Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
To know him is to loathe him?
Published on July 29, 2004 By Draginol In Democrat

John Kerry and his supporters have made a lot of noise of his 4 months in Vietnam on a Swift boat. But what do the men who actually served with him think?

Overwhelmingly, they reject him. Described variously as a glory hound, he apparently took a home movie camera with him in which he reinacted various events in front of the camera in an effort to glorify what he did.

I don't know enough on this to know how much of it is usual political propaganda or not.  However, I think it is very telling that so few people who served with him have any respect for him. That is very counter to the normal way of things between men who served together in combat.

Even his Purple Hearts have some dispute about them:

(USA Today)
Criticism Of Kerry’s Purple Heart Is Just

…”I was the commanding officer to whom Kerry reported his injury on December 3, 1968. I had confirmed that there was no hostile fire that night – and that Kerry had simply wounded himself with an M-79 grenade round that he’d fired too close.
He wanted a Purple Heart – and I refused**. Louis Letson, the base physician, saw Kerry – and used tweezers to remove the tiny piece of shrapnel, about 1 centimeter in length and 2 millimeters in diameter. Letson also confirmed that the scratch was inflicted with our M-79.” …

“Kerry orchestrated his way out of Vietnam – and then testified under oath before Congress that we, his comrades, had committed horrible war crimes.
This testimony was a lie – and slandered honorable men. We who were actually there believe he is unfit to command our sons and daughters. “

Grant Hibbard, retired commander U.S. Navy, Gulf Breeze, Fla.

Which wouldn't matter one bit to me except that Kerry has made such a stink about his Vietnam service. For all the sewage they've poured onto Bush for "only" flying aircraft in the states for the guard and unsubstantiated postfacto claims of "desertion", Kerry seem to have been living in a glass house all this time.

And that is what is so odd about this.  Kerry has made his Vietnam service such a center point of his campaign.  And yet, at the end of the day, what actually was that service? 4 months in Vietnam with a crew that almost universally despises him as a liar and show boat.  He takes advantage of the fact that most people think of Purple Hearts as being medals for serious wounds when, in his case, 1 of them may have been self-inflicted and the other 2 were for minor injuries.

That isn't to say that he has anything to be ashamed of. But given the war records of Bush Sr. and Bob Dole, neither of whom made anywhere near as much noise about their military career, it is rather stunning that all the valor noise coming from Kerry and his supporters is based on so little.

Comments (Page 5)
on Aug 20, 2004
No , Kingbee, you are still blaming Bush for it when you know Bush didn't have anything to do with it. Pure propaganda value. Next week, you'll do it again, and then pretend it never occured to you to mention that the Bush campaign had nothing to do with it.

Like I say, if Bush is responsible for that, then Kerry is responsible for every word at
on Aug 20, 2004

then pretend it never occured to you to mention that the Bush campaign had nothing to do with it.

please go back and find one instance of me pretending it never occured to me that the bush campaign wasnt involved in smearing mccain prior to the south carolina primary.  i distinctly and clearly recall being as disgusted with it then as i am today.  ive posted any number of full-on published quotes from witnesses, participants and investigative journalists all of which conclude the bush campaign savaged mccain during that race. 

you dont see anything unusual in the fact that mccain has called for bush to condemn the swiftboatvets ad?  when was the last time you saw a major party figure to try prevailing on his party's nominee on behalf of the opposition candidate?  

for the past three weeks, every mention of the bush campaigns has prompted a demand that kerry decry the ads. they put out exactly the type of ad that ive been bitching about and he does the right thing to what end?   it was all a plot?  

on Aug 20, 2004
Gah, it is like you are blind...

The Bush campaign had nothing to do with smearing McCain, there were no "McCain is a loon" ads. You have rumor and innuendo, and you can call it "witnesses, participants and investigative journalists", but it still adds up to *dick*. The *accusation* that the Bush campaign had anything to do with it was just that, an unproved accusation. To me, McCain publicly called Vietnamese people "gooks" and then had to make up some big smear conspiracy as damage control.

Yet you will still go around saying the Bush campaign smeared McCain, and ignore the soft-money behemoth that Kerry has smearing Bush online and off, around the clock. It servese your purposes, and it is far enough in the past that the truth of the matter is immaterial.

on Aug 20, 2004
thats even more dastardly than going to vietnam just so he could be president

You've finally admitted it! Woohoo!

