Bob Dole Slams Kerry
By Andrew L. Jaffee, August 23, 2004
Home   Search   Forum   Terms

Nothing has really changed for Democratic hopeful John Kerry, except that real war veterans, like Bob Dole, are questioning the “superficial wounds” and resulting “medals” he received during four (4) months service in Vietnam. Kerry is still flailing, trying to cover up a career punctuated by extreme left-wing politics and flip-flopping by talking to voters about his military service. He squandered his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention by trying to convince Americans that his tour of duty in Vietnam will make him a great commander in chief. Bob Dole isn’t buying it:

Former Republican Sen. Bob Dole joined critics of Kerry, telling CNN's "Late Edition" Kerry should apologize for his testimony to Congress more than 30 years ago in which he quoted other veterans talking about alleged atrocities in Vietnam.

Dole also said Kerry had received only "superficial wounds" in Vietnam and had been taken out of combat as a result.

"I respect his record. But three Purple Hearts and he never bled, that I know of. I mean, they're all superficial wounds. Three Purple Hearts and you're out," said Dole who himself was badly wounded in World War II.

"Maybe he should apologize to the other 2.5 million veterans who served," said Dole. "He wasn't the only one who was in Vietnam."

An apology is indeed in order. According to Ben Shapiro,

In any case, I'm far more concerned with John Kerry's record since he got back to the United States. His record starts with stabbing in the back American soldiers who were still under fire. In 1971, he told Congress that American military members "raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, (blew) up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam ... "

Hilariously, Kerry has attempted to build his 2004 presidential campaign on the idea that he was a famous war hero. Kerry infamously intoned upon reaching the stage at the Democratic National Convention: "I'm John Kerry, and I'm reporting for duty." In his nomination acceptance speech, Kerry referred to his Vietnam service no fewer than eight times. He didn't refer to his 1971 testimony before Congress once.

In his 1971 testimony, did Kerry mean that all U.S. soldiers participated in such alleged atrocities while serving in Vietnam? There are a lot of Vietnam vets that would contradict Kerry’s hyperbole. In the early 1970’s Kerry got very cozy with extreme leftist (communist) groups like the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW):

The communist Daily World delightedly published photos of him speaking to demonstrators and boasted that the marchers displayed a banner depicting a portrait of Communist Party leader Angela Davis, on record stating, “I am dedicated to the overthrow of your system of government and your society,” the New American recalled in May 2003.

“By frequently participating in VVAW’s demonstrations, Kerry found himself marching alongside what the Boston Herald Traveler identified as ‘revolutionary Communists.’ While noting that known Reds had openly organized these events, the December 12, 1971 Herald Traveler reported the presence of an ‘abundance of Vietcong flags, clenched fists raised in the air, and placards plainly bearing legends in support of China, Cuba, the USSR, North Korea and the Hanoi government.’"

Kerry went from fighting the North Vietnamese as a soldier to supporting their communist agenda as a senator:

As chairman of the Select Senate Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, created in 1991 to investigate reports that U.S. prisoners of war and soldiers designated missing in action were still alive in Vietnam, Kerry badgered the panel into voting that no American servicemen remained in Vietnam.

“[N]o one in the United States Senate pushed harder to bury the POW/MIA issue, the last obstacle preventing normalization of relations with Hanoi, than John Forbes Kerry,” noted U.S. Veteran Dispatch.

“But Kerry's participation in the Committee became controversial in December 1992,” reported the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity, “when Hanoi announced that it had awarded Colliers International, a Boston-based real estate company, an exclusive deal to develop its commercial real estate potentially worth billions. Stuart Forbes, the CEO of Colliers, is Kerry's cousin.”

The “odd coincidence,” according to FrontPageMagazine.com, involved a deal worth $905 million.

In one bizarre incident, Kerry protested the Vietnam war by joining with a group of veterans in throwing their war medals over a fence near the U.S. Capitol. But it turned out later that he secretly kept his own medals and threw away someone elses!?!?!?! How does this show integrity? Where are his medals now? They are hanging in his office.

All these revelations about his conversion from a soldier into an anti-warrior have alienated veteran’s groups. One vet, Joe Repya, was quoted recently in USA Today,

"Nobody says he wasn't brave when he was in Vietnam," said Repya, co-chairman of Veterans for Bush in Minnesota. "But once he came home, he disavowed his oath as an officer and he gave aid and comfort to our enemy by his anti-war stance. The North Vietnamese said the anti-war movement helped prolong the war, where they could get a better position" at peace talks to end the war.

Kerry’s actions have so estranged vets that a group called Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry has been set up.

Now Kerry is criticizing President Bush for a long-overdue realignment of American troops overseas, even though, as Victor David Hansen so eloquently points out, “there is no legitimate criticism to be offered.” The senator’s stand on U.S. armed forces redeployment is about as deep as, “If Bush says one thing, I’ll take the opposite stand.” In fact, Kerry publicly supported reducing the number of American forces in Korea and Europe just two weeks before Bush made the same proposal:

"If the diplomacy that I believe can be put in place can work, I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there but elsewhere in the world -- in the Korean peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps," Kerry said on the August 1 broadcast of ABC's "This Week."

Kerry is so upset about criticism of his Vietnam War record precisely because he has nothing to offer as an American president. Will he be elected for being the “most liberal member of Senate?” I doubt it. Senator Kerry is unhappy about veterans trying to “smear” his Vietnam record -- but he didn’t get upset about Michael Moore telling lies about President Bush.

The closer we get to November, the more convinced I become that President Bush will win reelection. The more people get to know Kerry, the less I see the heartland voting for him. Kerry is indeed the “first candidate in U.S. history to run a presidential campaign against himself.”



© 2003 War to Mobilize Democracy, LLC
All Rights Reserved.
This site developed and maintained by microIT Infrastructure, LLC