Veterans Against Kerry - Ad Fact Check

[Thundarr]

Don't believe everything you hear... (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231#) :hmmm: :mad:

[Smooth[GummiBear]]

http://www.swiftvets.com/

The people Kerry called his "Band of Brothers" don't even support him.

gg John

[Pure_Evil]

Too bad Bush's "Band of Brothers" all wear towels on their heads!

GG GB

[Thundarr]

Hellloooooo, Smooth, you obviously did not read what was on my link :rolleyes: I know it's a little long, but it appears that these Veterans (the same organization your link points to) are not being honest... These people were not his "Band of Brothers" that have supported him throughout the campaign, they did not even serve under his command, nor is the guy who alleges he treated John Kerry the person who is listed on Kerry's medical records as the person who actually treated him... PS. Note who funded this ad...

Where the Money Comes From

Although the word "Republican" does not appear in the ad, the group's financing is highly partisan. The source of the Swift Boat group's money wasn't known when it first surfaced, but a report filed July 15 with the Internal Revenue Services now shows its initial funding came mainly from a Houston home builder, Bob R. Perry, who has also given millions to the Republican party and Republican candidates, mostly in Texas, including President Bush and Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay, whose district is near Houston

Perry gave $100,000 of the $158,750 received by the Swift Boat group through the end of June, according to its disclosure report .

Perry and his wife Doylene also gave more than $3 million to Texas Republicans during the 2002 elections, according to a database maintained by the Institute on Money in State Politics . The Perrys also were among the largest Republican donors in neighboring Louisiana, where they gave $200,000, and New Mexico, where they gave $183,000, according to the database

At the federal level the Perrys have given $359,825 since 1999, including $6,000 to Bush's campaigns and $27,325 to DeLay and his political action committee, Americans for a Republican Majority, according the a database maintained by the Center for Responsive Politics.

And golly, see what Republican Sen. John McCain had to say???

McCain Speaks Up

Sen. John McCain -- who has publicly endorsed Bush and even appealed for donations to the President's campaign -- came to Kerry's defense on this. McCain didn't witness the events in question, of course. But he told the Associated Press in an August 5 interview:

McCain : I think the ad is dishonest and dishonorable. As it is none of these individuals served on the boat (Kerry) commanded. Many of his crewmates have testified to his courage under fire. I think John Kerry served honorably in Vietnam.

The link I posted goes into much more detail, however, I know it's tough for some to make through all that info.....

[Pure_Evil]

Why the hell didn't McCain with the ****ing primary 4 years ago?????

[Dissectional]

Why the hell didn't McCain with the ****ing primary 4 years ago?????

Kind of what I was thinking. I think that he was/is still a good choice.

[Thundarr]

Kind of what I was thinking. I think that he was/is still a good choice.

I voted for him... :thumbs:

[T I K]

Thx Thundarr :thumbs:

I would believe the ones that actually served with and under John Kerry in the same Swiftboat!! Than the ones that "served with John Kerry" as in being in the Navy or in the Vietnam War!!

I saw and interview with one of these pps that was in that political ? ad. And the only thing the interviewer could get from this person is that he as many Vets felt John Kerry was dishonarable or dishonest because when he returned from being actually one who served and fought in the military he then spoke out against the US Govt. and The Vietnam War!!

I can neither agree nor disagree with what John Kerry testified to at that time because unfortunately I am not that familiar with his testimony.

But from what I do know he Served his Country in the military, he led, he fought and he put his own life in danger to save a fellow comrade! And the last I heard ( tho there are those that would deny or lie or decieve) that this Country still has a Constitution and under the First Amendment, which guarrntee's us and John Kerry "The Freedom of Speech" which did allow him to speak out against and testify against the Vietnam War!!

This same Freedom of Speech also gives/offers some protection against those that may lie or may try to decieve through their statements in what appears to be a politicaly motivated ad!!:(

[T I K]

Well I almost forgot 2 add this............:D

[T I K]

And these little funni's? :D

[Dan2]

I couldn't resist.:D

The Purple Owie.

[Thundarr]

TIK, that's how I felt too! So, he served and then spoke out against the war after here returned.... So what? He's entitled to his opinion just like everyone else... :) Those pics are all funny, even Dan2's!! :p:

[Pure_Evil]

I agree T, He fought in it, actual combat, knew it was wrong when he returned, and said so. And people bitch about that :rolleyes:


In a few years, one of our future canidates will have experience in this pathetic war and will state it was wrong too, and the pollitical machine will discredit him/her for it then too.

One man stood up to what he believed in, and he's a bad man

the other hid behind his daddy, was awol for Gaurd duty :rolleyes: and he's good??

