OK I have had it.  What is the real story about Senator Kerry's
VietNam record?  How long was he actually over there?  How do you find
out the truth, vs. the rumors on his actual length of service in Viet
Nam, the real opinions of other Swift Boat captains, and whether he
self-inflicted his first and third wounds, resulting in purple hearts.
 Is it true that in his whole Senate career that he never originated
any major bills of any importance or is this also rumor?  Has his
record in the Senate indicated that he "has the stuff" to make tough
decisions to put America first even if we have to go it alone?
The question will be considered answered by any of you who grab this
and tell me how I can best find out what is closest to the truth
(among the rumors) on any of these things.
Any of you who read this, please comment and "tell me what you know."

---

Request for Question Clarification by kriswrite-ga on 29 Jul 2004 18:40 PDT

Schmooz~

What would you consider a reliable source? This becomes the main
problem when trying to detect the truth. In the meantime, you might
check out this old Google Answer:
http://www.answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=308223

Kriswrite

---

Clarification of Question by schmooz-ga on 02 Aug 2004 18:31 PDT

Hi Purkinje - take the question and close it with what you have.  I
have decided that I really don't care about the answer and it was even
a rather foolish question brought on by listening in to too many
meaningless discussions of things that can never be answered.  We are
facing such perils and I have decided to end where I should have
begun. . . . in prayer for whoever is put in this office, in prayer
for our country and our world.  Thanks for your patience.  Please take
and close the question.

---

Clarification of Question by schmooz-ga on 02 Aug 2004 18:35 PDT

Oh. . I am sorry, I think I picked up the wrong name Kriswrite, you
posted the clarification. . . please pick up and close the question. 
I am so sorry if I have made a mistake here.  Please forgive

---

Request for Question Clarification by kriswrite-ga on 03 Aug 2004 07:42 PDT

No problem, schmooz. But only you can close your question. Do this by
going to your "My Questions" page.

Regards,
Kriswrite

---

Clarification of Question by schmooz-ga on 03 Aug 2004 08:05 PDT

No Kris - you take the question as "answered"  I consider it answered.

---

Request for Question Clarification by richard-ga on 03 Aug 2004 08:09 PDT

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think schmooz's request that
kriswrite-ga "close the question" means schmooz wants her to post her
answer and collect the fee.

By the way, isn't it remarkable that Bush, with no legislative
experience, no combat experience, and a record of business failures,
is able to turn Kerry's military and Senate background into a
liability?

---

Clarification of Question by schmooz-ga on 03 Aug 2004 08:53 PDT

Ooooooooooooooooh. . . I am soooo confused.  I just want to pay
someone, anyone and get free from this question :). . whoever posted
the request for clarification or. . whoever is able, just take the
question and close it as "answered." 
Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease?

I'm sorry I misunderstood, schmooz. :)

Here's a shorter version of what I mentioned above, with a few added details:

The problem with trying to answer this question is: What's a reliable
source? Much of the problem with Kerry's record in Vietnam has to do
with things that aren't well documented; they rely on taking one
person's word over another's.

Sometimes it's helpful to go to a group who's against a person, and
see what positive things they can say. For example, Vietnam Veterans
Against Kerry (a group that
certainly has no love for the politician;
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com ; there's also a
similar site called Swift Boat Veterans For Truth:
http://www.swiftvets.com/ ), but the groups doesn't argue that Kerry
did earn medals:

?Kerry experienced his first intense combat action on Dec. 2, 1968. He
was slightly wounded on his arm, earning his first Purple Heart.?

?Kerry earned his second Purple Heart after sustaining a minor
shrapnel wound in his left thigh on Feb. 20, 1969.?

?February 28, 1969: When Kerry's Patrol Craft Fast 94 received a B-40
rocket shot from shore, he hot dogged his craft beaching it in the
center of the enemy position. To his surprise, an enemy soldier sprang
up from a hole not ten feet from Patrol Craft 94 and fled. The boat's
machine gunner hit and wounded the fleeing Viet Cong as he darted
behind a hootch. The twin .50s gunner fired at the Viet Cong. He said
he "laid 50 rounds" into the hootch before Kerry leaped from the boat
and dashed in to administer a "coup de grace" to the wounded Viet
Cong. Kerry returned with the B-40 rocket and launcher. Kerry was
given a Silver Star for his actions.?

?On March 13, 1969, a mine detonated near Kerry's boat, slighting
wounding Kerry in the right arm. He was awarded his third Purple
Heart.?

