Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy?
Quote | Reply
This one says he was Kerry's CO when he suffered his first Purple Heart hangnail...

An officer who served with John Kerry finally broke his silence Thursday about the Swift vets controversy — and said Kerry accidentally wounded himself before requesting his first Purple Heart.

In a detailed new account that is certain to fuel the growing controversy, eyewitness William Schachte Jr., a retired rear admiral, told columnist Robert Novak for Friday's papers that he was "astonished" to hear Kerry's version of the events of Dec. 2, 1968, when Schachte was in command of Kerry aboard a skimmer boat on the Mekong River.

Schachte said that Kerry:
— Wasn't wounded by hostile fire.
— Wasn't even under fire by the enemy.
— "Nicked" himself with a grenade launcher and "requested a Purple Heart" afterward.

If Schachte's version is accurate, Kerry would not have been eligible for the award, the first of the three Purple Hearts he received.

To win a Purple Heart, military personnel must have a wound that requires medical treatment, and it must have been received during the course of an engagement with the enemy, even if the wound was not a result of hostile fire.

What happened that day on the Mekong River became an issue after some of Kerry's fellow Vietnam War officers charged in a book, "Unfit for Command," and in TV ads that he didn't deserve his medals.

Two former enlisted men who are supporting Kerry have said they were with him in the boat that day — and that Schachte was not.

But Schachte, then a lieutenant junior grade like Kerry, told Novak he was in command of the boat that day, which was Kerry's first combat mission in Vietnam. They were aboard a small boat called a skimmer, or Boston Whaler, he said.

Schachte, now living in Charleston, S.C., said the boat fired a flare to flush enemy forces from the shoreline. Kerry's M-16 rifle jammed, so he picked up the M-79 grenade launcher, Schachte said.

"I heard a 'thunk.' There was no fire from the enemy," Schachte recalled.

Schachte's former superior Grant Hibbard said he told Kerry to "forget it" when Kerry came to him the day after the incident and asked for a Purple Heart.

Schachte is not a member of the anti-Kerry Swift boat vets, hasn't been contacted by the Bush campaign, and told Novak that he has backed candidates from both parties in past elections.

The retired rear admiral said he hadn't spoken out earlier because "I didn't want to get involved," but changed his mind after his own role in the incident was disputed on TV.

In a related development, Robert Lambert, a fellow crewman in a separate incident for which Kerry was awarded a Bronze Star, disputed their former commander and said the boat did come under fire.

He added that Lt. Larry Thurlow, the boat's commander who has challenged Kerry's account, was too distracted to notice the gunfire because he was busy rescuing other sailors.

All five Swift boats in the task force "came under small-arms and automatic-weapon fire from the river banks," Lambert said.

[None of which fire apparently struck the vessel, since it is not noted in the damage report.]


Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Cousin Elwood] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Let it go already, everyone claims to want to debate issues but instead you feel the need to unleash another worthless pile of horse flop about John Kerry and Vietnam. If you want to actually appear as the worldly and wise debater you apparently believe yourself to be, talk about something of substance rather then starting the same thread over and over again.
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Goose] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thank you!!!!!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://pavlov.psyc.queensu.ca/~psyc382/rockgold.html
(Norman Rockwell's "Do Unto Others")
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Goose] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Let it go already"

Sorry if your sensibilities are offended. I'm just enjoying watching slowguy defend the indefensible at the expense of his own credibility.

The point has been well made that Kerry exaggerated his service record, but that point has yet to be conceded by his partisans. There is a great point to be made once that much can be agreed upon. Until then, debate is pretty pointless:

Did too. Did not. Did TOO. Did NOT...


Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Cousin Elwood] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As said before, if you learned to read and comprehend anyone's posts besides your own, I am not a supporter of Sen Kerry. I am against idiots who make no argument, but continue to post the same points over and over again as if repeating them made them true.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yeah, I know what you mean. Kinda like the guy who won't admit the obvious...

