Since we're ABB, why not go frontal together on the AWOL issue?

[NV1962]

I think it'd be powerful if all of us start writing media exhorting them to dive into the AWOL issue and treat it like a serious charge that casts doubt on the character and credibility of someone who claims authority to be the President, instead of dealing with it as if it were just a "discomfortin allegation."

Shouldn't we all, I mean: from each and every one of the Dem campaigns hammer on this issue?

Shouldn't we all start writing letters?

[tobius]

1. AWOL

I think this is something that Clark needs to be upfront on. He should not discourage "deserter" talk.

[NV1962]

3. Clark doesn't support the "deserter" charge

because there's no evidence to support that - in fact, there's evidence that Bush doesn't meet the "deserter" criterium of having had the intent of not returning to duty, simply because he eventually did show up.

Wes Clark is a man for whom the word "just" isn't a diminutive qualifier, but an attribution of justice. That's why I believe he's right to reject the "deserter" charge.

AWOL is a different thing.

[tobius]

8. haven't seen

Clark reject the charge- he has artfully kept that discussion going, I believe that he knows what he is doing and we should encourage him.

;-)

[newyawker99]

10. Hi tobius!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[tobius]

28. "hey newyawker99!"

Thanks- it is a bit scary posting knowing that "posts=2" will show to everyone.

:toast:

[Trajan]

27. Our candidates should NOT roll up their sleeves ..

and do hand-to-hand in the trenches: .. that is OUR job ...

Clark neednt say much of anything on the subject, other than acknowledging the problem, then deferring the question to others ...

There are MANY people who are jumpng on this, thanks to Moore and Clark ... among others ...

He played this EXACTLY right ...

Now: .. he should talk about: .. education, international diplomacy, corporate honesty and jobs .... with an occasionally nod to the AWOL issue ...

The ATTACK DOGS need to pound the AWOL story .. not the candidates ...

[Faygo Kid]

2. No, no, no. We are winning on today's issues! This is a sideshow.

Look, I am 52. I had lots of fun back in 1971, too, but I remember death, and Kerry's principled stand (flame me, but I stand by that. He fought against the war, and as a very young man. Don't underestimate how we remember). I sense that the American people are not buying the tax cuts on the economy, or the Iraq war (finally!). For the first time, we have Bush and his orcs on the run. The hell with Bush's National Guard service. The contrast is obvious. The American people are questioning everything about Bush, now, and the Rush orcs are confused as to how to deal with this. No sideshow. Bush was wrong on this war. He is wrong on the economy. He is wrong on civil rights. He is wrong on jobs. Bring it on!

[knight_of_the_star]

4. No, we SHOULD

It proves that Bush has a pattern of LYING about BIG things and avoiding doing what has to be done.

[frogbison]

6. I'm 51 and it's not a sideshow.

I HATED the Vietnam War and the damage it has done.

It is very important that Bush's service record be held up to the light of scrutiny, the weight of public opinion. So many of my generation fought, were scarred or killed, in a war in which we felt our government's involvement was wrong.

The reason (lies told that it was necessary) that we were in Southeast Asia was our hope for an effect on stopping the plunkplunplunk results of the Domino Theory. Bush's war has no such noble intentions.

[blondeatlast]

11. It's a real issue--a man who wiggled out of service sending our children

off to die in an illegal aggression, while chipping away at their benefits at home and well being abroad. It's just sickening.

It doesn't matter WHO the candidate turns out to be, this is an issue that needs to be addressed on SO MANY levels; affirmative action for the privileged few, cowardice, knowledge of the costs of war, etc, ad nauseaum.

I'm a DK supporter until and if I must rechoose, and I think this issue is at the heart of what is so very wrong and out of the mainstream with this administration.

[Doctor_J]

23. I must disagree

Him prancing onthe Lincoln after fleeing military service shows that he lives in a pretend world. He's a pretend soldier (went AWOL), pretend businessman (went bankrupt twice, then used his dad's political connections to make millions), and a pretend resident (leading the country into war, recession, deficit).

Him being stoned while on the government payroll 30 years ago is part of a pattern of pretending to be what he's not - it fits together with what he does today.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NV1962]

7. Yes, I meant W's record, and only *his* record here

That's what the ABB reference was for.

[styersc]

9. Reality is that none of the serious candidates should mention the AWOL

issue themselves, this should be handled by operatives and allies. The successful candidate has to be presidential and remain above the mud slinging.

No one got in to this race because Whistle Ass went AWOL 30 years ago-our candidate should be presenting positive ideas and alternatives to the poor preformance by shrub, not wallowing in his sleaze.

The AWOL story should be kept alive and he should be forced to answer because it will only lead up to the story concerning his refusal to be drug tested and his removal from flight rotation at that time. If the candidate brings it up he will be saddled with the stink and we want our representative to be above all that.

The dirty work is up to us- write letters to the editor, call talk shows, confront GOP'ers (and be armed with facts).

[blondeatlast]

13. That's very true. The operatives can handle it on the left side of the fen

but if the press has any spine left they will go make *it* answer directly.

I know, but I can still dream, can't I?

Til then, I won't let the issue die.

[Doctor_J]

24. Yep

let McAuliffe, Malloy, Franken (whenever he comes on the radio) and the ground troops sling the shit. If we throw enough of it, it will stick. Let the candidates avoid the stench.

[CWebster]

12. Just think of all the really relevant issues the Democrats

could attack Bush with---if only they hadn't voted to support it all.
Instead they have to play alpha male games about who is the "real deal", an aging botuxed former anti-war protester with links to "Hanoi Jane" and a questionable record in Nam, who later attacked Bob Kerrey for inserting Viet Nam into the debate in defense of Clinton's "draft dodging"? Or another priviledged punk who sleazied his way out but will probably be bailed out by Daddy's Carlyle MIC connections--the usual pattern of getting his ass covered.

