heavily for the designs of buissness men in stuffed suits with misguided policy in a phony war that cannot be won. The administration hold these lives as expendable dispite their rhetoric which says different. It's tragic and sad and these are dark days in American History.

This has nothing to do with Iraq. It has to do with Kerry badmouthing troops who volunteer for duty for his own political gain. He has been held accountable, as well he should have been. Yes, the percentage black population of our armed services(22%) is almost double what the US black population percentage(13%) is. And it is true that many who enlist do so for lack of a better future, but this has never changed. Is isn't as though this is all of a sudden the case, and Kerry knows this. Regardless, it is a career opportunity for many across the economic spectrum.

[biglouie250]

He said before our troops were killing and raping innocent civilians, torture, blah blah blah. Guys 100% asshole

there are cases of these things happening. im not defending him because i think his comment was stupid. he should know better. he obviously isnt that smart. he isnt lying tho if he made comments about the things you listed above. Abu Ghraib isnt the only violation of human rights by american troops. im sure you could go on youtube and find something.

[Phreak101]

Kerry is a moron

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Nat...y/cda06-09.cfm

This shows that the majority of our troops are actually MORE educated than the general population.

[BajanBastard]

[RA]

there are cases of these things happening. im not defending him because i think his comment was stupid. he should know better. he obviously isnt that smart. he isnt lying tho if he made comments about the things you listed above. Abu Ghraib isnt the only violation of human rights by american troops. im sure you could go on youtube and find something.

When our country is at war and you say things at home to embolden the enemy to me your a traitor. Terrorists are specifically ramping up attacks right now trying to affect the elections. Who do you think they would rather see in office.

If we were a united front on terrorism things would go quicker and it would save soldiers lives.

[RA]

Did you even watch the vid?

I disagree with a number of things you said. First, Kerry's statement does relate to Iraq as that is the context in which we are speaking of the soldiers.

What is more, if a person enlists as a soldier at this time it implies that he or she has bought into the message that the war in Iraq is "the war on terrorism." If a person believes that, he or she is vulnerable to the persusion and marketing tactics of this administration. An educated person, by contrast, is less likely to be mislead because he or she has a relatively greater critical faculty through their training and their attitudes. An educated person is more likely to "see through" the message and the tactics because they are more aware of the machivellian ways of leaders.

The common idea that Kerry "bad-mouthed" the troops is merely an interpretation of Kerry's statement. Instead of saying that Kerry "bad-mouthed" the troops, it may be more precise to say that Kerry is bad-mouthing the mentality that leads people to be persuaded by the administration's message (i.e., that the war in Iraq is the war on terrorism). Ignorance of this type costs lives and that's a pity because I'm sure many of the soldiers have good intentions dispite their innocence.

Secondly, it's probably not to Kerry's political gain to make that statement. In fact, it probably puts him and the democrats at a potential disadvantage because most of the people out there will interpret the statement in the way that you did, namely, that "Kerry is bad-mouthing the troops." That's not in good timing with the election coming up and I can't imagine how his statement gains anyone but the republicans. On the other hand, maybe it does in the sense that the polls suggest that people are leaning towards the democrats.

I think it's risky action however and it seems more likely that it was a mis-statement made in an unguarded moment.

You made a reference to the black population and you seem to imply that there is less education in the black community. I'll tell you that there are plenty of white people (or people in general) who are uneducated and many of these people are in the military. I don't think it's as much as a race distinction as it is a socio-economic distinction. In fact, the military target those of lower-socioeconomic status because where there is less education and less opportunity, there is more vulnerability to persuasion by authority figures. Sadly, the socially and the economically disadvantaged are paying heavily for the designs of buissness men in stuffed suits with misguided policy in a phony war that cannot be won. The administration hold these lives as expendable dispite their rhetoric which says different. It's tragic and sad and these are dark days in American History.

[biglouie250]

When our country is at war and you say things at home to embolden the enemy to me your a traitor. Terrorists are specifically ramping up attacks right now trying to affect the elections. Who do you think they would rather see in office.

If we were a united front on terrorism things would go quicker and it would save soldiers lives.

so lets quit messing around and destroy the entire middle east. a few bad apples spoils the bunch. so lets uproot the tree and start over.

[biglouie250]

that picture is HILARIOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mike Dura]

Everyone did. It would be hard to miss it.

Did you even watch the vid?

[Logan13]

I disagree with a number of things you said. First, Kerry's statement does relate to Iraq as that is the context in which we are speaking of the soldiers.

