On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 10:17:15 -0700, Curtis CCR wrote:


I won't vote for anyone that wants crawl back in bed with the UN.

I believe Bush already has, hat in hand:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...035366,00.html

"Jim" wrote in message news:OZxhc.2126

http://www.johnkerry.com/about/military_records.html

You know, the silly thing about all this records flap is that some of the
records are meaningless if you don't know how to interpret them.

Take the Fitness Reports, for example. In one article I read, the reporter
was absolutely atwitter over the fact that one or two of Kerry's superior
officers commented on his exemplary use of the English language, how
generally well spoken he was, and his overall bearing and demeanor. Here's
a guy who was raised in a home where English was properly spoken, and then
spent most of his life at a Swiss boarding school, St. Paul's, and Yale. In
the early sixties, he was for a while dating Jackie Kennedy's half sister,
and was a regular, with the Kennedys, at the Bouvier "cottage" in Newport.
And now you have a couple of naval officers in 1965-1966 who had spent the
fifties and half the sixties dealing with sailors, and they're fairly
impressed by a guy who can speak English properly, sounds like a Boston
Kennedy, and behaves like a gentleman. Maybe it is normal that the Navy
might be impressed, but the reporter should have known better -- the
reporter, at least, is supposed to be a professional wordsmith.

The other thing about FitReps that bears understanding is the fact that they
were not necessarily objective. In the military of the fifties and sixties,
and into the seventies, any evaluative mark less than "outstanding" was a
potential career breaker. A rating of Excellent to Outstanding could have
meant that you were Excellent to Outstanding, or it could have meant that,
while not particularly valuable, you were a nice guy to have around, and
were not a danger to anyone.

The Silver and Bronze Stars are there, and they speak for themselves. I
don't think any serious commentator belittles what Kerry did, or had to do,
to be awarded one of these.

I think it is the Purple Hearts that make people uneasy -- not the awards,
but the process. I don't think there's any question that the textbook
criteria for these were met, but I think most people have figured out that
Kerry was a very smart guy who read the rulebook, and then worked the rules
to his advantage. The circumstances make it *appear* that Kerry took one or
two band-aid Purple Hearts to puff his record for the purpose of
reassignment, while there were thousands upon thousands of guys there who
never bothered with (or had the chance for) official medical care for minor
stuff. (One Boston Globe columnist referred to the brouhaha tongue-in-cheek
as "Bacitracin-gate." I like that.) Although technically authorized, if
the suspicions are true it smacks of what the Brits used to call "bad form",
a notion, btw, with which Mr. Kerry ought to have been thoroughly familiar,
having spent his most formative years in the Prep School/Ivy league world of
the fifties and early sixties. His application for reassignment based upon
the so-called "thrice-wounded" standard was submitted just four days after
the engagement for which he was awarded the third PH. In fact, though the
copy dates are somewhat unclear, it appears that the re-assignment app may
have been submitted before the third PH was actually awarded.

The facts of his Silver and Bronze Stars speak to his valor under fire, and
these facts are incontrovertible.

The facts of his Purple Heart submittals speak to his character, and these
facts seem to be shady and unclear.

This, I think, is what bothers people.

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 16:49:21 -0400, "John Gaquin"
wrote:


"Jim" wrote in message news:OZxhc.2126

http://www.johnkerry.com/about/military_records.html

You know, the silly thing about all this records flap is that some of the
records are meaningless if you don't know how to interpret them.

Take the Fitness Reports, for example. In one article I read, the reporter
was absolutely atwitter over the fact that one or two of Kerry's superior
officers commented on his exemplary use of the English language, how
generally well spoken he was, and his overall bearing and demeanor. Here's
a guy who was raised in a home where English was properly spoken, and then
spent most of his life at a Swiss boarding school, St. Paul's, and Yale. In
the early sixties, he was for a while dating Jackie Kennedy's half sister,
and was a regular, with the Kennedys, at the Bouvier "cottage" in Newport.
And now you have a couple of naval officers in 1965-1966 who had spent the
fifties and half the sixties dealing with sailors, and they're fairly
impressed by a guy who can speak English properly, sounds like a Boston
Kennedy, and behaves like a gentleman. Maybe it is normal that the Navy
might be impressed, but the reporter should have known better -- the
reporter, at least, is supposed to be a professional wordsmith.

