Our response to Kerry quote mis-characterization should be

[casus belli]

If George Bush were serious about supporting the troops, then how does he explain the following:

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/12910

-Quote-

As of last night, "at least 2546 members of the U.S. military died since the beginning of the Iraq war..., according to an Associated Press count." That figure includes seven military civilians and is six deaths higher than the Defense Department's own count.

<snip>

Perhaps most revealing in the remarks Bush offered the Stars & Stripes was his answer when he was asked why, to date, he has not attended the funeral of a single U.S. soldier who has been killed in his war. Bush, who famously dodged the regular-forces draft during the Vietnam War era, then went AWOL from his National Guard duty post in Texas, said: "Because which funeral do you go to? In my judgment, I think if I go to one I should go to all. How do you honor one person but not another?"

-End Quote-

I think if he really wants to characterize Kerry as having made disparaging remarks to troops, we should REALLY be pushing the fact that Bush has yet to attend a SINGLE funeral for our slain troops. Now which is the more disrespectful act? We shouldn't spend time defending Kerry's comments, we should immediately go on the offensive and point out the hypocrisy of this administration accusing anyone but themselves of disrespecting troops.

[Jensen]

1. Why is Bush taking advise from Henry Kissinger who's

policy killed a lot of American troops in VietNam?