3 PHs in 90 days. Sheeeit Elwood, happens all the time...


Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Cousin Elwood] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Again, since you don't seem to be able to comprehend, I didn't say it happens all the time. I said I don't have any evidence that it is so rare as to be a big deal. Unfortunately for you, you don't either. The keen Elwood instinct isn't enough.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Cousin Elwood] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Just a note to anyone who wants to know the exact content of this thread before Elwood has a chance to start "debating", please refer to the following threads:

"ONeill Dares Kerry: Sue Me"

"The OTHER Book JFKerry Doesn't Want You To Read"

"Why Do Vietnam Vets Hate Kerry?"

....All 3 are Identical and completely fail to bring up anything but the same points over and over again, and all were started by...Cousin Elwood. Elwood, I enjoy talking politics but please move past this and find something more substantial to rag on Kerry about, there is plenty of other completely baseless Republican propaganda floating around on Fox News each day, for example, Kerry looking French, Kerry and his most Liberal voting record in the senate, or perhaps Kerry and his plans to turn us into the Soviet States of America. George W. Bush snorted coke and drove drunk while Kerry was in Vietnam but I don't bring that up 4 times a day.
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Goose] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"All 3 are Identical and completely fail to bring up anything but the same points over and over again"
- - Seeking consensus... not getting it.

"Elwood, I enjoy talking politics but please move past this and find something more substantial to rag on Kerry about, there is plenty of other completely baseless Republican propaganda floating around on Fox News each day, for example, Kerry looking French, Kerry and his most Liberal voting record in the senate, or perhaps Kerry and his plans to turn us into the Soviet States of America. George W. Bush snorted coke and drove drunk while Kerry was in Vietnam but I don't bring that up 4 times a day."
- - Well, let's start with the easy ones. NO ONE with any credibility or reason to be expected to have the first clue, has suggested that Bush used cocaine. Just one ex-con, who didn't know GW Bush from Adam. That one's got no legs... although that rarely matters unless the target of the smear is John Kerry.
Next, Kerry has been rated as the most liberal Senator of the bunch. That's not open to debate, although I'm sure there are some here who would try.
Finally, Kerry's plan is to make the US a fiefdom of the UN, not the former Soviet Union.

What I find amusing, is that folks will tar and feather John O'Neill, a decorated war veteran with NO black marks on his record, and put total faith in John Kerry's bullshit story that wouldn't hold water if you dropped in the lake.

Goose, if you enjoy talking politics, put something in play. Meanwhile, I'm continuing to taunt slowguy until he admits that 3 PHs (legitimate ones, that is) in 90 days is just a giant freaking joke, as is the man who claims to have earned them... and is in the process of backing down on that.

Doesn't it strike you as odd that a man who spent so much time and energy denigrating Viet Nam and anyone connected to it, and besmirching the good names of other vets, now wants the job as CIC, and wants us to examine his military record, but only one tiny part it, while ignoring all the rest? Does that not bother you in the slightest?


Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"I said I don't have any evidence that it is so rare as to be a big deal. Unfortunately for you, you don't either. The keen Elwood instinct isn't enough."

That's where you're wrong, my bellicose friend. If you came to me and said "I just high jumped 14 feet," or "I just did a full Ironman in 6:22, I wouldn't need a witness to call you on your "error."

What's silly here is that you already know Kerry didn't legitimately earn three Purple Hearts, so why not do yourself a favor and man up. I did it yesterday, and Vitus is going to rub my nose in it, but it's OK. Show us that you're human after all...


Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Cousin Elwood] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I actually find it rather comforting to see a man that has experienced Vietnam and wasn't so stubborn as to claim that simply because he participated in it that it was a justifiable sacrifice for tens of thousands of American and Vietnamese lives. You can call Kerry a flip flopper about war but I prefer someone that can see their own mistakes to someone who views worldwide diplomacy with blinders on.
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Cousin Elwood] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Cousin Elwood, I think you kick ass!! I'm impressed at the resources and knowledge you have. Your posts are great. Do you have anything about how Max Cleland dropped that grenade on himself in vietnam? Perhaps you could start a new thread on that.


**All of these words finding themselves together were greatly astonished and delighted for assuredly, they had never met before**
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Cousin Elwood] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"What's silly here is that you already know Kerry didn't legitimately earn three Purple Hearts, so why not do yourself a favor and man up."

Elwood, read the words on the page. I DO NOT know if he earned 3 PHs in 90 days or if he played the system. You DO NOT know if he eanred 3 PHs in 90 days or if he played the system. If someone can show me any DoD statistics regarding how many guys earned 3 PHs or how long it took them, or how many guys earned 3 in 90 days, I will be glad to accept the numbers in the study. However, I was not old enough to serve in Vietnam, and you obviously did not serve in Vietnam, so neither of us has any way to judge this correctly. The difference here is that you won't admit that. You believe that if it comes from your brain and into the forum, it must therefore be fact. Anyone who doesn't know for sure that Sen Kerry didn't earn his PHs is wrong. Any scientist who has studied and supports the concept of global warming is not a "real scientist". Not because they are not real scientists, but because they contradict what the great and mighty Elwood has decreed. I disagree with Art Franke all the time, but in those discussions, we are both able to admit which things we have direct knowledge of, and which ones are simply opinions and beliefs. You could learn a lot from him about how to debate and discuss instead of how to repeat and repeat and repeat. Your arguments would have more value if they were arguments instead of statements of fact and you would have more credebility if you were able to see more than one side of any issue. As it is, you pay lip service to being anti-Bush yet you spend all your time bashing Sen Kerry. You have no credebility.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Elwood, read the words on the page. I DO NOT know if he earned 3 PHs in 90 days or if he played the system. You DO NOT know if he eanred 3 PHs in 90 days or if he played the system."
- - Yes I do know that he played the system. And if you had to bet on it, you damned well know you'd give long odds in favor of me being right. Any chance of you admitting to that? It's like Bill Clinton's "meaning of is," NO, Mr. Lying-Son-of-a-Bitch Clinton, you had sex, you lied under oath, and I'm not stupid enough to engage in semantic masturbation about what "is" means or whether that has any bearing on whether or not you sexually assaulted or harrassed Paula Jones.

"If someone can show me any DoD statistics regarding how many guys earned 3 PHs or how long it took them, or how many guys earned 3 in 90 days, I will be glad to accept the numbers in the study."
- - I'm willing to bet that the number of guys who got 3 in 90 days, is ONE, John Kerry. There might be a couple of other shrewd con-artists who came close to duplicating the feat, but I'll bet none did it faster. And the number of legitimate 1PH/month guys - - ZERO.

"However, I was not old enough to serve in Vietnam, and you obviously did not serve in Vietnam, so neither of us has any way to judge this correctly."
- - You are wrong about that last point. Since I was old enough, I had many friends and acquaintances who went. Those who came back with Purple Hearts also came back with permanent scars, permanent damage and some with lost or no-longer-functional body parts. So the idea that a guy can get that award for something that didn't even require a Band-Aid® is just fucking OBSCENE. Am I reaching you with any of this?

"The difference here is that you won't admit that. You believe that if it comes from your brain and into the forum, it must therefore be fact."
- - Slowguy, some things are just that simple. Have you ever met anyone who earned a Purple Heart for such a minor injury? Do you know anyone with TWO Purple Hearts? Through my work at the VA, I've met several, and they're in WHEEL CHAIRS.

"Anyone who doesn't know for sure that Sen Kerry didn't earn his PHs is wrong."
- - Like I said, the odds of them being legit are pretty much incalculable. I think most folks can see that. In fact, I think you can see that, but it would kill you to admit that it is infinitely more likely that I'm right on this that that I'm wrong.

"Any scientist who has studied and supports the concept of global warming is not a 'real scientist'."
- - Basically that's correct. The problem comes when folks claim to be scientists because they're members of the Union of Concerned Scientists, membership in which is almost as hard to acquire as a Ministers License from the Universal Life Church ($5 and an SASE, last time I looked). You see, science is very, how can I say this... scientific. I believe you guffawed over the idea that CO2 could cause global warming just a few days ago, then came back and said "oops, I see where CO2 IS listed as a cause of global warming," a short time later (or maybe I'm confusing you with Slowman again). But you were right the first time, CO2 is not dangerous.

FACT is (yes FACT) CO2 CANNOT cause long term or permanent increases in global temperatures, because of the cyclic nature of CO2 in plant metabolism. Excessive CO2 causes excessive plant growth, which used up the CO2 and helps return temperatures to normal. I find it mind-boggling how many people can't follow this simple argument, yet it happens. The Sierra Club measures the polar ice cap at some specific point, and announces that it is 22.763% thinner than it was 100 years ago, ergo the sky is falling, the globe is warming and the waters will soon rise to inundate major cities. Meanwhile, the ice cap in other places is getting thicker, but the Sierra Club doesn't tell you about that. For example, a squadron of planes when down on Greenland in 1942. A few years back, a salvage mission pulled one of the planes out, after digging down through THREE HUNDRED FEET of ice.

"Not because they are not real scientists, but because they contradict what the great and mighty Elwood has decreed. I disagree with Art Franke all the time, but in those discussions, we are both able to admit which things we have direct knowledge of, and which ones are simply opinions and beliefs."
- - OK, I tried to tell you that I've been around the block on the whole environmental issue for many, many years, and your retort was that you knew guys with better credentials. The fact is, that you may know guys whose credentials are better than mine, but I bet you don't know anyone with credentials better than the guys I hired as consultants and the guys I've discussed global warming with at length. It would just KILL you to admit that I might not be a complete moron. Why is that?

On this subject, slowguy, I'm way ahead of you, because I was around in the late '60s when the first global environmental summit met to discuss the dangers of global cooling. These same nitwits have just kept niggling at the statistics until they found something they could use to get a federal research grant. Meanwhile, a good friend of mine (PhD in Climatology) is involved in a long-term study of temperature and climate patterns designed to repair all the errors and inadequacies of the IPCC report, and although the study won't be finished and findings won't be published for quite some time, so far it looks REAL BAD for the global warming theory.

"you would have more credebility if you were able to see more than one side of any issue."
- - I can see other sides, but that doesn't make those sides worthy of respect or consideration. Global warming is FAR from being a proven phenomenon, and even if it is proven, human activity as the cause is preposterous.

"As it is, you pay lip service to being anti-Bush yet you spend all your time bashing Sen Kerry. You have no credebility."
- - Let me clear that up for you. On a scale of one to ten, I give W a TWO. Kerry's rating is MINUS 9,876. While I think it's sad that the Republicans had no one better to offer in the decades since Reagan than Bush, Dole and Bush, I'd take any of the three over Clinton, Gore or Kerry. Meanwhile, I will continue to vote third party as a protest. I was actually naďve enough to believe that four years of Bill Clinton would serve as a wake up call to Americans so that we could move back to electing honorable men (or women) to our highest elected offices. And yet Al Gore managed to get half the popular vote. So if Kerry gets elected, I'll just hope he screws up worse than Clinton, and maybe the morons will think twice about who they vote for in '08, all the time knowing that "No one ever went broke underestimating the American public" (Mencken). So while I don't support Bush, I do consider him to be the lesse of the two evils.


Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Cousin Elwood] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
why not do yourself a favor and man up. I did it yesterday, and Vitus is going to rub my nose in it, but it's OK.

Only for a few days, Elwood. I can't resist. I'm weak.

I'm surprised everyone isn't doing it, actually. And considering your dust up with Slowman the other day, I was half expecting to see the quote at the top of the page, replacing the "Oberbiker" banner.

;)








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [Cousin Elwood] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't really think I have to say anything more about this. In your last post you actually say that you "know" for sure about something which you have no direct knowledge or evidence of any kind. I could just as easily say that I "know" there is life on Jupiter and expect everyone here to accept that. When you are shown to be wrong, you change the subject or attempt to obfuscate. You deny things that you said, and that are pretty easy to verify considering the forum we're on, and you refuse to have debate on anything substantive, instead stating as fact that you know best and there is only one side to whatever the issue is. A guy like you can not be argued or reasoned with, and so, I'm done arguing with you. Your opinion is not fact, and it holds no value for me.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
and the answer to the question is........... [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
It would just KILL you to admit that I might not be a complete moron. Why is that?


Because it would be like acknowledging that global warming exists. i.e. it would not be true.

Just for laughs though, I thought that this was priceless:

Quote:


I was actually naďve enough to believe that four years of Bill Clinton would serve as a wake up call to Americans so that we could move back to electing honorable men (or women) to our highest elected offices.


You thought Reagan was honorable?

Uhm, lets see:

Late in 1986 the administration admitted that it had been secretly selling arms to Iran, with some of the profits possibly going to the guerrillas in Nicaragua.

[The official 1987 report] depicted Reagan as confused and uninformed, and concluded that his relaxed “personal management style” had prevented him from controlling his subordinates. Congressional committees heard testimony that Reagan did not know of the diversion of funds. Most committee members signed a majority report in Nov. 1987 asserting that although Reagan’s role in the affair could not be determined precisely, he had clearly failed to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Poindexter, North, and others were indicted in the affair.

Honour = selling arms to fundamentalist Islamic states.

Dishonour = getting head in the oval office.

Discuss.
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"You thought Reagan was honorable?"
- - I did. However, I was more reffering to Ike and Kennedy.

"Late in 1986 the administration admitted that it had been secretly selling arms to Iran, with some of the profits possibly going to the guerrillas in Nicaragua."
- - I've never objected to the idea that some things our government does are done in secrecy. Whether I disagree or agree that assisting the Contras was a good idea, I think it was a decision I elected Reagan to make without me.

"[The official 1987 report] depicted Reagan as confused and uninformed, and concluded that his relaxed “personal management style” had prevented him from controlling his subordinates. Congressional committees heard testimony that Reagan did not know of the diversion of funds."
- - I don't know if that's true, but whether he knew or just delegated the responsibility to make something happen, I'm still OK with what happened.

"Most committee members signed a majority report in Nov. 1987 asserting that although Reagan’s role in the affair could not be determined precisely, he had clearly failed to 'take care that the laws be faithfully executed.' Poindexter, North, and others were indicted in the affair.
- - I believe that nearly every president has such skeletons in his closet. I don't think you can run the most powerful nation on earth with all your cards face up on the table, as John Kerry would propose to do.

I don't expect to get much agreement on this, but I do take a certain amount of delight when folks say what a stumbling moron Reagan was, and yet he got the best of all of them!


Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"In your last post you actually say that you 'know' for sure about something which you have no direct knowledge or evidence of any kind."
- - I have enough knowledge and experience to know bullshit when I see it. Kerry's three PHs in 90 days is BS. Tell you what, let's see if we can find the stats on how many guys got three and out in 90 days, and I'll be $100 there aren't any others who aren't disabled. Deal?

"I could just as easily say that I "know" there is life on Jupiter and expect everyone here to accept that."
- - Not even remotely similar. You're getting desperate... and shrill!

"When you are shown to be wrong, you change the subject or attempt to obfuscate."
- - You mean like equating life on Jupiter to Kerry's three bullshit Purple Hearts?

"you refuse to have debate on anything substantive, instead stating as fact that you know best and there is only one side to whatever the issue is."
- - When did I refuse to debate something substantive?

"Your opinion is not fact, and it holds no value for me."
- - That's OK, you left your credibility in ashes when you refused to admit that the overwhelmingly most likely scenario is that Kerry lied. You could hedge that and say you can't be sure, but come on already, admit that if you had to stake your life on it one way or the other, you'd come down on my side on this one. Why is that so hard?


Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
Quote Reply
Re: How's Kerry gonna smear THIS guy? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"I'm surprised everyone isn't doing it, actually. And considering your dust up with Slowman the other day, I was half expecting to see the quote at the top of the page, replacing the "Oberbiker" banner"

And I'm surprised you didn't find my second admission and add it to your trailer...

Let me know if you catch slowguy admitting an error...


Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...
Quote Reply