And then there's Cobb:
David Cobb -- a former construction worker and grandson of a Baptist preacher -- was a public interest attorney for the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund in Texas until he launched his Presidential campaign (and moved to California) in September 2003. Ralph Nader's politics inspired him to join the Green Party, and Cobb was a co-founder of the Texas Green Party in 1999. One year later, Cobb closed his private law practice when Nader asked him to coordinate his Texas campaign. He has devoted himself to full-time citizen activism since the conclusion of the 2000 campaign, serving as General Counsel for the Green Party National Committee until he formally launched his Presidential campaign. "We are building a democratic movement that will take this country back from the corporate hooligans who have hijacked it from us," said Cobb. Party insiders agreed that Cobb became a frontrunner for the nomination when Nader decided to not run in 2004 as a Green. Cobb won the DC primary, and placed first in several other state caucuses. Cobb was one of only four Greens listed on the California Presidential primary ballot (2nd place - 12%). He ran the most active national campaign out of anyone seeking the Green Presidential nomination. Cobb was a leading advocate of the Greens pursuing a "Safe States" strategy in 2004 -- which means that, unlike with Nader in 2000, the Cobb will focus their attempts to win votes only in the states that are not close contests and would not endanger a Democratic national victory over Bush. Pat Buchanan -- running as a conservative Reform Party canidate in 2000 -- pursued a similar strategy so as to not hurt Bush against Gore in that race. Cobb also maintains that his candidacy is only about promoting the party itself -- and building the grassroots -- and not merely promoting an individual personality (i.e., Nader). With the help of several key party leaders, Cobb outmaneuvered Nader and his allies to win the party's nomination in June 2004. Nader badly miscalculated his strategy for dealing with the Greens. On the eve of the Green Party Presidential Nominating Convention, Nader selected respected Green leader Peter Camejo as his VP runningmate. His supporters then made a push to either win Nader the nomination or, alternatively, ensure that the party nominated no candidate -- but then endorsed Nader. At the convention, Cobb praised Nader's passion but successfully argued that merely "endorsing" Nader would risk the party's ballot status in several states and do nothing to build the party. Cobb's approach worked, as he handily defeated the Nader forced for the Presidential nomination on the second ballot. As the Green nominee, Cobb is ensured of ballot status in at least 22 states.

[Thundarr]

Thanks Pure, that very interesting reading, and I have to say Mr. Cobb sure has an interesting strategy, much better than Mr. Nader's, IMO!!! :thumbs:

[Death Engineer]

Here's some more facts about John Kerry while we're talking about them:


1. He tried to use the same tactic Clinton used to dodge the draft, i.e. He applied for an "extension" to his education. Kerry wanted to go to Paris, France to study. His request was denied, and knowing he was going to be drafted, Kerry volunteered for the Navy.

2. Kerry was making anti-war statements long before he went to Vietnam, even before he joined the Navy.

Both these facts are substantiated in the 18 Feb 1970 article in Kerry's school paper, THE HARVARD CRIMSON
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=352185

[Thundarr]

Here's some more facts about John Kerry while we're talking about them:


1. He tried to use the same tactic Clinton used to dodge the draft, i.e. He applied for an "extension" to his education. Kerry wanted to go to Paris, France to study. His request was denied, and knowing he was going to be drafted, Kerry volunteered for the Navy.

2. Kerry was making anti-war statements long before he went to Vietnam, even before he joined the Navy.

Both these facts are substantiated in the 18 Feb 1970 article in Kerry's school paper, THE HARVARD CRIMSON
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=352185

Read both articles... Only thing is, why does it matter that he enlisted after being turned down for an educational extension? If it were me, I wouldn't have wanted to get drafted either... So he may as well have joined so he could choose the branch he wanted to be in, at least... He still went and served regardless of how he personally felt about the war... Sounds pretty patriotic to me... :)

[Slice]

Here's some more facts about John Kerry while we're talking about them:


1. He tried to use the same tactic Clinton used to dodge the draft, i.e. He applied for an "extension" to his education. Kerry wanted to go to Paris, France to study. His request was denied, and knowing he was going to be drafted, Kerry volunteered for the Navy.

2. Kerry was making anti-war statements long before he went to Vietnam, even before he joined the Navy.

Both these facts are substantiated in the 18 Feb 1970 article in Kerry's school paper, THE HARVARD CRIMSON
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=352185
It amazes me how people speak of war like it is a good thing. War sucks.

[UZI]

OK, OK temptation killed the cat.

McCain has endorsed Bush. He says that he does not think Kerry would make a good President.

Let the logic continue :drink:

[UZI]

Sorry folks. Just finished reading "God's Equation" and "Fermat's Last Theorem" and was tired of all the logic.

And please don't jump in with the "you biased person" stuff. I have not taken a side here. Just want to understand this logic of all of these political strings.

Fundamentally, if the laws of thermodynamics remain valid, we see increasing disorder in the political system. But, on the other hand --- the political system seems to have created a higher level of organization in that the masses have flocked to two organized, non-shifting camps. Which dictates that a process of increasing disorder has created an increased type of order.

I am drawn to the scene from the John Belushi film of 1941 where the army is fighting the Navy/Marines and there is mass chaos in the streets. Dan Aykroyd gave a darn good speach and then they proceed to "Knock out those lights kid".

[Thundarr]

Sorry folks. Just finished reading "God's Equation" and "Fermat's Last Theorem" and was tired of all the logic.

And please don't jump in with the "you biased person" stuff. I have not taken a side here. Just want to understand this logic of all of these political strings.

Fundamentally, if the laws of thermodynamics remain valid, we see increasing disorder in the political system. But, on the other hand --- the political system seems to have created a higher level of organization in that the masses have flocked to two organized, non-shifting camps. Which dictates that a process of increasing disorder has created an increased type of order.

I am drawn to the scene from the John Belushi film of 1941 where the army is fighting the Navy/Marines and there is mass chaos in the streets. Dan Aykroyd gave a darn good speach and then they proceed to "Knock out those lights kid".

I just am trying to show that there are two sides to every story and that the one in political ads is not always true... Some people believe everything they see on TV and I just would rather folks made an informed decision whether it be for or against what I would choose... :thumbs: