Your Lips Keep Moving but All I Hear Is “I Served in Vietnam.”
First, credit where credit is due. My 15 year old daughter came up with the slogan which I used for the title for this blog. I have heard slogans like “We need a tree, not a bush” and while these may be funny they are plays on words that really mean NOTHING to the issues.
However, this one struck at an issue, which I have been thinking about blogging on for some time.
Senator Kerry feels the need to mention his (4 month) Vietnam service at almost EVERY occasion. From saluting at his national convention, “reporting for duty” to the debates when he “casually” mentioned it when answering an question on faith, that his faith got him through a “war.” Did that have anything to do with the question? Or was that simply a way to interject his (4 month) military service into the debate? Of course the argument could be made that his faith was an integral part of his service. (One could read from the contemporary journal he kept to see how important his faith was to him back then.) And an argument could be made for each of the hundreds of times he mentions his service in a casual, seemingly unconnected to the subject way. But when you take the hundreds of times as a whole, it shows a pattern of inserting his service far more than is needed to make ANY point.
Is there any SLIGHTLY informed voter in America who does not know that John Kerry served in Vietnam? The last time he mentioned it, probably this morning, is there a single person who learned of this for the very first time? Ironically he only wants us to know about SOME of his service though. Senator Kerry will not sign form 180 releasing his military records. What could there be in his military records so damaging that he will not release them? President Bush released his own.
Senator Kerry believes that his 4 months in Vietnam, decades ago, qualifies him as Commander in Chief today, and since that is the only thing he can use as a qualification he uses it over and over and over. If he starts with just after his service (well actually still during his service) he can tell you how his own self admitted wartime atrocities qualify him as Commander in Chief. He can go into detail as to how his going behind the back of his own country (while still in the service) to aid the (enemy) North Vietnamese in Paris, France qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could tell you of how he opposed, at every turn, the WINNING strategy used by Ronald Reagan to WIN the cold war, and that this qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could tell you how he voted against the first gulf war because the French were not on board, (no wait, they were) and that this qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could talk of how he wanted to slash our intelligence budgets within months of the first World Trade Center terrorist attack, and how that qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could also tell you of all the Senate Intelligence Committee meetings he missed the year after the first WTC attack, ALL of them! then tell you how that qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could tell you of all the weapons systems he voted against in the Senate and explain how that qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could tell you how he voted for the current gulf war because the French were on board (no wait, they were not) and this qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could tell you how he voted FOR the $87 billion to support our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan (no wait, in the only vote that counted, the last one, he voted against it) and explain how this qualifies him as Commander in Chief.
OK Senator Kerry, I see your point.
You served in Vietnam.
Think for yourself!
Make up your own mind!
However, this one struck at an issue, which I have been thinking about blogging on for some time.
Senator Kerry feels the need to mention his (4 month) Vietnam service at almost EVERY occasion. From saluting at his national convention, “reporting for duty” to the debates when he “casually” mentioned it when answering an question on faith, that his faith got him through a “war.” Did that have anything to do with the question? Or was that simply a way to interject his (4 month) military service into the debate? Of course the argument could be made that his faith was an integral part of his service. (One could read from the contemporary journal he kept to see how important his faith was to him back then.) And an argument could be made for each of the hundreds of times he mentions his service in a casual, seemingly unconnected to the subject way. But when you take the hundreds of times as a whole, it shows a pattern of inserting his service far more than is needed to make ANY point.
Is there any SLIGHTLY informed voter in America who does not know that John Kerry served in Vietnam? The last time he mentioned it, probably this morning, is there a single person who learned of this for the very first time? Ironically he only wants us to know about SOME of his service though. Senator Kerry will not sign form 180 releasing his military records. What could there be in his military records so damaging that he will not release them? President Bush released his own.
Senator Kerry believes that his 4 months in Vietnam, decades ago, qualifies him as Commander in Chief today, and since that is the only thing he can use as a qualification he uses it over and over and over. If he starts with just after his service (well actually still during his service) he can tell you how his own self admitted wartime atrocities qualify him as Commander in Chief. He can go into detail as to how his going behind the back of his own country (while still in the service) to aid the (enemy) North Vietnamese in Paris, France qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could tell you of how he opposed, at every turn, the WINNING strategy used by Ronald Reagan to WIN the cold war, and that this qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could tell you how he voted against the first gulf war because the French were not on board, (no wait, they were) and that this qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could talk of how he wanted to slash our intelligence budgets within months of the first World Trade Center terrorist attack, and how that qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could also tell you of all the Senate Intelligence Committee meetings he missed the year after the first WTC attack, ALL of them! then tell you how that qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could tell you of all the weapons systems he voted against in the Senate and explain how that qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could tell you how he voted for the current gulf war because the French were on board (no wait, they were not) and this qualifies him as Commander in Chief. He could tell you how he voted FOR the $87 billion to support our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan (no wait, in the only vote that counted, the last one, he voted against it) and explain how this qualifies him as Commander in Chief.
OK Senator Kerry, I see your point.
You served in Vietnam.
Think for yourself!
Make up your own mind!
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home