The other thing about FitReps that bears understanding is the fact that they
were not necessarily objective. In the military of the fifties and sixties,
and into the seventies, any evaluative mark less than "outstanding" was a
potential career breaker. A rating of Excellent to Outstanding could have
meant that you were Excellent to Outstanding, or it could have meant that,
while not particularly valuable, you were a nice guy to have around, and
were not a danger to anyone.

The Silver and Bronze Stars are there, and they speak for themselves. I
don't think any serious commentator belittles what Kerry did, or had to do,
to be awarded one of these.

I think it is the Purple Hearts that make people uneasy -- not the awards,
but the process. I don't think there's any question that the textbook
criteria for these were met, but I think most people have figured out that
Kerry was a very smart guy who read the rulebook, and then worked the rules
to his advantage. The circumstances make it *appear* that Kerry took one or
two band-aid Purple Hearts to puff his record for the purpose of
reassignment, while there were thousands upon thousands of guys there who
never bothered with (or had the chance for) official medical care for minor
stuff. (One Boston Globe columnist referred to the brouhaha tongue-in-cheek
as "Bacitracin-gate." I like that.) Although technically authorized, if
the suspicions are true it smacks of what the Brits used to call "bad form",
a notion, btw, with which Mr. Kerry ought to have been thoroughly familiar,
having spent his most formative years in the Prep School/Ivy league world of
the fifties and early sixties. His application for reassignment based upon
the so-called "thrice-wounded" standard was submitted just four days after
the engagement for which he was awarded the third PH. In fact, though the
copy dates are somewhat unclear, it appears that the re-assignment app may
have been submitted before the third PH was actually awarded.

The facts of his Silver and Bronze Stars speak to his valor under fire, and
these facts are incontrovertible.

The facts of his Purple Heart submittals speak to his character, and these
facts seem to be shady and unclear.

This, I think, is what bothers people.



Right on, John. Kerry's commanders certainly didn't put him in the "water
walker" category, as anyone who has ever had anything to do with fitness reports
understands.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

John Gaquin wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message news:OZxhc.2126


http://www.johnkerry.com/about/military_records.html


You know, the silly thing about all this records flap is that some of the
records are meaningless if you don't know how to interpret them.

Take the Fitness Reports, for example. In one article I read, the reporter
was absolutely atwitter over the fact that one or two of Kerry's superior
officers commented on his exemplary use of the English language, how
generally well spoken he was, and his overall bearing and demeanor. Here's
a guy who was raised in a home where English was properly spoken, and then
spent most of his life at a Swiss boarding school, St. Paul's, and Yale.

Bush was raised in a home where English was spoken properly, attended a
tony prep school, got into Yale as a legacy, was turned down by a
third-rate Texas law school, and then had his way paid into Harvard
business school. Yet when he speaks, he sounds like an idiot.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c6eqc6

Bush was raised in a home where English was spoken properly, attended a
tony prep school, got into Yale as a legacy, was turned down by a
third-rate Texas law school, and then had his way paid into Harvard
business school. Yet when he speaks, he sounds like an idiot.

GW is a terrible public speaker, 'tis true. But, to borrow a line from "The
American President" (a lightweight but enjoyable bit of fluff from 1995),
"Louis, we have had Presidents who were beloved who couldn't find a coherent
sentence with two hands and a flashlight." [possible slight paraphrasing]

The difference is that Kerry started in New England, and desperately wanted
to sound even more like a Kennedy -- the evolution was natural. GW started
in Texas, and didn't want to lose it. No amount of Prep School time in the
world can remove a dose of Texas that doesn't want to be removed. That's
not good or bad, that's just the way it is.

With or without the Texas, GW would still be a poor public speaker. With or
without the affected Brahmin, Kerry would still be an impressive one. It's
an innate skill that is not necessarily relevant. The esteemed Mr. Clinton
has shown us well that a glib and facile tongue doth not a great president
make.

John Gaquin wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c6eqc6

Bush was raised in a home where English was spoken properly, attended a
tony prep school, got into Yale as a legacy, was turned down by a
third-rate Texas law school, and then had his way paid into Harvard
business school. Yet when he speaks, he sounds like an idiot.


