Food for thought on Kerry and Fonda
Feb. 21st, 2004 09:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sethrakA discussion of whether or not those photos were evidence of a Kerry/Fonda alliance of some nature: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=240876
Take it as you will.
I, personally, have found this board to be frequented by reasonably intelligent people of all political beliefs, and most of them are damn good about checking their facts and sources before they post. The first few posters in this thread seem to be among those careful board members.
They're certainly all more eloquent on this subject than I can ever be. ^_^
All I will say, for myself, is that attendance at the same rallies that were anti-Vietnam does not constitute complete alignment of beliefs, not on the war, not on whether anyone who fought there is evil, not on anything. As a liberal in good standing and a former college activist, I can tell you that most of the attendees at *any* liberal rally of any sort, when pinned down on the subject of why they are there, give widely different explanations. If probed further, they have pretty divurgent beliefs on all sorts of other "liberal" topics. ^_^
Edit: I'm annoyed at the NYT website.... They're charging a couple bucks for the privilege of reading the entire article.... correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the daily paper itself perhaps half that? At non-subscriber prices, mind you? The rest of the links are good, though, particularly Snopes.com, and the commentary still seems fairly sound to me. (Until the inevitable MB sniping between posters begins... ^_^ )
Take it as you will.
I, personally, have found this board to be frequented by reasonably intelligent people of all political beliefs, and most of them are damn good about checking their facts and sources before they post. The first few posters in this thread seem to be among those careful board members.
They're certainly all more eloquent on this subject than I can ever be. ^_^
All I will say, for myself, is that attendance at the same rallies that were anti-Vietnam does not constitute complete alignment of beliefs, not on the war, not on whether anyone who fought there is evil, not on anything. As a liberal in good standing and a former college activist, I can tell you that most of the attendees at *any* liberal rally of any sort, when pinned down on the subject of why they are there, give widely different explanations. If probed further, they have pretty divurgent beliefs on all sorts of other "liberal" topics. ^_^
Edit: I'm annoyed at the NYT website.... They're charging a couple bucks for the privilege of reading the entire article.... correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the daily paper itself perhaps half that? At non-subscriber prices, mind you? The rest of the links are good, though, particularly Snopes.com, and the commentary still seems fairly sound to me. (Until the inevitable MB sniping between posters begins... ^_^ )
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-02-25 12:17 pm (UTC)http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A22260-2004Feb7¬Found=true
http://www.gopusa.com/news/2004/february/0223_racicot_letter_kerry.shtml
The first is an article in the Washington Post that, in its own liberal way, shows Kerry's flip-flopping on military issues and some of the things he's voted to cut. The second is totally partisan toward the GOP, but it also highlights some of the things he's voted against.
Things like the Patriot Missile. This is the piece of equipment that shoots down SCUD missiles and keeps soldiers sleeping in their tents from being blown up in the middle of the night.
He also voted against the F-15, F-16, AH-64, M1 Abrams, the Aegis cruiser, the Tomahawk cruise missile, and the B-1 and B-2 bombers. These weapons systems are the backbone of the U.S. technological advantage in EVERY BRANCH OF THE SERVICE.
In 1995 he was voting to cut back the CIA's budget. Yeah, people are blaming the CIA for a lot, but it's hard to spy on people when your own government keeps cutting your budget.
He's done everything he can to deprive the military of the equipment they need to do their job safely. The automatic response is: "Why do we need a billion dollar stealth bomber to bomb people in Iraq?" The answer is: "It keeps pilots alive."
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable, given the ops tempo we have, of staying in a military with that kind of threat hanging over it.
That picture of Kerry and Fonda was taken before she went on her infamous trip, but, knowing how Kerry viewed the military afterwards, can anyone say he wouldn't have posed for one afterward?