What silliness, kingbee. If you can't see the "convenience" of the moveon ad, you are truly blind. You're like a drone, endlessly repeating yourself. How many times do people have to point out that is just as much a tool of the Kerry campaign by your standard?

on Aug 20, 2004
If the people who questioned McCain's sanity were part of the Bush Campaign, then Soros is soundly part of the Kerry Campaign, and Kerry should be directly responsible for MoveOn and any other 527 smear that appears.

You can't have it both ways. Kerry is opening a big can of worms. Even *IF* Swift Boat Vets are lying, their lies are nothing compared to what is being perpetrated by the "anyone but Bush" soft-money machine. If you are going to blame Bush for what third parties say about Kerry, then Kerry has some SERIOUS explaining to do...
on Aug 20, 2004

It also demonstrates once again the double standard of ethics that the far far far left has. You see it here and elsewhere.

MoveOn and F9/11 put out incredibly insulting savage things, and have been for months.  But oh no, some vets get together and do a little ad and the left freaks out crying foul. 

It's like a neighbor who dumps his trash on his lawn all day, every week, for months bitching about his neighbor who let a candy wrapper fall out of his car.

The swift boat stuff is pretty mild compared to the sewage coming from 

Kerry's actions, especially the ones that pissed off the swift boat vets, are a matter of public record.  Kerry spent 4 months in Vietnam and then went home thanks to receiving 3 purple hearts -- all 3 of them for wounds most people wouldn't consider wounds.  He then leads the anti-war vet protesters and fabricates all kinds of stories accusing the US military of wide-spread atrocities and accusing those vets in the ad of having commited atrocities.  Apparently, it's okay for Kerry to make up things about these men but not okay for them to objet to it.

The point being, at least the Swift Boat ads have some basis in fact.  Regardless of whether some left wing kooks can nit-pick some aspect of the background of one or two of them, it's pretty hard to argue that these regular guys all are some how political operatives or something.

But hey, it's okay for DNC party chairman, on ABC's This week to accuse the President of the United States of having gone AWOL. Because hey, there weree rumors  in 2000 about McCain that were mean. Mean things that (amazingly) no one can seem to show -- no ads, no flyers, etc. So mean rumors about McCain in a primary is apparently the same thing as the DNC chairman accusing the President of going AWOl on national TV.

But the left can't manage to see the imbalance there.  Let's see, DNC party chairman on network TV accusing Bush of going AWOL without any real evidence vs. alleged mean things said by someone (but no one knows who) in a primary in North Carolina.  Yea, i can see how those things are equivalent...not.

And some swift boat vets put together an ad refuting things Kerry has said. And then puts out trash attacking Bush, the same old unsubstantiated AWOL stuff and more and this is somehow..equivalent.

I don't know what the issue here is.  Are left wingers simply so unsophisticated and inexperienced with logic that they are incapable of looking at these issues with any sort of reason or are they so emotionally hateful of Bush and self-righteous that they believe that anything their side does is "good" because it's for a greater good (getting rid of Bush).

You can see the ad for yourself:

It starts with smearing Bush and then implies that the President of the United States should go and start forcing independent groups to take their ad off.  And Bush, who has condemned ALL of these kinds of soft money ads, is supposed to personally go after the swift boat ads? Please.  F-9/11 was far more nasty than the swift boat ads and if we're going to start asking public officials to censor people, why not start there?


on Aug 20, 2004
If the people who questioned McCain's sanity were part of the Bush Campaign, then Soros is soundly part of the Kerry Campaign, and Kerry should be directly responsible for MoveOn and any other 527 smear that appears.

You said yourself that McCain supports bush. McCain has also denounced the ads, and said that they are from the same people who attacked him. So what would be your problem with Bush denouncing these ads?

to what is being perpetrated by the "anyone but Bush" soft-money machine
- Would you like to explain more?
on Aug 20, 2004
Regardless of whether some left wing kooks can nit-pick some aspect of the background of one or two of them,


I'm on your side of this issue in the broadest sense, but I must concede there is more than nit-picking when it comes to the background of some of the enablers of the vets, not so much the vets themselves. Worth taking a read through the stuff on Jerome Corsi, at least. Mind you, I don't think that matters all that much, but you/we should be aware & knowledgeable about it.

on Aug 22, 2004
I agree that these swift boat vets should be scrutinized.  But compare the accuracy of the swift boat ad to F9/11 which Kerry quotes.
on Aug 22, 2004
The difference between a serious injury and a minor one can be a mere millimeter so the arguement over have "valid" an award is is rediculous. To get an award a who slew of commanders have to APPROVE the request, and if I am not mistaken, others have to put you in for a medal - not yourself - especially for something like a bronze or silver star! The true measure of a good leader is how the men UNDER you feel about your leadership and almost every single man that served under and for Kerry defend him and vowed to follow him anywhere! That says it all!
The whole issue is nothing more than a "sour grapes" right wing smear campaign designed to destroy an individual who does not agree with the right wing agenda. The same tactics worked well against Max Cleland (is loosing 3 limbs good enough for a Purple Heart yo yo?) and was used against McCain. They have no record to run on (Chaney - how many deferments coward?? and Bush - where are your records??). The record speaks for itself - record deficets (by the so called fiscally responsible Republican controlled Congress), net job losses during his four years (not accomplished since Hoover), the most polarized nation since the civil war (brought to you by the man who claimed he was a "uniter not a divider"), no domestic policy, an arrogant and ignorant foreign policy and an ill advised (get rich and get reelected quick) war in Iraq.
The simple facts are that Kerry went when others didn't - as did Bob Dole and McCain by the way - while others did not (Chaney, Bush, Clinton). He served honorably, was properly awarded his medals and was defended by those who matter most - the men who served under him. Find another target or subject for your smear attempts!
on Aug 22, 2004
Well said burtoo!
on Aug 22, 2004
I've felt all along that the specific allegations of the swift boat guys had more to do with Kerry's actions and overblown (dare I say, fabricated?) claims made after leaving Viet Nam than what he did or didn't do while there. And I'm not prepared to cast doubt on every Viet Nam medal recipient by suggesting the process for awarding them was tainted, even in Kerry's case.

I will observe, however, that from the perspective of the left (burtoo, pk65) it appears that all such activity critical of their candidate is considered part of a "right wing smear campaign," while any allegations, whether false or unsubstantiated, made by left wing groups are just good-faith efforts by conscientious Americans to get the "truth" out. Drag is still correct - they can & love to dish, but go apeshit when the tables are turned. The trash being put out by is no less reprehensible, but appears to bother their conscience nary a whit. Correct me if I'm wrong, guys - give me the references to their apologias. Even after the 9/11 Commission Report contradicted him and showed his main allegation to be unfounded, Roger Moore is still screaming anywhere he can as loudly as he can that Bush is a "liar."

I wish the RNC video was getting more attention than this, actually. That is specific, unchallengeable (it's just Kerry being Kerry, after all) and makes him look the fool he is. Too bad so much vitriol is being focused on this swift boat thing. But Kerry stuck his chin out there when he chose to glorify his military experience as a key credential at the convention.

I'll say it again, just in case - I lay no claim to any road, high or low.

on Aug 23, 2004
My responses only relate to the BS from the Swift Boat Vets, the attacks against medal recipients and the fact that very similar attacks occured against McCain and Cleland - all during the same time frame Bush and his cronies were in power or slinging mud and money to get there. The attacks against Cleland and McCain were also equally shameful. F 9/11 or Moveon.Org are not discussed much in of this particular thread and maybe if that was discussed I might agree with some of what you have to say about it (although I doubt Nevertheless,it will be a moot point in a few months however when Bush goes the same way as all the others who won without the popular vote - one term and out.
on Aug 23, 2004
The attacks against Cleland and McCain were also equally shameful.

pk65 -

You and I agree on this. Trash is trash now matter who dumps it. But there is a willingness, even eagerness, on the part of too many to see people pulling strings in the background when no such thing is happening. If McCain truly believes Bush had a direct hand in those smear efforts, it would be hard for me to understand his unwavering support for him now (though come to think of it, I suppose politicians have done stranger things... odd breed). After all, from a personal perspective, he has more in common with Kerry than Bush. I personally don't think Kerry or his camp have had any direct hand in or any of the other smear efforts against Bush, either. But there is this unfounded conviction out there that absent some behind-the-scenes Wizard of Oz crap, SBVT wouldn't exist. McCain being McCain, I think he'd publicly rebuke Bush on it if he had good reason to think the campaign was behind it. There was some unpaid advisor on a vets affairs advisory committee to Bush's campaign who participated in one of SBVT's ads without warning or telling the campaign & who resigned his position, but I expect that's about as much "conspiracy" as we're going to find. There is so much "kettle calling the pot black" that substantive stuff is getting ignored.

on Aug 23, 2004
Oh, forgot to add:

Don't misunderestimate him.

And whether Bush or Kerry wins, our problem dealing with terrorism is not going away. There is a scenario that seems to me to be a real possibility if Kerry wins - when we have another 9/11-equivalent (or attempt) after the election, he becomes an even bigger hawk than Bush. Big sensitive hawk.