What is more, if a person enlists as a soldier at this time it implies that he or she has bought into the message that the war in Iraq is "the war on terrorism." If a person believes that, he or she is vulnerable to the persusion and marketing tactics of this administration. An educated person, by contrast, is less likely to be mislead because he or she has a relatively greater critical faculty through their training and their attitudes. An educated person is more likely to "see through" the message and the tactics because they are more aware of the machivellian ways of leaders.

The common idea that Kerry "bad-mouthed" the troops is merely an interpretation of Kerry's statement. Instead of saying that Kerry "bad-mouthed" the troops, it may be more precise to say that Kerry is bad-mouthing the mentality that leads people to be persuaded by the administration's message (i.e., that the war in Iraq is the war on terrorism). Ignorance of this type costs lives and that's a pity because I'm sure many of the soldiers have good intentions dispite their innocence.

Secondly, it's probably not to Kerry's political gain to make that statement. In fact, it probably puts him and the democrats at a potential disadvantage because most of the people out there will interpret the statement in the way that you did, namely, that "Kerry is bad-mouthing the troops." That's not in good timing with the election coming up and I can't imagine how his statement gains anyone but the republicans. On the other hand, maybe it does in the sense that the polls suggest that people are leaning towards the democrats.

I think it's risky action however and it seems more likely that it was a mis-statement made in an unguarded moment.

You made a reference to the black population and you seem to imply that there is less education in the black community. I'll tell you that there are plenty of white people (or people in general) who are uneducated and many of these people are in the military. I don't think it's as much as a race distinction as it is a socio-economic distinction. In fact, the military target those of lower-socioeconomic status because where there is less education and less opportunity, there is more vulnerability to persuasion by authority figures. Sadly, the socially and the economically disadvantaged are paying heavily for the designs of buissness men in stuffed suits with misguided policy in a phony war that cannot be won. The administration hold these lives as expendable dispite their rhetoric which says different. It's tragic and sad and these are dark days in American History.

It should not take you 6 paragraphs to try and explain what Kerry said. Why does it take you 6 paragraphs....2 reasons? First off you overanalyze to the point of absurdity, and secondly there simply is no defense for what he said, no matter how hard you try.

[J.S.N.]

Yes it does, but I honestly believe that he went into the military for no reason but to set up his political career. Have you researched the shit that this man did and said back in the day during/after the war? My dad was in Vietnam as well, he remembers Kerry all to well.........

pure revisionism. the fact of the matter is, he went to vietnam and bush flew in the national guard.

[Mike Dura]

Those are the two reasons you can think of.

I believe the answer relates to the difference between opposite motives which result in opposite thinking styles.

For example, some people put a premium on having confident answers. He tends to be motivated to answer a question with a quick, confident, oversimplified answer. Those answers will be relatively easy, short, superficial and to most, pleasing because they are not demanding on the attention span.

Other people assume that an answer to a question requires greater consideration and therefore more information processing. His answers tend to be more detailed and more nuanced and therefore longer because more information is being examined (probably innapropriate for a steroid website).

The former type of person tends to be confuse by the latter person and therefore the latter person may be dismissed as "in left field" or "wishy washy."

So, some people have a need for confident answers while others have the need for information processing. Two totally different motives that lead to two totally different results.

It should not take you 6 paragraphs to try and explain what Kerry said. Why does it take you 6 paragraphs....2 reasons? First off you overanalyze to the point of absurdity, and secondly there simply is no defense for what he said, no matter how hard you try.

[Mike Dura]

Name-calling is niether courageous or cowardly. It's just a norm in politics and no one does it better than Carl Rove (Bush's political strategist who has a reputation for Low-ball and at times illegal political tactics). Unfortunately, Rove seems to be above the law. His influence on Bush policy-making is well known too. Although Kerry mispoke, at least he isn't causing thousands of deaths in a phony war that is costing two billion a week to you and I the tax payer.

It doesn't take balls to call people names. He is just pissed that he has been backed into a corner, again, and we have the video to prove what he said.

[Mike Dura]

Who said I was trying to defend Kerry? That's not was I was doing at all. I was speculating about what he intended to say versus how it comes across to most people. You should re-read.

It should not take you 6 paragraphs to try and explain what Kerry said. Why does it take you 6 paragraphs....2 reasons? First off you overanalyze to the point of absurdity, and secondly there simply is no defense for what he said, no matter how hard you try.