All of Kerry?s Purple Hearts came from what are sometimes called ?band
aid wounds.? This has not been disputed, as far as I can tell. As
Vietnam Veterans Against Kerry states: ?When later asked about the
severity of the wounds, Kerry said that one of them cost him about two
days of service, and that the other two did not
interrupt his duty. ?Walking wounded?" as Kerry put it. After his
third Purple Heart Kerry requested to be sent home. Navy rules, he
pointed out, allowed a thrice-wounded soldier to return to the United
States immediately.?

(See the website for a photo of Kerry receiving a medal, and another
photo of him wearing some in Vietnam: Vietnam Veterans Against Kerry,
page 2, http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/page2.html ;
also check out "John Kerry's Purple Hearts,"
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/kerry_pur_hrts.htm )

Notice that the Purple Hearts were for very minor injuries. (Some
people speculate he got injured ?on purpose? in order to use the
?thrice-wounded rule,? but this, as far as I can tell, cannot be
proved.) If you wish to know some more specifics of how Kerry was
injured, the V.V.A.K. site does provide some details. Notice, too,
that their account of how Kerry got his Silver Star isn?t exactly
glowing.

There are many veterans who really wonder about that Silver Star; as
one veteran opined, ?If everything was confirmed and approved, an
officer (normally the original witness) would write the citation
Describing the action. All of this was then forwarded to whatever
command level was required by the AR to approve that particular award.
A Silver Star requires something quite extraordinary in the infantry.?
He, too, thinks Kerry?s behavior should not have earned a Silver Star.
You can read his entire commentary at ?A Vietnam Vet Against Kerry,?
Power Line, http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/005841.php )

Another vet states, ?[The awarding of medals] it is not a pure
process, meaning that it often depends on the command, even military
politics itself. And, something that is almost never discussed about
awards--all are not equal. In Vietnam, the Bronze Star could be
awarded for service. In other words, showing up for work...Or, the
Bronze Star could be awarded for valor. If for valor, it had on it, a
"V," it meant that the person who received it did something
extraordinary under fire.? (?IN COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR YOUR OWN
PERSONAL SAFETY,? Airborne Press,
http://www.airbornepress.com/nov2803.html ) According to Veterans For
John Kerry, Kerry?s Bronze Star did have a ?V? on it, although they do
not specify when or how he received the medal. (?John Kerry?s Service
Record,? Veterans for Kerry,
http://www.johnkerry.com/communities/veterans/service.html ) I could
not find any anti-Kerry sites that verified the presence of the
"V."

Going back to the Silver Star, one website claims that it can be given
for ?For active participation in ground or surface combat subsequent
to 1 March 1961 while in the grade of captain/colonel or junior
thereto.? (Ribbons of the U.S. Navy, Home of Heroes,
http://www.homeofheroes.com/medals/ribbons/1_ribbons_n.html ) Under
that classification, the medal might make more sense. Even if you
believe Kerry did ?everything wrong? (indeed, he has even been accused
of ?war crimes? that day?see ?THE LOGIC OF LIBERAL BIAS? The Daily
Howler, http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh021003.shtml ), he *did*
participate in combat. While there are rules against shooting the
wounded, a generous person could conclude that Kerry was scared and
fired without thinking.

It is absolutely true that I've only cited a handful of source for
this question, given that you've decided you just wanted a quickie
answer and preferred to pray on the subject. However, I should mention
that I've researched similar topics before, and have found nothing to
counter the above claims, even on the most liberal websites.

Hope this helps a little,
Kriswrite


KEYWORDS USED:
Kerry "Silver Star"
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=Kerry+%22Silver+Star%22&btnG=Google+Search

Vietnam ?Silver Star? circumstances
://www.google.com/search?q=vietnam+%22Silver+Star%22+circumstances&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=10&sa=N

Vietnam ?shooting wounded?
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=vietnam+%22shooting+wounded%22

Kriswrite - you did a stellar job on a question I was sorry I asked,
one that was certain to foster more division than truth.

Obviously this is going to be a hot topic-- which statements are true,
which are false, and which are manipulated truth? Well, some of the
stuff below is what I found from Kerry's website, so that at least
represents his own side.

