...no, my metal ribbons, I mean, someone else's medals, or ribbons, and I never said I threw my medals, except when I did. Clear?"

<a href='http://abcnews.go.com/sections/Politics/Investigation/kerry_vietnam_medals_040425-1.html' target='_blank'>Somebody give the man a spatula</a>

Charles Gibson caught him in a lie. I like the eh....ummm.eh...i said...eh er...i ...i mean...eh Bush is misleading us on the war. I about rolled off the couch laughing, its was pretty good for 7:30 programming :roflol:

Duh....potato.... :wave:

Is "bringing up" the same as "lying"?

Oddball Wrote:Is "bringing up" the same as "lying"?

Nope, but they are similiar in that they both come from John Kerry's lips with depressing frequency.

Quote:So what does Kerry say he did with those medals? As with so many of his shifts and flip-flops, it's all on the record.


Take 1:

Q. Did Kerry throw his combat decorations away in an antiwar protest 33 years ago?

A. Yes. As The Boston Globe reported on April 24, 1971, "John Kerry . . . said before he threw his medals over the fence: `I'm not doing this for any violent reasons, but for peace and justice, and to try to make this country wake up once and for all.' "


Take 2:

Q. Did Kerry throw his decorations away 33 years ago?

A. Yes. In a Nov. 6, 1971, interview with WRC-TV, he recalled that the protesters had decided to "renounce the symbols which this country gives . . . the medals themselves." When the interviewer asked, "How many did you give back, John?" he answered: "I gave back, I can't remember, six, seven, eight, nine." The interviewer noted that Kerry had won the Bronze and Silver Stars and three Purple Hearts. Kerry: "Well, and above that, I gave back my others."


Take 3:

Q. Did Kerry throw his decorations away 33 years ago?

A. No. In 1984, running for the Senate against a World War II Air Force veteran, he claimed he had refused to do so. "After showing a reporter his medals and ribbons on display in his Back Bay apartment," The Boston Globe reported on Oct. 15, 1984, Kerry "said he had disagreed with other protest leaders on throwing away medals." The medals he was seen tossing, Kerry added, were those of a "veteran from Lincoln [Mass.], at his request."


Take 4:

Q. Did Kerry throw his decorations away 33 years ago?

A. Medals, no; ribbons, yes. During his 1996 reelection campaign, he told the Globe that he only threw the ribbons pinned to his uniform. "Asked why he didn't bring his own medals to throw since it was planned weeks in advance," the Globe reported on Oct. 6, 1996, "Kerry said it was because he didn't have time to go home [to New York] and get them." The medals he was seen tossing, he claimed, belonged to two other veterans — the one from Lincoln and one from New York. "Kerry says he can't remember their names."

The variations don't end there. For example, his explanation that he "didn't have time to go home and get" the medals — i.e., he would have trashed them if he could have — is sharply at odds with his earlier "explanation" to the Boston Herald: "They're my medals. I can do g-ddam what I want with them."

On Monday's TV show, after being shown the tape of his younger self claiming to have thrown "six, seven, eight, nine" medals onto the trash heap, Kerry heatedly insisted that he had pitched only his ribbons, not his medals. Then he insisted even more heatedly that "ribbons, medals were absolutely interchangeable. . . . there was no distinction . . . I think, to this day, there's no distinction between the two."

Well, if ribbons and medals are identical, then by his own admission he did throw away his medals. So why does he angrily maintain that he didn't?

Kerry could acknowledge that his various statements on the subject are inconsistent. He could apologize for his deception. He could even resort to the Bush Sidestep: "When I was young, I did a lot of foolish things." Instead he attacks the president over his National Guard service — an assault he has now escalated on the campaign trail — and accuses ABC of "doing the bidding of the Republican National Committee."

But the questions won't go away just because Kerry snarls at the questioners. By itself, the medals incident matters hardly at all. But as a surrogate for all the issues on which Kerry has ducked and dissembled, it matters very much.

"The candidate who starts each morning by having to explain himself is a goner," the Village Voice remarked in an editorial this week. The Village Voice! If that's what they're saying on the far left, what must be going through the minds of the mainstream?&nbsp;

--From an article by Jeff Jacoby in this morning's Jewish World Review

:snore:

Show me the WMD's, or shut the @#$% up about lies.

"What say we all step back a few feet and get some perspective? On the one side, we have a man who served his country in Vietnam, returned with three Purple Hearts and a variety of other commendations, then protested the war and threw something -- possibly ribbons, possibly medals -- over a fence in symbolic protest. On the other side, we have a man who may or may not have served in the Air National Guard in lieu of going to Vietnam, who continues to refuse to answer a straight question about his military service, and who most probably misled the country into another war."

