[eDebate] Trond, better check your own facts

[scottelliott at grandecom.net]

Actually Trond, I find the whole set of issues about what two twenty year olds
did or did not do in Vietnam to be quite laughable. Given the War on Terrorism,
healthcare issues, the economy, jobs, natural disasters, etc., I find this
entire "debate" over "who has a better attendence record and who got how many
purple hearts" to be a comic tragedy and a HUGE politcal red herring. Frankly,
most people (me included) do not give a rats ass about what Bush did when he
was in his twenties. I don't care if he smoked pot or snorted coke at a frat
party. Frankly, I don't care if Kerry killed women and children in Vietnam.
What I care about is whether Bush or Kerry will (1) kick enough terrorist ass
to minimize threats against moms and dads at walmart and (2) keep the economy
humming along at a modest growth rate. All of this crap about war records and
dodging the draft, by BOTH parties, is really a big waste of time.

But to answer your "charges," I stand by the National Review article. Because,
Trond, you are the one missing the point--which is--even if your "devastating
charges" are true, it means that Bush skipped out on the last couple months of
pulling Guard Duty in Alabama at the end of Vietnam. It ain't like he went and
stabbed his wartime comrades-in-arms in the back--oh wait that was Kerry during
the now infamous Senate investigations lie-fest--but that's another issue.

You and the rabid democrats make the charges of "disertion" sound like Bush cut
and ran during some pitched battle at Porkchop Hill. He got a cush National
Guard job flying jets, got transferred to Alabama where the jets weren't really
being flown, got ready to go to Harvard Business School and slacked off for the
last few months of an otherwise excellent six year stint. Thus, even if these
"damning" charges are true. I and the rest of America say, so what? How does
this in any way impact my life, the economy, and the War on Terrorism?

You crazy democrats just don't get the point. In politics there is a concept
called "staying on message." The Whole Vietnam issue has been a brilliant
example of taking the opponent off his message. This news cycle--the next
week's news cycle is going to focus on potential forgeries and Vietnam. Kerry
has not answered a single press question in over a MONTH. This means that Kerry
will lose another week (and there are only 7.5 of them left) to make a case for
voting a democrat into office. What is Kerry's plan for healthcare? What is
kerry's plan for solving Mid-East Peace? How would Kerry be more effective at
stopping Terrorism? I have absolutely no idea because all I see is Kerry et al
bitchin' about his Vietnam war record and whether Bush is a diserter. What a
hoot. Meanwhile, Bush, everyday, gets to stay on message because Fox news, etc.
broadcast that (1) the Economy is growing (2) the is a War going on (3) Bin
Laden is a threat and we need a cowboy to kick his ass and (4) Wall street
fears Kerry and his tax hikes. You must be pretty bitter at this point--how can
people so obviously (to you) stupid and evil constantly beat the crap out of
people that are so obviously brilliant and caring?





By the way, I have seen on PDF, "official" documents stating that the U.S. has
regular diplomatic visits from space aliens; that the Earth is really flat;
that we never went to the moon; that JFK is really alive and on life support on
a Greek Island.  So, just because you read a letter on pdf on the internet does
not make it real. Why, just yesterday  i saw a pdf document demonstrating that
John Kerry personally supported the cloning of Hitler. LOL.