SwiftVets.com

[TRUTH108]

Your efforts are actually helping us, so keep up the good work!


NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
Bush could be accused of conduct unincumbent
By Peter S. Canellos | June 1, 2004

KEY WEST, Fla. -- For those who don't live in so-called battleground states, the voice is surprising: ''I'm George W. Bush, and I approved this message." What follows on the screen is less surprising: an ominous listing of John F. Kerry's Senate votes, suggesting he opposed everything from the Sherman tank to McGruff the crime-fighting dog.

Floridians, like Ohioans, Pennsylvanians, and others, see scores of these commercials every week, along with increasing numbers of ads from the Kerry campaign and liberal ''527" groups, so named for the provision in the tax code that allows them.

But while most of Kerry's ads so far have been upbeat biographical spots -- leaving the dirty work of softening up Bush to the ''527" groups -- Bush's campaign was at work earlier and longer in trying to define Kerry as a weak-on-defense liberal.

This shock-and-awe of the airwaves hasn't seriously damaged Kerry, though Republicans can reasonably argue that the horse race polls would be worse for them without the ads. But viewers might just as well wonder whether Bush has come on too strong, too fast: His campaign is already on orange alert with five months to go before the election.

The Bush strategy seems simple: Use the Republicans' fund-raising advantage to portray Kerry as a Massachusetts liberal just the way George H. W. Bush portrayed Michael Dukakis as an out-of-touch, card-carrying left-winger in 1988.

But so far, this campaign has played out as Bush-Dukakis the way Dukakis must have envisioned it unfolding: Bush has seemed a little shrill and insistent, while Kerry travels the country making presidential-type addresses. He's currently on an 11-day tour discussing national security.

That's not to say that anyone, even the most diehard Democrats, thinks that Kerry is cruising to victory. The state-by-state numbers are only moderately encouraging, and the possibility of an event that could tip the election in Bush's favor -- a major terrorist attack, the capture of Osama bin Laden -- will be present every day until Nov. 3.

But the continued closeness of the election only makes Bush's attack-dog tactics seem more out of proportion for an incumbent seeking reelection. Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton seized the initiative in their reelection runs by portraying their administrations in gauzy, upbeat themes, conveyed in 30-second spots that played like Viagra ads.

This year, if anyone's running a stately, incumbent-style walk-through, it's Kerry. And if the poll numbers continue to decline for Bush, expect a further role reversal. It could be only a matter of weeks before Bush starts invoking the spirit of Harry S. Truman, the patron saint of embattled incumbents, whose toughness and feistiness (they didn't call it negative campaigning then) helped him overcome his unpopular policies.

The Democrats' secret weapon this year has been their unity of purpose. Not only has the party avoided internal squabbles, it has tacitly accepted the idea that it must run two complementary campaigns without ever acknowledging the differences between them.

The first is the campaign against Bush, which got off to a jump-start with former Vermont governor Howard Dean's fiery rhetoric, took off on the Internet and in TV spots by groups like MoveOn.org and now continues apace with different Bush antagonists taking the lead every week: hundreds of thousands of women marching against Bush's judicial nominees one week, an apoplectic address by Al Gore another week, a provocative description of Iraq as ''Bush's Vietnam" by Edward M. Kennedy another week, and so on.

The second campaign is Kerry's effort to establish himself as a serious president-in-waiting. With former Clinton administration economic and foreign-policy advisers charting a moderate course -- and even matching Bush's hawkish policies in the Mideast -- Kerry has staked a claim to the political middle without losing many Democrats on the left.

Ralph Nader's third-party campaign remains a threat, however, as do some policy successes for Bush. The economy, which voters say is their top concern, is far from weak, and Bush has yet to receive much credit for it. If the Iraq news were to quiet down, voters might notice that their incomes have been rising steadily while their federal tax bill has gone down.

For now, though, Kerry can enjoy the luxury of running a 19th-century campaign, offering policy pronouncements from his rhetorical front porch while others stoke the outrage against Bush.

It's not a small advantage. With each serious speech and sober pronouncement, Kerry looks more like a man preparing for a new administration in January.

And with each intemperate attack ad, Bush looks like a man expecting a different administration in January, too














Bush's Negative Campaign is Helping Kerry More Every Day
Peter S. Canellos writes: "This shock-and-awe of the airwaves hasn't seriously damaged Kerry...[in fact] viewers might just as well wonder whether Bush has come on too strong, too fast: His campaign is already on orange alert with five months to go before the election.The Bush strategy seems simple: Use the Republicans' fund-raising advantage to portray Kerry as a Massachusetts liberal just the way George H. W. Bush portrayed Michael Dukakis as an out-of-touch, card-carrying left-winger in 1988. But so far, this campaign has played out as Bush-Dukakis the way Dukakis must have envisioned it unfolding: Bush has seemed a little shrill and insistent, while Kerry travels the country making presidential-type addresses. He's currently on an 11-day tour discussing national security. And with each intemperate attack ad, Bush looks like a man expecting a different administration in January, too."

[95 bxl]

So, FALSE108... if you're so thankful for the backlash effect... then why are you here telling us how "appauled" you are about this site?

Let's not be like the typical war-criminal supporter, shall we?

Stop being a hypocrite, will you? THERE'S a good little troop.

[War Dog]

You just keep on believing that and the rest of the propaganda being put out by your side. I think you are going to find that more and more veterans and Americans are getting tired of all the hate be spewed by those on your side. More Democrats and veterans are turning against their own party and candidate each day. You aren't fooling the mature, clear thinking minorities anymore, and more and more mainstream democrats are realizing that John Kerry just isn't the candidate for them.

So, keep up what you're doing, and when November comes around, you are going to be greatly surprised! There's huge talk and rumors of suspected actions by the Clintons in September and October that will shock the political world. I do not know if that is the truth or not, but if I was a Democrat, I'd be worried what they are going to do to John Kerry and his campaign. Neither Bill or Hillary can afford for John Kerry to win in November, as this would seriously damage Hillary's hopes to run in 2008.

And as for John Kerry, he turns more and more Democrats and Americans away from him each time he waffles or flip-flops on an issue, changes his mind, tries to defend both sides, etc.. And it matters alot to these people whenever John Kerry opens his mouth and does things to embarass himself and his party by losing his cool, telling people to "F" off, using the "F" word, giving people the finger in front of school kids. The more anti-Bush venom that John Kerry uses in his ads and speeches, the more people are turning against him.

Even CBS ran a poll that shows that Veterans are turning more and more against John Kerry every day!

Yeah, keep on doing what you are doing! It's working for our side!

War Woof!
_________________
"When people are in trouble, they call the cops.

When cops need help, they call the K-9 unit."

[TRUTH108]

Hey, man, we are vets. We are supposed to honor and respect the job we did. We are not here to tear down a man who actually showed up for the war. Sen. Kerry wasn't hopping all over the place helping out with campaigns.

What do you think would have happened if it had been you or me who decided not to show up. If our father's had not been head of the CIA we would have been in Levinworth and dishonarably discharged. Don't you see the difference.

I posted that info because it just came across AP that the more negative Bush and his outside groups get the more support Kerry is getting.

Do you have any common sense at all?

Your like a hen, picking and pecking at everything that is said. That was just a news worthy article.

I don't have time to play with you guys anymore today. Check in tomorrow to see what good stuff you have cooked up for the next president of the United States. I am passing this site on to other vets I know. They will get a hoot out of this.

Ya'll don't wear white hoods and sheets do you?

[War Dog]

The hate coming from you isn't doing you any good at all! You just don't understand the real issue here with most veterans. It isn't that John Kerry served in Vietnam, isn't that he served with honor or not. In fact, the majority of the complaints voiced here about John Kerry deal with what he did after he left Vietnam and returned to the states. It's what he did and said about the Vietnam War and the Veterans who were over there that they object to. It's all the antics, activities, actions and testimony given by not only John Kerry, but Jane Fonda and others in the anti-war movement that is objected to!