Here's his record of military service:
http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Request_For_History_of_Service.pdf
 
Other documentation (such as of purple hearts) can be found in the list at 
http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_records.html

The only bill that I can find that he ever proposed was to cut
intelligence funding by billions. Even this msn website (which is
totally biased to Kerry) admits that this is a fact:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2096874/ This website says it's only 1.5
billion, but another website has this quote: ?Mr. President, I
introduce a ?Budget Buster Bill? that strips more than $90 billion
from the budget and cuts 40 programs which I consider to be pointless,
wasteful, antiquated, or just plain silly.? - John Kerry, 9/29/95
http://www.liddyshow.us/kerry6.php

Basically, I just see Kerry pandering to ignorant Americans (He's
going to provide free health care, solve all economic problems,
decrease the deficit, and maintain tax cuts???? Yeah, I'm going to
give every person in America a new car, free massages, and a
millionaire dollars for no cost! Vote for me! He obviously has done no
research on what such a plan would entail-- just look at what such a
plan has done to canada (do a google search on "socialized
medicine")-- they're health care sucks, people die waiting for months
to get surgeries and in waiting rooms of ERs, there's overcrowding for
the most minor injuries, the government is going broke spending 30% of
its revenue on healthcare, doctors have no incentive to work and are
going on strike, etc.) and I lose all trust in him.

The Slate article referred to in the above comment states:
"Bush and his operatives are making a practice of mischaracterizing
the voting record of the presumptive Democratic nominee. Two weeks
ago, the Republican National Committee put out a "Research Brief" that
flagrantly distorted Kerry's votes on weapons systems. ... Bush's
remarks yesterday are more dishonest still.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2096874/

You did a stellar job on a question I am sorry I asked, one that was
certain to foster more division than truth.  As to prayer, both sets
of candidates as well as our country and our world - can use as much
prayer support as we can give.  Thank God that He holds us all in the
palm of His hand.  Read the following if you need more perspective on
what needs to be prayed for:

From Scottish Professor in 1787!
Re: The Fall of the Athenian Republic.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can
only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves
largesse (generous gifts) from the public treasury. From that moment
on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most
benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy
always collapses over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed
by a dictatorship." "The average age of the world's greatest
civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have
progressed through this sequence.  From bondage to spiritual faith;
from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from
liberty to abundance, from abundance to complacency; from complacency
to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back into
bondage."

***************

Schmooz...I kid you not, I've been using that quotation as my
signature in my emails!

Kriswrite

John Kerry is one of those fellas who will say whatever he thinks
people want to hear, not only that he's been caught already in so many
lies its pitiful.
As George W. Bush stated, Kerry has very few accomplishments to show
for his very large agenda.  Kerry has been known to flip-flop/change
his story on his beliefs back and fourth when ever it seems convenient
for his political gain.

The bottom line is, George W. Bush is the logical and moral choice for
America for the next 4 years <><

God Bless!

Your best source for clearing this up is the non-partisan group FACT CHECK.

Here's the direct link about the swift boat stories. Bottom line: The
evidence backs Kerry and shows the Swift Boat Vets are partisan front
men for Bush.

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=231


Another great source for sorting out Kerry fact from Republican fiction:
http://www.independentsforkerry.org/uploads/media/jk-rumors.html

In my opinion, to use any one source for facts or interps is a
mistake. It's much better to wade through both sides of the story
yourself, and find the glaring inconsistencies and/or problem areas
yourself.

Kriswrite

Kriswrite and i11ustrator:  Kriswrite, I agree and have done my best
to sort this out for myself, regreting that I asked this question. 
illustrator, I find the factcheck site useful but. . . I am sorry, the
very name of http://www.independentsforkerry.org plus your comment
that this site "sorts out Republican fiction from Kerry fact" leads me
to insecurity that there is no bias involved. . . don't you think?
I have decided to vent my concern into prayer for both Kerry and Bush.
. . knowing that the God who created us all, will not be surprised by
the outcome of this election.  In fact, He has known the outcome since
before the foundation of the world and as in all things, will use it
in His greater plan.  I thank you both.

News outlets have a commercial interest in keeping alive captivating
controversies for as long as they can. Real-world soap-opera such as
the Swift Boat accusations makes such good television and good article
narratives, news outlets are simply weary of debunking them. After
all,
who wants to kill a good storyline?

In response, the Columbia University's graduate school of journalism
set up the website at campaigndesk.org to identify news reports who fall short
of the journalism ideals. I found their website to be an invaluable
reference when trying to evaluate the veracity of various news story.

From the about page: 
"
The Desk is politically nonpartisan; its only biases are toward
accuracy, fairness, and thoroughness. Its focus is not on what
politicians say and do, but on how the press is presenting (or not
presenting) the political story to the public. It will monitor not
just news reporting, but also political analysis and commentary,
assessing the accuracy of the facts behind the argument and the
fairness of the framing. It will be a resource not only for
conscientious journalists, but also for all citizens who want the best
possible version of a free press at a time when it matters most.

Their summary of the Swift Boat coverage is found here:

   http://www.campaigndesk.org/archives/000851.asp