GW is a terrible public speaker, 'tis true. But, to borrow a line from "The
American President" (a lightweight but enjoyable bit of fluff from 1995),
"Louis, we have had Presidents who were beloved who couldn't find a coherent
sentence with two hands and a flashlight." [possible slight paraphrasing]

The difference is that Kerry started in New England,

Bush started in New England, too. He was born in the same hospital I
was, in New Haven, Connecticut. His father was attending Yale at the time,


GW started
in Texas, and didn't want to lose it.

Nope.


No amount of Prep School time in the
world can remove a dose of Texas that doesn't want to be removed. That's
not good or bad, that's just the way it is.

With or without the Texas, GW would still be a poor public speaker. With or
without the affected Brahmin, Kerry would still be an impressive one.

I don't think Kerry is much of a speaker. He's better than Bush, but,
then, it's hard to think of any politician who isn't. I think Kerry uses
sentences that are far too long and far too lacking in color. I far
preferred Dan'l Patrick Moynihan or Bill Clinton as speakers . Tony
Blair is a great speaker, as are most Brit prime ministers.


It's
an innate skill that is not necessarily relevant. The esteemed Mr. Clinton
has shown us well that a glib and facile tongue do



It's relevant. The "leader" of the free world should not sound the
village idiot, as Bush does.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

Bush started in New England, too. He was born in the same hospital I
was, in New Haven, Connecticut. His father was attending Yale at the time,

Don't be a simpleton, Harry -- you know better than that. Where you're born
is not always the salient point. Kerry was born in Colorado.

W lived in Texas oil country from the time he was a small boy.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

I far
preferred Dan'l Patrick Moynihan or Bill Clinton as speakers .

Moynihan was to many voters as a torpedo is to a stationary ship - too much
to handle. He'd begin a speech with an idea which required at least a 30
minute attention span. Cuomo was the same way. And Garrison Keillor......

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c6eqc6

Bush was raised in a home where English was spoken properly, attended a
tony prep school, got into Yale as a legacy, was turned down by a
third-rate Texas law school, and then had his way paid into Harvard
business school. Yet when he speaks, he sounds like an idiot.

GW is a terrible public speaker, 'tis true. But, to borrow a line from
"The
American President" (a lightweight but enjoyable bit of fluff from 1995),
"Louis, we have had Presidents who were beloved who couldn't find a
coherent
sentence with two hands and a flashlight." [possible slight paraphrasing]

The difference is that Kerry started in New England, and desperately
wanted
to sound even more like a Kennedy -- the evolution was natural. GW
started
in Texas, and didn't want to lose it. No amount of Prep School time in
the
world can remove a dose of Texas that doesn't want to be removed. That's
not good or bad, that's just the way it is.

With or without the Texas, GW would still be a poor public speaker. With
or
without the affected Brahmin, Kerry would still be an impressive one.
It's
an innate skill that is not necessarily relevant. The esteemed Mr.
Clinton
has shown us well that a glib and facile tongue doth not a great president
make.

Really, the worst part is that your boy is a chameleon, same as he paints
his opponent. He insists on mispronouncing words which are second nature to
a 7th grader in my town, so as to not alienate the dropouts who comprise the
majority of his support. Pathetic, isn't it? "Look, son. That's yer
presuhdent. Y'all can flunk outta school and be just like him". Remember
this? "Go ahead - fail all your courses, and you can pump gas for the rest
of your life".

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"Jim" wrote in message news:OZxhc.2126

http://www.johnkerry.com/about/military_records.html

You know, the silly thing about all this records flap is that some of the
records are meaningless if you don't know how to interpret them.

Take the Fitness Reports, for example. In one article I read, the
reporter
was absolutely atwitter over the fact that one or two of Kerry's superior
officers commented on his exemplary use of the English language, how
generally well spoken he was, and his overall bearing and demeanor.
Here's
a guy who was raised in a home where English was properly spoken, and then
spent most of his life at a Swiss boarding school, St. Paul's, and Yale.
In
the early sixties, he was for a while dating Jackie Kennedy's half sister,
and was a regular, with the Kennedys, at the Bouvier "cottage" in Newport.

My background was nothing like that, but I can still speak the native
language of this country more proficiently than your president. Why is that?