I don't suggest you get too cocky right yet.

[MoonRiver]

14. Absolutely! This is not about the Vietnam war.

It relates to credibility and character. * is a major criminal. He's done illegal drugs, gone AWOL in a time of war, and killed thousands of our soldiers and innocent civilians through an illegal war which he started on the basis of transparent lies. All of this is on record. * will try, but he can't hide from his past and present crimes, unless we let him. So we MUST hammer it home. People are waking up to the fraud and corruption of this administration. Let's make sure they don't slip back into the twilight zone.

[CWebster]

15. You missed the point

Kerry voted to give Bush a blank check and he can be ripped over the coals for his military creds just as easily. Keep ignoring that reality.

http://www.counterpunch.org/willson1015.html

[blondeatlast]

16. Kerry was there, Bush wasn't--and I saw the whole thing on TV.

So did most baby boomers (I'm on the cusp). We remember, oh yes, we remember, when war was mangled bodies and grieving parents--the press brought it home to us.

We can nitpick about Kerry's war record, but there is no denying that he saw combat. George saw a possibly windowless office--big difference.

I'm a DK supporter, but this issue is terribly relevant. But we must let the operatives handle it, not the candidates.

[MoonRiver]

17. No, I got the point and agree with you. I've been worried about that

from the moment Kerry made that HUGE IRW mistake. But many people were fooled about Iraq (including my very liberal husband). Also Kerry can use the mismanagement of post-Iraq against *. But regarding the AWOL issue, Kerry fought honorably, was a decorated war hero, and then exercised his right of free speech by protesting the war. AWOL during wartime is a criminal matter, which should have been dealt with during the 2000 election. Why the hell Gore didn't do this I'll never understand. I think it's very legit for Kerry to demand an explanation from * now. Better late than never.

[CWebster]

18. the view from the other side

http://www.usvetdsp.com/jf_kerry.htm

[MoonRiver]

19. There are many people, aka Pukes, who won't vote for a Dem

no matter what. These folks have already brought out the slime machine and are aiming it at our candidates. I want Wes Clark to win like crazy. But I have no illusions that if he does the vile spinmeisters will be on the war path for the General. If Kerry gets the nom we have to stand together. Once the facts are on the table, no way will Kerry look anything less than angelic next to bottom feeder *. Kerry accidentally killed a woman and baby in Vietnam. While that is very tragic, think how many little babies and mothers * has blown to bits for the greater glory of Hallicurton.

[blondeatlast]

20. RW talking points--they are pissed because he threw his medals on the

Capital steps in protest. I'm old enough to remember.

Not a good idea to link to RW sites on this board--I would have thought you'd have figured that out by now.

From the site:

...rubbing shoulders with Hanoi Jane Fonda (view article and pictures) as a much-celebrated organizer for Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), one of America's most radical pro-communist groups.

Sen. Kerry, the "noble statesman" and "highly decorated Vietnam vet" of today, is a far cry from Kerry, the radical, hippie-like leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) in the early 1970s.

Pro-Communist? Like I say, I'm old enough to remember. :wtf:

Please don't link to RW sites for "facts."

[CWebster]

21. Except they weren't his medals

They were someone else's medals. If you read the counterpunch link above from a fellow veteran, you would've known that. Of course they are right-wing points, the issue being that you are viewing this within the confines of your own spin, and they could just as easily pile grievances on Kerry.

I marched against the Viet Nam war with my father, a veteran of Korea, where he witnessed war atrocity often as a consequence of bad command decisions from wealthy priviliged superiors. My cousin, son of a gung-ho WW2 navy flier, bought the lie about honor and duty and went to Nam where he flew heliocopters. Upon his return he would have nothing to do with his father--or any of his family ever again.
My father was prepared to move us to Canada if my brothers were to be drafted---so you best watch who you are calling a coward when it comes to fighting unjust wars.

Viet Nam was a shameful moment in our past, to spin it as anything else is revisionist history more in keeping with Republican talking points....speaking of Republican talking points.

[bmbmd]

22. The issue in my mind is not so much

of being AWOL, it is of using his position of privilege to avoid meaningful service. I am forty-nine, registered for the draft, and had a very low draft number. Had the draft not ended in 1972, I would have gone to Viet Nam. There was no way out for a young man of humble upbringing. Bush, on the other hand, leapt to the top of the list, joined a "Champaign Brigade", and snorted his way through five years of so-called "service" to his country. I resent that deeply. I was spared and have gone on to live a sucessful and happy life. Many of my friends and co-babyboomers were not spared. I find that much more despicable than dodging the draft. My suggestion would be to downplay the "AWOL" angle and concentrate on the silver spoon angle. Like his whole life, his military service was predicated on lies and privilege, and is meaningless.

[CWebster]

25. OTOH there are those same young men and women

of humble upbringing still paying the price. Thanks to cowardly senators, who abdicated their duty and handed Bush, who every idiot knew was incompetent, carte blanche support.

[PurityOfEssence]

26. This is something for proxies to do, not candidates or their campaigns

Let the greybeards or pundits work this one; for the candidates to do it, it will seem very petty. I had a very interesting talk with my Dad about this--he brought it up--and his take was that there were so many "real" issues to go after the guy with that it would be silly to pursue this.

It should definitely be brought up by people outside of the campaigns and kept alive, but it looks very "gotchaesque" from the guys themselves.

I must say though, if Kerry or Clark is the nominee, a slogan along the lines of "War Hero, or War Zero" or "War Hero or Warmonger" would be fun...