Kerry Slams Our Troops Again

The story continues on Kerry's remarks from yesterday. Kerry claims his remarks were taken out of context. Was he or wasn't he? I don't know how he truely feels about our troops and I don't think anyone can say one way or the other but I did think that their was more to the story than what was originaly reported.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/us/31kerry-transcript.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

 

:sleeping_2:

Politics as usual.. John Kerry was trying to zing Bush, and slipped, and now Bush is beating Kerry up over it. I am sure if we look back, Bush tried to zing Kerry and slipped, and Kerry beat Bush up over it...

Much to do about nothing...


I'm with Ken, both parties suck. Anyone voting for a 3rd party this year?

 

[quoite]Is he really trying to imply that it takes a lot of smarts to work the regulations to get pulled out of a war zone . . . and a lot of stupidity to stay in a war zone?[/quote]

I don't think so. Kerry doesn't approve of George W. Bush.

Of course, George W. Bush never worked the regulations to get out of a war zone. He signed a paper asking to ( please ), never be sent to the war zone. No one ever accused Dubya of wanting to go to war. By that I mean he didn't want to go personally. He's fine with other people going to war.

Just to be sure he didn't have to go, he went AWOL, got busted and grounded, and then just stopped showing up.

 

intentional or not, slip or not, joke or not, I think Kerry should apologize and get off his high horse. We all say stupid things. If I think I've hurt someone, I want to make amends. Thank goodness most of my comments aren't televised for the whole world to see.

 

Amazing! John Kerry makes a statement and the entire Democratic Party is to blame. However, when U.S. Republican Mark Foley is caught attempting to lure underage boys, he's just one individual and not representative of the whole Republican Party.

 

Everyone, as individuals, should be held responsible for his/her actions.

 

http://dadmanly.blogspot.com/2006/10/kerry-body-parts.html

A soldier's view of Kerry's misspeech. And the BBC link on the above is interesting coverage, too.

It would be so grand if all politicians would be willing to apologize. It would be grand of each of us would begin this process ourselves and apologize for misunderstandings. To ask for clarification ourselves. To take longer to take offense. To offer understanding, and to look for understanding.

To know our neighbors.

 

He didn't address the misspeech but pretended that that was what Kerry intended. It's so much more fun that way!

 

Based on Kerry's remarks when he returned from his few months in Vietnam I think that we have to entertain the idea that his remarks yesterday may have been a Freudian slip.

 

Bitsy

You have been on a roll lately with really good posts.

Who's the new speech writer?



:wayne_ducking:

:saint:

 

I wonder if anyone has actually determined the educational level of the troops today. During Vietnam, there was the interesting situation where in many units, the grunts were better educated than the NCOs.

The fact that the Army is now waiving the requirement for a High School diploma suggests that it's not that way anymore.

 

So, how does a "ground reconnaissance unit, no tracks" get an education?

:laugh:

Dallas school district is waiving language requirements . . . What's next?

 

I don't have a link but generally what I have heard is that the volunteer military is higher than the drafted military - certainly based on the training that members receive today compared to the Vietnam War era.

 

What Kerry said:

What Kerry nows says he was supposed to say:

Look at the phrasing of the second statement, which he claims he meant to say. It's a grammatical monstrosity. The correct way to say that would be: "Do you know what a person can end up doing if he doesn't study, if he isn't smart, if he is intellectually lazy? He can end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq." There would be no repeated use of the word 'you' in such a statement. The repeated use of 'you' in the alleged PREPARED statement indicates the same as the actual remarks: that the statements are referring to the members of the audience, not pointing to a third party.

The only logical conclusion is that the second statement was composed AFTER the fact trying to use the basic patterns of the actual remarks, but twisted around to mean something else. There is a lot of difference between the two statements as they are. He must have realized that if he took out all the 'you's' as well it would be hard for even his supporters to believe that he said one meaning to say the other.

Any reasonable person should be able to see that Kerry has been a public figure far too long to go in front of an audience with prepared remarks as semi-literate as what he now claims he meant to say. It's his attempt to try to defuse the situation through falsehood without being too obvious about the lie.

Finally, if the remarks he made were at odds with his personal history, one could perhaps give him the benefit of the doubt. However, the idea that anyone who would choose to go into the military must either be an idiot or someone with no other career option (the direct implication of his actual statement) is completely consistent with his earlier lies and slander about our brave service men and women. He has obviously held the military in low regard for a long time, so it can't be surprising that he would say something demeaning about them now.

I think he probably was working with notes without a precise sentence in mind, and didn't mean to be as blunt as he ended up being. He just found himself saying what he really believes. That's the most logical conclusion based on all the evidence.

 

If that was really what he meant to say. . . then was Kerry saying that if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you're intellectually lazy? You end up President of the United States?

 

Bush made that joke, about being a C-student, some time ago.

It's not a monstrosity in speaking, which is looser than in writing, just casual. Talking of a theoretical "he" doesn't do as well as "you" to make a point.

Kerry didn't slam the troops back in the 70s, he slammed the administration as now. Some people pretend not to know the difference because righteous indignation is fun.

 

I heard they are waffling about the requirement that all principals speak or be in the process of learning to speak, Spanish. Not a good thing, I think.

Hadn't heard about anything else.

This year, Bush's "no child left behind" puts a cap on the number of Special Ed students who can take a modified test. He figures if they take the harder test, they will be more successful.

Just as he thinks he can make things better in Iraq by telling the American people that we are winning.