When I began this blog in 2001, I was appalled by President Bush's headlong rush to an illegal war (we were not in fact under attack). As time wore on and Bush began his assault on the Constitution and any people bold enough to criticize, I believed that "the republic is endangered more by actions of our own government than by those of any terrorist." With the election of a high-minded, compassionate, intelligent man like Barack Obama, my fears have ceased.
"Honor them with peace, not war"
United for Peace
Wednesday, September 01, 2004
First I want to say how angy I am that Bush - first father and now son -- making Vietnam an issue. Our generation was deeply divided over it, and we finally had a truce going; we didn't each agree with what the other did in the 60s, but we had begun talking to each other again.
Bush, the AWOL warmonger, presents a natural contrast to Kerry who went to Vietnam rather than seeking to avoid service in the National Guard (now with the military draft gone, sons of the rich no longer need sign up with the guard to avoid active duty, and indeed it has been arranged that only the poor are likely to sign up; hence their overuse in Iraq).
I would have preferred that Kerry omit the convention references to his service -- I think he overplayed that, though I can understand it, since lack of Vietnam service is Bush's weakest point among certain constituents. I was first attracted to Kerry's candidacy because he was a founder of Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
So here comes Bush, probably brainstorming over his own weaknesses as a candidate and accuses Kerry of exactly those same flaws. This is a ploy designed to confuse, not enlighten, the public.
One of the worst things about Bush is that he not only does not keep his campaign promises, but he had no intention of keeping them; they were trotted out to appeal to voters who would not otherwise support him. For instance, he has expressed concern over the envirornment, but as president has undermined it in several important and detructive ways.
Bush Senior outraged his constituency by approving a new tax after promising none; but he was bowing to reality there, not starting a new policy. See the difference? Junior's promises and the actions are so opposing, and the actions so intentional it is hard not to call him a liar.
And there Junior is, accusing Kerry of flipflopping on issues.
Likewise, the Vietnam service. Bush has a deplorable, dishonest record. Personally I wouldn't have cared about his service record, except that he is such a warmonger and hypocrite. His lies directly affect public policy. So, on Vietnam service, Bush II has no record of his own to hold up, so he seeks to undermine Kerry's.
Not he himself, you understand who seeks to undermine-- that would benegativecampaigning. No; he uses surrogates (Swift Boat Veterans for 'Truth')and denies any connection between them and himself.
But now comes Misleader.org outing him on that score as well. I offer the full article, footnotes and all, put out by Misleader.org"
Sources:
1. "Press Gaggle by Scott McClellan," WhiteHouse.gov, 8/20/04.
2. "A Swift Shift in Stories," Washington Post, 8/31/04.
3. "FastShip, Inc. to Receive $40 million in Federal Support for Marine Cargo Terminal in Philadelphia," FastShipAtlantic.com, 2/02/04.
4. "A Swift Shift in Stories," Washington Post, 8/31/04.
5. OpenSecrets.org, 8/04.
6. Charleston Post & Courier, 2/17/2000.
7. "Bush-Cheney Lawyer Advised Anti-Kerry Vets," Washington Post, 8/25/04.
8. "Bush Campaign Drops Swift Boat Ad Figure," Washington Post, 8/22/04.
Visit www.Misleader.org for more about Bush Administration distortion.
And do NOT vote for George Bush. Even if you agree with his goals and plans,eventually he will throw you to the wolves.
Copyright © 2001-03 Pam Shorey
(except the specific sources credited in quotes)
That swift boat thing
First I want to say how angy I am that Bush - first father and now son -- making Vietnam an issue. Our generation was deeply divided over it, and we finally had a truce going; we didn't each agree with what the other did in the 60s, but we had begun talking to each other again.
Bush, the AWOL warmonger, presents a natural contrast to Kerry who went to Vietnam rather than seeking to avoid service in the National Guard (now with the military draft gone, sons of the rich no longer need sign up with the guard to avoid active duty, and indeed it has been arranged that only the poor are likely to sign up; hence their overuse in Iraq).
