HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Aug 23, 2004 I've written, during August, three or four opinion pieces here at Useless-Knowledge.com and have been inundated with hate-filled e-mails apparenly by the Democrat Kool-aid drinkers from the far left. I've been called every name in the book, from "idiot," to "loser," to "bigot" although how bigotry could be discerned from any of those articles is beyond me. One supposes that anyone who doesn't spout the liberal line, to these folks, MUST be a "bigot." Those that know me and my history know for a fact that I'm probably the LEAST bigoted person these folks are likely to meet. At the very least, I don't look upon Black Americans as merely a source of votes every so often, to be forgotten entirely until the NEXT election. There are hundreds of articles about how this guy Rood from the Chicago Tribune has come forward and told essentially the same story that Kerry told about that "Silver Star" incident. Curiously, he wasn't on the Kerry boat either, but is somehow given GREAT credence for his story. Weren't these same folks saying that the Swift Boat Vets didn't know anything about Kerry because they "weren't on his boat" just a week ago? I don't get it. Why is Mr. Rood believable and these 254 other guys NOT when both were viewing John Kerry's behavior from other boats? It COULDN'T be that the news media are using yet another example of the old "double standard," now could it? For that matter, why are 6 of his "shipmates" believable and the one shipmate who's critical of Kerry isn't? Why is the Green Beret that Kerry pulled aboard his boat deemed honest and believable when he admittedly spent much of the incident in or under the water and probably never saw Kerry in any other action? This whole thing seems to stink to high heaven of the press's putting on the full court press (you should pardon the expression) to repair the damage done by the Swiftboat Vets' ads. While they simply COULDN'T get away with completely ignoring the questions raised by these vets, they CAN choose to give more credence to their detractors and aid and abet in trying to neutralize and marginalize those brave men who stood up to be counted at great risk to themselves and their reputations and names. The fact that one of them received a Bronze Star for the same action during which John Kerry got his doesn't detract from his version of the facts. Someone gave ME a medal for something that I didn't deserve, but I don't know very many military men who'd say, "No! I don't have that coming." The officer in question has said that he shared it with his family and put it away-- never to mention it again. My point in this has been that the issue in question is not whether or not President Bush did or did not "avoid the draft" by joining the ANG, though ask those NG troops in Iraq today just how safe a haven from combat NG service actually IS. The point is that Senator Kerry, if he wants to run on his Vietnam era record and ignore his less than stellar Senate record, must be willing to have the ENTIRE record of that era examined. If he can effectively deny that he didn't behave disgracefully when he returned to the U.S. and allied himself with some of the WORST left-wing elements in the country of that time, then he might come through this OK. The worst thing is that, with help from the willing accomplices in the national media, he just might. If the man gets himself elected in November, it would be an utter disaster for our country. We might be "liked" better by the French and Germans, but we'll lose all of our self-respect. ------------ About the author: A semi-retired middle-manager in the oil and gas industry, Mr. Jared is currently writing his first book, which will contain TRUTHFUL accounts of his two tours in Vietnam, which should be a refreshing change from anyone who's read "Tour of Duty." Email: Pappadave@sbcglobal.net |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
