Benedict Arnold & John Kerry

[jbfam4]

Benedict Arnold & John Kerry

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 17, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37157

By C.J. Cheetham
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com



When America had a clear moral vision, we were able to see that people like Benedict Arnold were traitors. Yet today, a man who was far less valiant and far more treasonous is about to be nominated by the Democrats for the presidency.

John Kerry couldn't hold a candle to Benedict Arnold in terms of service. Arnold served longer, with greater distinction, and in more dangerous environs.

Kerry has outdone Arnold in only one respect – Kerry's treason was more insidious, more immoral and more harmful to America than Arnold could muster.

Sadly, America has lost her ability to understand issues of treason. So, the name Arnold remains interchangeable with treason and Kerry continues to be called a "hero." On many of America's elementary-school playgrounds, boys will still playfully call each other "Benedict Arnold" in order to convey a feeling of betrayal. These children will see no moral dichotomy in understanding clearly that Arnold was a traitor, while a man of lesser character vies for the presidency. This is not the fault of our children, but the fault of American adults who have grown weary of right and wrong.

So, Kerry who sold out to the communists is a hero. Kerry who accused American soldiers of horrific war crimes without a shred of evidence is a hero. Kerry who threw his medals at the White House in the 1970s is a hero. Kerry who cavorted with Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden and the radical left at a time we still had brave soldiers on the field of battle is a hero. Kerry who voted against every major weapons system now defending us in the war on terror is a hero. Kerry who wanted to abolish the CIA is now a hero.

[still_one]

1. All these loud mouths at wnd should be sent to Iraq

[EXE619K]

2. I don't like John Kerry.

However, don't you think posts like this belong in Free Republic?

Just my opinion.

[onehandle]

3. Do we need this right wing trash here?

Posted without comment?

No. We don't.

[XanaDUer]

4. While you were digging around...

and found World Net Daily, did you notice the ads for Michelle Malkin's book, and Michael Savage's Book?

:eyes:

[jbfam4]

9. My purpose in going to this rag

was to find the lastest articles by Bill Press. It's the only place I can find him........got another source for me?

[XanaDUer]

15. I'm not doing your research for you...

although I have been a researcher in the past.

The rules state that this source is not acceptable here at DU, accept under certain parameters.

Take that up with the admins and mods if you don't like that policy.

[ChompySnack]

5. Go away freeper

[jbfam4]

8. I am NOT a freeper

I am incensed by this article just like the one by Coulter on Max Clealand and Drudge on Kerry. There is nothing this people wouldn't do secure the election for Bush. I think it is important for us to know how low they will go and what we are up against.

Will ignoring this make it go away?

[trotsky]

10. *I* know you're not, but...

Next time you post from a right-wing source be sure to include a couple of lines explaining why it should be shown on DU. Looks disruptive to just dump an article.

[jbfam4]

14. Thanks,trotsky

That's good advice. I have no intention of being disruptive, sorry if it came across that way. The only articles I ever read on this site are Pat Buchanan, when he agrees that this was an immoral war and Bill Press, who agrees with most of us here on DU.

[saltpoint]

12. This post I'm writing now --

-- follows the other one I entered earlier. I read your post and thought you endorsed this position.

You need an introductory remark so people understand what you're doing.

Otherwise, we don't know what's up and we react based on our loyalty to the party.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

6. I'm suprised more people here are NOT agreeing with this....

smear on John Kerry. After all, there is so much hate
against him here.

[mac2]

7. If Kerry is a traitor what is Bush?

And the rest of the Republicans?

Jane Fonda was right about Vietnam. The protestors stopped the war and brought back our troops. Otherwise..they would still be there wouldn't they? Same with Iraq. They lied to us.

George Arnold Bush is taking away our democracy and country for profit of the few with the Americas Union. Do I hear that? We should.

[saltpoint]

11. Here at DU we look forward to your next post --

-- entitled, "Democrats: Spawns of Satan?"

Hells bells, dude. Get lost.

[fjc]

13. I just hope the Bush people start talking this way.

It's political suicide.

[Shylock]

16. why

why are Kerry's quotes about the war crimes allowed to be taken so far out of context. why doesn't some one in the Kerry campaign point out what he really said? why do we perpetuate these lies?

