--- Gautam's rationalizations below are sad. Since a security guard is likely a republican, his rationalizations are similar to the Swift Boaters for truth.
I prefer looking at Kerry's comrades in arms, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF WHICH stepped forward to be with him, expressing admiration and gratitude. They knew him best & I'll take their word. The insanity of praising draft dodgers like Cheney-Bush while attacking war heroes like Kerry and Clarke, whatever other disagreements, shows how utterly nasty the right has been since 92. As for Dems being soft. I repeat: Clinton planned Afghanistan so that W could say "go!" and get all the credit. I repeat: Clinton planned Afghanistan so that W could say "go!" and get all the credit. THAT was fighting terror. Iraq is simply insanity. For 1% of the money we could have put a 2 billion$ price tag on saddam's head. > I think it's a combination of a few things. The > first > time I heard about Kerry's Vietnam War activities > was > from a security guard in my old office, who was a 20 > year Navy vet (and registered Democrat) who _hated_ > John Kerry and told me that he was sure that Kerry's > medals were invalid. I completely disagreed with > him > and thought this was just old service gossip. > Possibly he should have been the consultant and I > should have been the security guard. The second is > the generalized distance between the Democratic > Party > and the military since Vietnam, as much of the > military feels (rightly or wrongly) that the > American > left turned against the armed forces then, and > things > haven't changed since. I still hear people talking > about the Clinton staffer who told Barry McCaffrey > "I > don't talk to people in uniform." So it's distrust > of > his policies, too. Beyond that...well, Sam > Huntington's first big book, _The Soldier and the > State_, talked about the natural conservatism of > successful militaries. Huntington, as always, had a > point (even if I don't agree with everything he > said, > but hey, he's got more political science talent in > his > pinkie finger than I do in my whole body, so I > disagree with caution), and it's still true today. > > > Why would Wes Clark alienate the military even > more > > than Kerry? > > I'd put it this way. I know ~10 senior officers > (counting active duty and retired generals, > colonels, > and lieutenant colonels) well enough that I feel > comfortable asking them about their political views > and their opinions of their fellow officers. I'm > being unspecific to preserve their anonymity, since > these were all personal conversations. They _all_ > have a low opinion of Wes Clark. One whom I've > known > for five years has only once, in that entire time, > said anything personally critical about _anyone_ to > me, and that person was Wes Clark. For several of > them, the word "despise" comes to mind to describe > their feelings. "Arrogant", "self-absorbed", "not a > team player", "abusive to subordinates", etc. are > used > with some frequency. I've never met the man myself, > so I can't comment in person, but these are all > people > I respect - two of them are among the five people I > most respect on earth - and at least one of them is > a > fairly major Kerry supporter (and so hardly a > Republican partisan) and they really, really, really > opposed Clark's run for the Presidency. So in > Kerry's > case, it's a combination of politics and > personality. > In Clark's case, I don't think they _cared_ about > his > politics, they just knew the guy. > > ===== > Gautam Mukunda > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > "Freedom is not free" > http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l > _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
