October 31, 2006

John Kerry's Continuing Contempt For the Military

Lurch just can't keep his contempt for our brave soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines hidden any longer.

“You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”

This mindblowingly stupid comment comes courtesy of Allahpundit, who also has Kerry on audio and video over at Hot Air.

I hope that members of our military keep in mind that Kerry is only articulating sentiments that many on the far left have held over and passed down to future generations of service-hating leftists since at least the Vietnam War era, and that our military can voice its displeasure with Kerry's "fellow travelers" at the ballot box exactly one week from today.

If Kerry's backhanded slap at those in uniform isn't a call to get "out the vote" for our brave servicemen and servicewomen and those who support them, I don't know what is.

Update: Republican Senator, Navy Pilot and former POW John McCain lets Kerry have it with both barrels:

Senator Kerry owes an apology to the many thousands of Americans serving in Iraq, who answered their country's call because they are patriots and not because of any deficiencies in their education. Americans from all backgrounds, well off and less fortunate, with high school diplomas and graduate degrees, take seriously their duty to our country, and risk their lives today to defend the rest of us in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.

They all deserve our respect and deepest gratitude for their service. The suggestion that only the least educated Americans would agree to serve in the military and fight in Iraq, is an insult to every soldier serving in combat, and should deeply offend any American with an ounce of appreciation for what they suffer and risk so that the rest of us can sleep more comfortably at night. Without them, we wouldn't live in a country where people securely possess all their God-given rights, including the right to express insensitive, ill-considered and uninformed remarks.

I'm asking CY readers to send a copy of Kerry's comments and the link to the Hot Air URL (copy and paste: ) via email to everyone they know of voting age.

As their selected candidate for President of the United States just two short years ago, John Kerry obviously reflects the mindset of many liberals in the Democratic Party. Let them all know what you think of them one week from today on November 7.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at October 31, 2006 11:54 AM | TrackBack

Itz niic too no that iam knot ejukated.

Posted by: Retired Navy at October 31, 2006 12:13 PM

Excerpted and linked at Bill's Bites >> Jean Fraud Kerry -- Still Lovin' Our Troops

Get your gear for the next Kerry Lied rally here. "Proud Veteran-American. Silent No More!" We haven't gone away, Johnny, and we haven't forgotten. We're still here, locked and loaded, waiting for you to crawl back out from under that rock again. Bring it on, Johnny.

Bill Faith
USAF 1970-1974
Proud Viet Nam Veteran

Posted by: Bill Faith at October 31, 2006 02:13 PM

Yes, McCain is all the things you describe him to be, and I understand that this gives him gravitas when discussing military matters. Why, though, doesn't it cut that way for Murtha, or even for Kerry? I don't think much of Kerry as a person, but, if military service on the resume makes one an authority, why doesn't it work for him?

Posted by: Doc Washboard at October 31, 2006 02:43 PM

The right blogosphere is so desperate for something to divert attention that they've seized on the misquoted remarks of someone not even running for office. Hilarious!

I feel bad for them, so let's give 'em this one...I promise not to vote for Kerry next Tuesday unless he apologizes!

Posted by: Ed at October 31, 2006 02:50 PM

Ed: Independents who favor and respect the military could be swayed by this as being emblematic of the Dem's true feelings. As well, it has a sobering affect on dwadling Republicans to vote against the Dems.

Pray tell us how Kerry was "misquoted" when you can watch him utter these stupid remarks.

Posted by: wjo at October 31, 2006 03:02 PM

The more he opens his mouth, the more he steps in it. He should just have apologized for what he said and been done with it. The man just doesn't know when to shut up. