XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.fan.barbra.streisand, alt.fan.j-garofalo   
   XPost: alt.fan.julia-roberts   
   From: dontspam@me.com   
      
   Kerry has more right to speak out than anyone of the blow-hard pundits on   
   the right who, to a man, all found ways to get out of it when we were   
   exporting democracy to Vietnam. Limbaugh, O'Leilly, Cheney, Bush, Ashcroft,   
   the list goes on and on, all conveniently found ways to make sure their   
   privileged (cystic) asses let someone else fight in their places. As a   
   former Marine, I am appalled to hear these chickenhawk pussies puff on the   
   peter of the current administration in support of this war. We are there   
   now, so I think we have to finish what we started, but most of those on the   
   conservative side have zero right to criticize anything Kerry did in regards   
   to Vietnam.   
      
   David H.   
      
   --   
   Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. ~ Daniel   
   Patrick Moynihan   
   "Dr. Linus Bahadur Goldfarb"  wrote in message   
   news:o5t970dbft03tn99gtrq53ci5skb1b18mr@4ax.com...   
   > Hanoi John Kerry is a Traitor To The Vietnam Fighting men. Hanoi John   
   > Kerry Hates America.   
   >   
   >   
   > John Kerry's Resume for Commander and Chief and Defender of the   
   > Working Man: Protest with Jane Fonda, Accuse the American Military of   
   > War Crimes, and Marry Two Women with Inherited Fortunes? Bring it On!   
   >   
   > By George F. Holland   
   > Feb 8, 2004, 21:09   
   >   
   > Every time the Democrats place all their intellectual resources behind   
   > a "winning" strategy they ultimately find themselves on ice so thin   
   > that the heat from a single candle can melt the ice beneath their   
   > feet. Today's democratic strategy is to base John F. Kerry's eventual   
   > candidacy on the strength of his war record and his defense of the   
   > working class. Howard Dean had not even finished the last note of his   
   > infamous screech before this strategy was embraced by almost every   
   > liberal constituency of the Democratic Party. These constituencies are   
   > now led by career operatives at the DNC, actors in Hollywood whose   
   > careers are on the decline, and a parade of failed Democratic   
   > candidates who now have time for party activities since they have   
   > nothing better to do. I think this strategy will ultimately fail since   
   > John Kerry's congressional record and life after Vietnam does not show   
   > he has the wisdom required to defend our country or any possible   
   > connection to the working man.   
   >   
   > Claim Number One in the Kerry Campaign: John Kerry is eminently   
   > qualified to be Commander in Chief of our military and to lead the war   
   > against terrorism because of his service as a courageous young soldier   
   > in the 1960's. No one can dispute that John Kerry volunteered to go   
   > into military service and won several medals during his time in the   
   > Vietnam War. John Kerry's courage as a young man in the jungles of   
   > Vietnam will forever deserve the gratitude and admiration of our   
   > nation. However, courage as a young soldier does not automatically   
   > translate into wisdom as an older politician. Let us examine how John   
   > Kerry translated his youthful combat experience into further service   
   > to his country.   
   >   
   > After he returned from active duty, he became a leading anti-war   
   > activist and worked hard to support the anti-American programs of   
   > radicals like Jane Fonda. He attended a seminar bankrolled by Fonda in   
   > Detroit in February 1971 during which 125 self-proclaimed Vietnam   
   > veterans testified at a Howard Johnson's about atrocities allegedly   
   > committed by our own forces. In order to further ingratiate himself   
   > with his new friends he participated in and even led efforts to   
   > humiliate and discredit our armed forces and our country's leadership.   
   > Although, honest policy disagreements are a fundamental part of our   
   > democratic system, symbolic gestures of hatred and disrespect for our   
   > country are not. These acts of hate not only add no value to the   
   > national debate, but encourage our enemies and discourage our allies.   
   > Both Jane Fonda and John Kerry translated their disputes over our   
   > country's policy on Vietnam into the most heinous acts of disrespect   
   > for our military and national character.   
   >   
   > Pictures of Jane Fonda on top of the very tanks which fired on and   
   > most likely wounded and killed our troops gave the enemy a morale   
   > boost and public relations edge against the United States. John Kerry,   
   > who was not invited to that particular photo shoot, led his own   
   > efforts to embarrass and humiliate our military. Navy lieutenant John   
   > Kerry, as leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, testified   
   > before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 23, 1971 that   
   > U.S. soldiers had "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, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and   
   > generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam." It is important   
   > to note that while Lt. Kerry sat in plush offices on Capital Hill and   
   > testified that American soldiers routinely committed these war crimes   
   > against Vietnamese civilians for fun, our soldiers were still fighting   
   > and dying in the jungles of that country. Did John Kerry's testimony   
   > provide additional justification and passion for the torture of   
   > American soldiers at the hands of their North Vietnamese captures? We   
   > will probably never know. Should a man who loved his country have made   
   > those inflammatory charges in public while his brothers and sisters in   
   > the military were being held prisoner? Absolutely not.   
   >   
   > As a further public relations coup for our adversaries and to gain   
   > more publicity for himself he then threw medals he claimed were his   
   > own over the White House garden wall. However, as soon as his medals   
   > proved to be a political asset as opposed to a publicity liability he   
   > confessed that the medals he threw over the garden wall in fact were   
   > not his own and now displays his own medals. He has used them for   
   > political advantage ever since and they are now the centerpiece of his   
   > presidential campaign. We may never find out who owned the medals he   
   > so callously threw over the garden wall or what sacrifices that   
   > soldier endured to win those medals. I guess John Kerry wants us to   
   > honor his medals which he now so prominently hangs on his wall more   
   > than he honored the medals of that fellow veteran. I wonder if John   
   > Kerry would have thrown the veteran over the wall wearing those medals   
   > if it would have resulted in better press or more accolades from his   
   > anti-American admirers.   
   >   
   > One would also think that someone who fought and saw men die in the   
   > jungles of foreign lands would become a passionate leader in the   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)