"Been dazed and confused"

I wrote the majority of this little rant last week, but I did not get it posted until this week. I would apologize, but I figure everyone has gotten used to hearing about John Kerry's extremely lengthy war record from 30 years ago.

Last week I watched most of the Democratic National Convention in Boston. Like all the other conventions (Democratic or Republican) the music sucked, there were scary looking people left and right, and protesters were outside protesting just to protest. Too make matters worse, "those f#$%ing baloons" wouldn't drop. Like John Kerry himself, the overall message and image of the DNC flip-flopped. Senator Obama from Illinois told me that there is one America whereas vice presidential candidate Edwards told me that there are two Americas, rich and poor. On one had the Democrats tried to convey themselves as a party for all people by having various races speak. On the other hand, one of those speakers was "Reverend" Al Sharpton, a man who once publicly referred to Jews as "hymies" and New York City as "Hymietown." But, I must admit John Kerry's speech was simply amazing. He was so well-spoken, that if I had not been paying attention to the rest of the convention, what other Vietnam vets had to say about him, the opinion of active servicemen about him, , his desire to raise taxes, his war record, and his Senate record than I may have actually developed some respect for him. Moreover, he left me confused about his life. I believe that my father put it best when he said that "the way Kerry and his friends spoke about his life you would think he spent 20 years in Vietnam and 4 months in the Senate." Kerry did not mention anything about his time in the Senate which is very interesting seeing as he spent 4 months in Vietnam and almost 20 years in the Senate.

With so much time spent in the Senate, one would think he would highlight his leadership skills. After all, 20 years would be more than enough time to have sponsored a number of important bills that might deal with issues such as taxes, social security, or education. Yet, Kerry has only sponsored two bills, both of which were concerned with fishing in Massachusetts. A president is supposed to be a leader, not someone who is just along for a free meal.

Now I'm sure there are many that will probably argue that he showed courage and leadership in Vietnam. I really do not wish to argue this point, seeing as it will not lead to my point. The point I am trying to get at is that John Kerry lacks two key presidential qualities: loyalty and honesty.

Don't listen to me though, there are plenty of things that his fellow Vietnam vets have to say:

"While in Cam Rahn Bay, he (Kerry) trained on several 24-hour indoctrination missions, and one special skimmer operation with my most senior and trusted lieutenant. The briefing from some members of that crew the morning after revealed that they had not received any enemy fire, and yet Lt.(jg) Kerry informed me of a wound; he showed me a scratch on his arm and a piece of shrapnel in his hand that appeared to be from one of our own M-79s. It was later reported to me that Lt.(jg) Kerry had fired an M-79, and it had exploded off the adjacent shoreline. I do not recall being advised of any medical treatment, and probably said something like 'Forget it.' He later received a Purple Heart for that scratch, and I have no information as to how or whom. Lt.(jg) Kerry was allowed to return to the good old USA after 4 months and a few days in-country, and then he proceeded to betray his former shipmates, calling them criminals who were committing atrocities. Today we are here to tell you that just the opposite is true. Our rules of engagement were quite strict, and the officers and men of Swift often did not even return fire when they were under fire if there was a possibility that innocent people, fishermen in a lot of cases, might be hurt or injured. The rules and the good intentions of the men increased the possibility that we might take friendly casualties." — Commander Grant Hibbard, USN (retired)

"During Lt.(jg) Kerry's tour, he was under my command for two or three specific operations, before his rapid exit. Trust, loyalty and judgment are the key, operative words. His turncoat performance in 1971 in his grubby shirt and his medal-tossing escapade, coupled with his slanderous lines in the recent book portraying us that served, including all POWs and MIAs, as murderous war criminals, I believe, will have a lasting effect on all military veterans and their families. Kerry would be described as devious, self-absorbing, manipulative, disdain for authority, disruptive, but the most common phrase that you'd hear is 'requires constant supervision.'" — Captain Charles Plumly, USN (retired)

(excerpts from "Swift Boat Veterans speak out")

There is much more to say and I think I will separate the rest into smaller essays. I will leave you with something to ponder. John Kerry has 4 months of experience as a foot soldier in a war faught more than 30 years ago. George Bush has three and a half years of experience as commander in chief. Who do you think is best suited for the job?