[Andromeda]

17. I assume you're just posting this for informational...

purposes. I would be careful which publications I used for reference because I don't think this one is a source that is acceptable on DU.

Comparing Kerry to Benedict Arnold is a cheap shot and has no place here.

[jbfam4]

19. Totally agree

I thought people would be as inscensed as I was and write to the [e-mail].

This is the male version on an Ann Coulter. I hope Senator Kerry sues this man for Slander.

thanks,Andromeda, for giving me the benefit of the doubt.

[Skittles]

18. KERRY DID *NOT* THROW AWAY HIS MEDALS

I AM SICK OF THIS LIE

[HereSince1628]

21. No he threw away his ribbons...

Here is the deal, medals aren't typically worn with Class A and Class B uniforms. Instead the ribbons (ribbons have patterns that are the same as the cloth that suspends the medal) that represent the medals are worn. That's what the colorful display above a soldier's left pocket is all about.

As a Vietnam veteran I see NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEDALS AND RIBBONS since they symbolize the same thing.

I will not attack Kerry for his action, whatever they were. Neither will I defend him. Veterans are often tremendously conflicted over their service.

How can you feel bad about people who literally saved your life? How can you feel good about being a cog in a machine which conducted an un-necessary and horribly expensive war (in human terms)? If Kerry threw his ribbons and saved his medals it is perhaps the best representation of the personal conflict that many Vietnam Vets feel.

I am not a Kerry supporter, but I refuse to fault him on this.

[Skittles]

23. well said, HS

I enlisted in the military the year the Viet Nam war ended. I too cannot fault Kerry for his actions.

[HereSince1628]

20. I am amazed that the greatest Democratic f***-up EVER is defended

by the R's.

The Vietnam conflict has got to go down as the most egregious decision ever made by and then supported by Democrats.

What a weird world I live in, when instead of arguing the war was a tragic mistake for EVERYONE involved, the R's now choose to nit pick at those who served.

Pass me a postage stamp, the hallucinations can't be any stranger.

[joyautumn]

22. All lies -- if not, I might vote for Kerry

First of all, Kerry didn't throw his medals, just his ribbons with someone else's medals. He's still got his medals. I'm sure Kerry would point that out to this writer if he were trying to get his vote.

Second, co-organizing a protest against the Vietnam war with Jane Fonda could hardly be called "cavorting". But why does Kerry insist he never even met Jane Fonda, when he was the main spokesperson for VVAW and Fonda had been stumping for VVAW as its Honorary Chair? Is he ashamed of being associated with Fonda? Yes, because he actually is worried about what writers like the above think of him. So his response on that point is, "Jane who? Oh her, heh, never met her."

Voting against every weapons systems and to abolish the CIA? He did vote to cut some systems and reduce the CIA budget long ago but guess where he stands now:

" Stephanie Cutter, Kerry's communications director, said in an e-mail response to questions about Kerry's record that the senator's views on weapons programs "evolved" once he was in office and that he used his votes to voice opposition to a defense budget he thought was "explosive and irresponsible" during Reagan's presidency. She said Kerry has supported "responsible and appropriate" requests for defense spending, including major increases under Bush.

Kerry also proposed cuts in funding for the CIA during the 1990s but now advocates a more robust intelligence operation. A Kerry adviser said his proposed intelligence cuts were part of a broader proposal to reduce the deficit and that his goal was to reduce dependence on technological intelligence gathering and buttress human intelligence resources. "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22260-2004Feb7.html

Accusing the military of atrocities? Not as a senator. In fact, he defended Bob Kerrey when news of Kerrey's atrocities in Vietnam came out, insisting that the press should just forget it because it was so long ago and vets should not be blamed for what they did.

http://quicksitebuilder.cnet.com/supfacts/id364.html

And he has said nothing during the campaign about the Tiger Force investigation that Kucinich, after agitating for a year on it, finally got the army to start in earnest a couple weeks ago:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04046/273264.stm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44718-2004Feb15.html
http://www.muhajabah.com/muslims4kucinich/archives/008097.php
http://www.imwithdennis.com/article266.html