Excellent BusinessWeek(!) Editorial: "Flinging the Foul Mud of Vietnam"

[TahitiNut]

By Thane Peterson (...emphasis mine...)

John Kerry returned a hero. The smears his political enemies are now flinging mark them -- not him -- as beneath contempt

The next time the nation gets into a war, why would any American with an interest in national service show up to fight? When did the U.S. come to blithely accept the tarring for political gain of honorably discharged combat veterans? Obviously, I'm talking about the attacks on John Kerry by a bunch of angry, Bush-backing Vietnam-war vets who claim the Democratic candidate doesn't deserve all of the medals, which include Bronze and Silver Stars and three Purple Hearts, that he won in combat in Vietnam.

But I'm also talking about the attacks on Republican Senator and former prisoner of war John McCain -- a genuine hero by anyone's definition -- during his South Carolina primary battle against George W. Bush for the 2000 Presidential nomination. And the relentless assaults on the patriotism of Democrat Max Cleland by Republican Saxby Chambliss, who defeated Cleland for one of Georgia's Senate seats in 2002. If you want proof of Cleland's patriotism, all you need to know is that he lost three limbs in Vietnam.

It's time for Bush in particular -- and Americans in general -- to get on the right side of this issue once and for all. No moral equivalency exists between Kerry and Bush on the issue of service in Vietnam. Kerry served in combat. He was shot at. Not Bush. If you don't think it's important for a President to have served in combat, fine, make your choice on other grounds. But if you do, Kerry is your man, at least on this one issue.

<more>

[Nite Owl]

1. That was a terrific article.

In regard to the moveon ads, they were not lies. Maybe the truth hurts but he didn't show up for duty and he did use the same tactics on McCain. I see no real reason to condemn them. The SBV ads are lies and that is the difference.

[Vincardog]

9. This Is an excellent article

Exactly so Night Owl. Why should Kerry condemn moveon running truthfully ads and bush not condemn a pack of lies? This whole discussion is slanted exactly the wrong way. Sen. Kerry volunteered. He served. He Saw the quagmire and came back and supported the people in helping to stop the carnage. Bush used his political family ties to avoid service and then went AWOL and probable deserted after failing his drug test. Why are we talking about this BS and not talking about the abject failure of GW in every aspect of his policies as well as his life? To be specific why should we follow GW Custer into his final failure? Are we willing to sacrifice our country for PNAC and one mans delusions?

[Ruffhowse]

2. Will this editorial be in the print version of Business Week?

[TahitiNut]

3. I kinda doubt it.

This is written by a Business Week Online editor. It might show up in the print edition, but I'm guessing the Online edition reaches an even more extensive audience.

[enough]

4. What a breath of fresh air.

Great editorial.

[citizen]

5. a voice of reason from the business press!

Thanks for highlighting this article! He even skewers journalists reporting on the swift-boat liars...

[TahitiNut]

6. Yeah. I makes me wonder what he's doing with BusinessWeekOnline.

There are plenty of pseudo-libertarian neoconservatives in IT/MIS and BWO sure doesn't want to tell its audience things they don't want to hear. Once upon a time, 'enlightened' business-folk insisted that the 'bad' news get to them sooner than the 'good' news. But that was 35+ years ago and certainly not universal. Today, it's kill the messenger unlucky enough to displease the addressee. Most corporations look like communal sandboxes full of cats compulsively kicking sand over the turds.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Could be several reasons

And he doesn't have to be a Democrat to dislike Bush and his campaign. He may just want the election to be fought on substantive issues, rather than smears; he may recognise that Democratic presidents have a better record for employment and the stock market; he may just want a competent president and cabinet, rather than a bunch of crooks out for power and self-enrichment. Finally, he might want to avoid the USA starting wars that cost thousands of lives.

[Barrett808]

7. Iraq a "nasty, unnecessary conflict"

That's a pretty big admission from the pages of BW.

[Cocoa]

10. one of the few that doesn't blame Kerry for this

how many times have we heard "Kerry was asking for it."

[TahitiNut]

11. It's funny how many "ask for it" ...

McCain asked for it. Cleland asked for it. Gore asked for it. Now Kerry is aksing for it. :eyes:

The Republican Slandermongers, who proclaim themselves so fond of the military, sure do have a track record of slandering combat veterans.

How can these people "love America" and hate Americans, particularly Americans who're combat veterans??