[Mike Dura]

Are you saying that your father remembers Kerry from media coverage or direct contact during his time in the service? I can't wait to hear this.

Yes it does, but I honestly believe that he went into the military for no reason but to set up his political career. Have you researched the shit that this man did and said back in the day during/after the war? My dad was in Vietnam as well, he remembers Kerry all to well.........

[Logan13]

Those are the two reasons you can think of.

I believe the answer relates to the difference between opposite motives which result in opposite thinking styles.

For example, some people put a premium on having confident answers. He tends to be motivated to answer a question with a quick, confident, oversimplified answer. Those answers will be relatively easy, short, superficial and to most, pleasing because they are not demanding on the attention span.

Other people assume that an answer to a question requires greater consideration and therefore more information processing. His answers tend to be more detailed and more nuanced and therefore longer because more information is being examined (probably innapropriate for a steroid website).

The former type of person tends to be confuse by the latter person and therefore the latter person may be dismissed as "in left field" or "wishy washy."

So, some people have a need for confident answers while others have the need for information processing. Two totally different motives that lead to two totally different results.

And yet you take another 5 paragraphs to try and explain what you meant in the last 6 paragraphs that you wrote trying to explain what Kerry meant. Silly!!

[Logan13]

Are you saying that your father remembers Kerry from media coverage or direct contact during his time in the service? I can't wait to hear this.

Media coverage. Kerry's statements during and after the war made life hard for the Vietnam vets. Eveyone who was in Vietnam must remember him. My dad was there, you weren't.........

[Logan13]

Who said I was trying to defend Kerry? That's not was I was doing at all. I was speculating about what he intended to say versus how it comes across to most people. You should re-read.

The fact that you are trying to find an excuse for Kerry's statement just shows a lack intellectual honesty on your part. Fact is, if it were a Republican, you would not be trying to find an excuse for him. And if it were a Republican, there would be no excuse for his comments in my eyes.....
Your blind ideals marginalize everything that you say.

[Teabagger]

John Kerry is a loathsome slime ball. I am a Viet vet and I can assure you his words after he returned hurt the troops and the cause. Just like Jane Fonda then. They provided "comfort" to the enemy and in my mind are traitors. Nothing will change that. But him being a Senator from Mass is not surprising...their other Senator is a drunk, murderer, and probably an accessory to rape...so what the hell, whats wrong with a traitor.

[RA]

Well the Dems threw him under the bus...hes not campaigning anymore. They cant even justify his idiotic statements

[biglouie250]

Well the Dems threw him under the bus...hes not campaigning anymore. They cant even justify his idiotic statements

they shouldnt. sometimes in politics its nice to see people not defend at all costs and realize that the guy is a ****ing idiot.

[Mike Dura]

I don't think it's silly. But if you find it silly, I'm glad you found a way to get something out of it.

And yet you take another 5 paragraphs to try and explain what you meant in the last 6 paragraphs that you wrote trying to explain what Kerry meant. Silly!!

[Mike Dura]

Actually, you are confusing the term "fact" with "interpretation". You interpret what I'm saying as a defense of Kerry and your calling your interpretation a "fact." In fact, maybe for you perception is reality. I say, that's too easy.

In fact, I think it was politically, a dumb thing to say and I would never defend it. But my interpretation of the statement is much different than yours.

The fact that you are trying to find an excuse for Kerry's statement just shows a lack intellectual honesty on your part. Fact is, if it were a Republican, you would not be trying to find an excuse for him. And if it were a Republican, there would be no excuse for his comments in my eyes.....
Your blind ideals marginalize everything that you say.

[Mike Dura]

I didn't say I was there.

Regarding Kerry's statements on the media, however, who is to say that I couldn't watch in on tape? Who is to say I couldn't examine the Viatnam war in retrospect? Being there is not the same as earning a solid understanding of Kerry or a given historical context in general. That's a scholarly pursuit.

Media coverage. Kerry's statements during and after the war made life hard for the Vietnam vets. Eveyone who was in Vietnam must remember him. My dad was there, you weren't.........

[Logan13]

I didn't say I was there.

Regarding Kerry's statements on the media, however, who is to say that I couldn't watch in on tape? Who is to say I couldn't examine the Viatnam war in retrospect? Being there is not the same as earning a solid understanding of Kerry or a given historical context in general. That's a scholarly pursuit.

Probably because you and I did not experience Vietnam. A scholary pursuit 30years later will never give you the perspective that the soldiers had since they actually lived through it.