Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

My response to a RW complaint about Kerrys testimony before the Senate

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
mourningdove92 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-26-04 09:36 PM
Original message
My response to a RW complaint about Kerrys testimony before the Senate
I wish someone would explain to me why some people are so offended by John Kerry's testimony in front of the Senate way back then.

Let me just lay it out the way I see it. Keeping in mind that I am a part of the Vietnam generation and was almost as opposed to that war as I am to the war in Iraq.
John Kerry volunteered to join the military. He then volunteered to go to Vietnam, the very place that so many young men were doing everything in their power to avoid. Now, he could have avoided Vietnam and the military. He came from money, had excellent grades, and there were many ways for the monied folks to get out of it. But he chose to go.
So he goes, serves his time, sees a lot of things first hand. You know, the real things. Not the things that had been scrubbed and cleaned up by the media for public consumption. He received and carried out orders. He spoke with many others that were there. At some point, he came to a decision. He decided that he had been conned. He had been lied to. America had been conned. America had been lied to. His opinion, after having actually been there, was that we did not need to be in Vietnam. That Vietnam was not an honorable war. Vietnam was Lies, deceit, dishonor.

So he comes back to America. Now, many Vietnam Vets feel that way. Most of them just went home and tried to get on with their lives. John Kerry decided to speak out. He chose to speak out against an Administration that was vicious and corrupt. He did not go before the Senate to tear down the soldiers serving in Vietnam. He went there to speak out against the government policies that perpetuated the horror of Vietnam.

Why would you deride him for that? What did he do that was wrong? I really and truly do not understand. Of course, neither do I understand the mind set of a year and a half ago, when anyone that spoke out against the war in Iraq was immediately called a traitor and Unamerican.

Please explain this to me. Many soldiers have died defending our freedoms, one of which, is the freedom of speech. Why would someone, who loved his country enough to put himself in harms way to defend her, be called a traitor for execising his right to speak out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC