Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/24/2004 2:23:59 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/24/2004 2:30:58 PM EST by Charging_Handle]
I was listening to a local talk radio personality today on 630 AM WLAP and he mentioned some things about Kerry that I hadn't heard mentioned before. I tried to take notes and jot down all the interesting stuff that I could. I'm not sure the sources of the info but I would like to toss it out for discussion and see if anyone can confirm any of it.

First, I'll touch on stuff related to the Swiftees and Vietnam.

1. He points out that the author of Unfit For Command didn't just come forward during this election year with criticism for John Kerry. He also points out that this guy has fought Kerry from the start and accused Kerry of being a liar. According to this radio source, the author appeared on the Dick Cavitt(?) Show in 1971 to discuss Kerry and to dispute the things Kerry had been saying. So it seems this guy isn't someone who just mysteriously appeared out of nowhere, but rather someone who has been fighting Kerry for a long, long time. To me at least, this would seem to give him much more credibility.

2. The person who the democrats keep calling the "Texas Republican" donor, who has contributed money to the Swift Vets for Truth, actually claims to be an independent, not a republican. What makes this claim seem all the more true is that not only has he contributed money to the swiftee's efforts, but he has contributed significantly more to the causes of democrats in the past. I can't remember the exact numbers but I think the figures were $7k to the swiftees vs. $10k to the dems. If true, how the hell can anyone label him a republican?!?!

3. Contrary to what the left is saying, the swiftees come from all walks of life. They are not all republicans. In fact, according to this information I heard this afternoon, there are quite a few democrats among the group. Lee (the radio guy) even goes on to say that the democratic members pleaded with the democrat party not to nominate Kerry because of his reputation and because of his actions following his return home. They advised that they could not support (nor would lots of veterans) a man who did what he did. In essence, these guys are crossing party lines and saying they simply don't like Kerry for who he is and what he stands for and thet they will not support him no matter their party or his.

4. Kerry claims his first purple heart resulted while under fire. But according to Lee, that is not the case by John Kerry's own words. He says that in John Kerry's biography, Tour of Duty , Kerry himself states that while speaking of a specific date 9 days after the date of the first purple heart incident,that at that point he had not been under fire yet. Hmmmm. So now I guess he's just flip flopping again?

He goes on to mention the 527 groups and their politial funding of "negative" attack ads. According to Lee, $60 million has been spent by the left on anti-Bush ads, while only $3 million has been spent in anti-Kerry ads. And the left is the ones crying over this?!?!

Now let's rewind to the Michael Moore movie. Clearly it was politially motivated, contained distortions of the truth and even outright lies. It was extremely negative and unfair of Bush. Yet how did Bush respond? He simply addressed the parts of the movie he felt untrue, didn't dwell on it and moved on. Contrast that with Kerry's reaction the book from the swiftees. Not only has he done a piss poor job of countering their accusations, but he has even called for book stores to pull it off their shelves and not sell it! I don't recall Bush asking theatres to not show Michael Moore's 9/11 documentary. And the left claims to be such diehard supporters of free speech? Bullshit! Only when free speech favors them do they support it.

And one other piece of information, not related to Vietnam or the swiftees, yet relevent I would think to his claims of being suited to the fight on terrorism. Lee mentions a situation a couple of years prior to the September 2001 terrorist attacks where an individual at Boston's Logan Airport had become greatly concerned about security there. He saw that weapons could be easily smuggled aboard planes and other things. When he sought to voice his concerns and see to it that security was improved, guess who he had to go through? Yep, you guessed it, Senator John F. Kerry. On more than one occasion, this individuals concerns were flushed down the toilet and totally ignored by Kerry. Well, we know what happened a couple of years later. And we know what airport it originated from. If true it appears Kerry could have helped to prevent those attacks, had he been willing to listen.

Anyway, I considered all of this stuff pretty interesting and wanted to mention it here for discussion. Can anyone confirm any of the above information? The guy on the radio often just mentioned these cases and he didn't site sources on some of them, so I can't confirm they are all true. Therefore I am not presenting it as the literal truth at this time. However I also have no reason to doubt the claims. Can anyone else shed any light on any of this?

-CH
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 2:47:20 PM EST
bumped because it fell of the front page almost as soon as it was posted! (active evening here)
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 4:18:41 PM EST
Free BTT for you.
Top Top