<a href='http://gadflyer.com/politicalaims/index.php?Week=200418#251' target='_blank'>more here</a>

What's your priority?

Oddball Wrote::snore:

Show me the WMD's, or shut the @#$% up about lies.

Good point. It is somewhat surprising but entirely believable that the Dems would nominate another lying liar as their candidate. One who proffered the following:

Quote:"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

But stick around long enough and he'll change his tune on anything. Like voting to support the troops at war before he voted against it. That was priceless. Or this exchange:

Quote:"Do you own an SUV?"

"No" - Kerry

"What about that black suburban in front of your house?"

"That is my family's." - Kerry

This guy is more full of shite than Bill "Depends on what your definition of is is" Clinton, and about a third as electable. It's not too late, Dems. Drop this loser now and find a candidate that the rest of America can relate to or get used to another 4 years of gnashing your teeth, screaming "Fascists!!!" at your peace rallies, calling the guy who repeatedly kicked your butts a moron and other such silly little displays of your insignificance.

Bush? Kicked our butts?

As El Rushbo says, "THIS IS TOO RICH!" :roflol:

So, because Bush lied and many were fooled, we should blame those who were decieved? Mmmmkay.... :rolleyes:

Quote:"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

I didn't realize the Governor of Texas was crafting the Dem's foreign policy agenda in '98. Mmmkay indeed.

To quote Mr. Hewitt from his article in the other thread:

"Kerry acknowledges that WMD may yet be found. This admission destroys the left's critique of the war and months of 'Bush lied!' rantings from the MoveOn.org swamp. Kerry knows what everyone with a memory knows: which is that Saddam had WMD and the world agreed he had them. Perhaps they were destroyed, perhaps hidden, perhaps trucked to Syria, but he had them. Thank you, Mr. Kerry, for your only contribution to the public's understanding of the war to date."

Dang, Oddball, a dimbulb like Kerry gets this and yet you can't. Sheesh.

The reason Kerry was certain that Iraq had WMD THEN was that we had the reciepts. How that fits into the idiot coalition attacking now is beyond me.

We attacked Iraq because Bush said that they had WMD. There were none. No amount of neo-com bulls#!t makes that anything but a lie. :rolleyes:

Oddball Wrote:The reason Kerry was certain that Iraq had WMD THEN was that we had the reciepts. How that fits into the idiot coalition attacking now is beyond me.

We attacked Iraq because Bush said that they had WMD. There were none. No amount of neo-com bulls#!t makes that anything but a lie. :rolleyes:

So, the question is where did the WMD's go? He had them, and everyone new it, so where are they now?


You can pass this off as Bush Lies all you want, but everyone thought (knew) that he had them!

More liberal attack machine propaganda. Take it FWIW:

"U.N.: Iraq had no WMD after 1994
By Bill Nichols, USA TODAY


UNITED NATIONS — A report from U.N. weapons inspectors to be released today says they now believe there were no weapons of mass destruction of any significance in Iraq after 1994, according to two U.N. diplomats who have seen the document."

<a href='http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-03-02-un-wmd_x.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/20...02-un-wmd_x.htm</a>

joebordenrebel Wrote:More liberal attack machine propaganda. Take it FWIW:

"U.N.: Iraq had no WMD after 1994
By Bill Nichols, USA TODAY


UNITED NATIONS — A report from U.N. weapons inspectors to be released today says they now believe there were no weapons of mass destruction of any significance in Iraq after 1994, according to two U.N. diplomats who have seen the document."

<a href='http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-03-02-un-wmd_x.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/20...02-un-wmd_x.htm</a>

The key phrase is "they NOW believe"!

GrayBeard Wrote:

Oddball Wrote:The reason Kerry was certain that Iraq had WMD THEN was that we had the reciepts. How that fits into the idiot coalition attacking now is beyond me.

We attacked Iraq because Bush said that they had WMD. There were none. No amount of neo-com bulls#!t makes that anything but a lie.&nbsp; :rolleyes:

So, the question is where did the WMD's go? He had them, and everyone new it, so where are they now?


You can pass this off as Bush Lies all you want, but everyone thought (knew) that he had them!

Simple. He used some, others passed the date where they were useful, and some (nooke-yoo-ler) never existed. The government KNEW all of this. The case was made that they were producing WMD. They weren't, and we didn't have any hard evidence that they were.

It's hard to admit that someone you trusted lied to you, isn't it?

Politicians lie? No, your kidding me. Even though, I don't see this particular example as lying, I am not niave enough to think that alll politicians don't lie.