I would have preferred that Kerry omit the convention references to his service -- I think he overplayed that, though I can understand it, since lack of Vietnam service is Bush's weakest point among certain constituents. I was first attracted to Kerry's candidacy because he was a founder of Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
Bush accuses opponent of his own weaknesses to confuse voters
So here comes Bush, probably brainstorming over his own weaknesses as a candidate and accuses Kerry of exactly those same flaws. This is a ploy designed to confuse, not enlighten, the public.
One of the worst things about Bush is that he not only does not keep his campaign promises, but he had no intention of keeping them; they were trotted out to appeal to voters who would not otherwise support him. For instance, he has expressed concern over the envirornment, but as president has undermined it in several important and detructive ways.
Bush Senior outraged his constituency by approving a new tax after promising none; but he was bowing to reality there, not starting a new policy. See the difference? Junior's promises and the actions are so opposing, and the actions so intentional it is hard not to call him a liar.
And there Junior is, accusing Kerry of flipflopping on issues.
Likewise, the Vietnam service. Bush has a deplorable, dishonest record. Personally I wouldn't have cared about his service record, except that he is such a warmonger and hypocrite. His lies directly affect public policy. So, on Vietnam service, Bush II has no record of his own to hold up, so he seeks to undermine Kerry's.
Not he himself, you understand who seeks to undermine-- that would benegativecampaigning. No; he uses surrogates (Swift Boat Veterans for 'Truth')and denies any connection between them and himself.
But now comes Misleader.org outing him on that score as well. I offer the full article, footnotes and all, put out by Misleader.org"
The Bush White House has denied any connection to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth[1] - the group that has been airing factually unsupportable smear ads against Sen. John Kerry's war record. But a new report today shows that one of the key accusers in the smear ads was a lobbyist for a company that recently received a massive federal contract from the Bush administration.
As the Washington Post reports, Rear Admiral William L. Schachte Jr., the man who claims Kerry was not under fire when he received his first Purple Heart, is a top lobbyist for a defense contractor that recently won a $40 million grant from the Bush administration. According to a March 18 legal filing by Schachte's firm, Blank Rome, Schachte was one of the lobbyists working for FastShip's effort to secure federal contracts.[2] On Feb. 2, FastShip announced the Bush administration had awarded it $40 million.[3]
Schachte has other connections to the Bush administration. The Washington Post notes David Norcross, Schachte's colleague in the Washington office of Blank Rome, is chairman of this week's Republican convention in New York.[4] Records show that Schachte gave $1,000 to Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaigns.[5] Additionally, Schachte helped organize veterans' efforts against Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and for Bush in the 2000 South Carolina primary.[6]
This is not the first member of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth who has been revealed to be connected to the President. The Bush-Cheney campaign's top outside lawyer was forced to resign after he admitted providing legal services to the veterans group.[7] The Bush-Cheney campaign's veterans adviser was also featured in one of the smear ads.[8]
Sources:
1. "Press Gaggle by Scott McClellan," WhiteHouse.gov, 8/20/04.
2. "A Swift Shift in Stories," Washington Post, 8/31/04.
3. "FastShip, Inc. to Receive $40 million in Federal Support for Marine Cargo Terminal in Philadelphia," FastShipAtlantic.com, 2/02/04.
4. "A Swift Shift in Stories," Washington Post, 8/31/04.
5. OpenSecrets.org, 8/04.
6. Charleston Post & Courier, 2/17/2000.
7. "Bush-Cheney Lawyer Advised Anti-Kerry Vets," Washington Post, 8/25/04.
8. "Bush Campaign Drops Swift Boat Ad Figure," Washington Post, 8/22/04.
Visit www.Misleader.org for more about Bush Administration distortion.
And do NOT vote for George Bush. Even if you agree with his goals and plans,eventually he will throw you to the wolves.
Palema
6:20 AM
Comments:
Post a Comment
Copyright © 2001-03 Pam Shorey
(except the specific sources credited in quotes)
|
|