It's the thirty or more years of crap and abuse that a majority of Vietnam Veterans have had to live with that was caused by the lies, false accusations and rumors that was spread by the people and groups mentioned above. It's about the many years that all of us had to keep quiet about being a Vietnam Veteran for fear of being called names, insulted, and being thought of as baby killers, rapists, murderers, war criminals, etc.

It's about the many Vietnam Veterans that either lost or were refused jobs when it was learned that they were Vietnam Veterans. It's about the people that judged us based on what they heard from the anti-war groups and anti-war liberal media. Even to this day, there are people in this nation that still consider all Vietnam Veterans as wackos, nuts, loose cannons, firecrackers ready to explode, unstable. They think that all of us suffer from PTSD, have nightmares every night, that we could explode and go postal on everybody at any time. They fear us based on what was said about us.

Did war crimes and atrocities happen in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Thailand? Yep, I'm sure they did. They happen in all wars, and are committed by forces, armies and troops on all sides of any conflict or war. Look at all the people murdered, slaughtered, raped, maimed, etc., in Europe and Asia during WWII, in Korea, and since Vietnam in Asia, China, Africa, South America. It's still happening in many nations around the world, espically in Africa. Event the United Nations Peacekeeping troops in Africa are committing rapes against the very people they are there to protect!

Anyone who was either in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and/or Thailand understand the mass war crimes, rapes, murderers, atrocities that were committed during the war and after by the NVA, the VietCong, the VietMin, the Cambodians, the Laosians, and is still happening to this day. Look at the millions that lost their lives when Vietnam fell, in Laos, in Cambodia.

Clearly you feel strongly on your own issues and opinions, and that is good. So do we! But if you honestly and sincerely care about these issues, go back and read all the threads posted from a bunch of people who are honestly just giving their opinions based on the facts that are a part of history, and well documented. Look through the hate, the name calling, the slanderous comments, the insults thrown by both sides.

If you can do that, great, you've learned something, which a lot of people cannot do! I was a Democrat and a Liberal from 1970 until 1997. If I can turn myself around, then so can you! Just open your mind, and take the time to read and hopefully understand what others are trying to say to you. Debate them on that level. Try and discuss the issues without hate, without calling others names, insulting them. Be the better person, if they spew hate, give them love and understanding. If they spread lies, give them truth and facts. If they provide false accusations and biased websites, find ones of your own that prove your side.

But do it without hate, without calling others names, insulting them, etc., and if they do, let it wash off your back like water off a duck! Don't fall into their trap, because when you lose your cool and resort to their level, you lose common sense and respectability in the eyes of those here who are trying their best to be honest and truthful.

Can you do that? If you can't, then you are no better or worse than those who are attacking you!

War Woof!
_________________
"When people are in trouble, they call the cops.

When cops need help, they call the K-9 unit."

[TRUTH108]

I have heard nothing on these posts but negative statements. I have seen no facts to base these opinions on.

I am open minded enough to listen to the facts. Not personal feelings but facts that support your decision to support Mr. Bush.

Is it too much to ask for facts rather than just random statements based on emotion.

I am not spewing any hate. It is your site that has set up a podium for negative attacks on a veteran who is running for President of the United States against a man who did not serve and does not understand war and what damage it does to families, it is called "collateral damage", the Bush family would take that term collateral as a banking term since they collapsed, Silverado Savingss and Loan in Texas and took down the banking industy here and around the country. Now that is a fact. I would just like to have you give me facts on why you hate this brother, a veteran so much.

If you "jarheads" would give facts, not emotion then your site would certainly be more credible.

[waltjones]

TRUTH108: Any real veteran would know that the term "jarhead" only applies to Marines! You just screwed up, 108 - I don't think you're a vet at all; if you are , you're sure a dumb one! Thatisall .....
_________________
Walt Jones (USMC, '65 - '69) It says much about the person who defends a man with no honor.

[Greenhat]

[waltjones]

FALSE108 is blind, Greenhat - intentionally so. Semper Fi!
_________________
Walt Jones (USMC, '65 - '69) It says much about the person who defends a man with no honor.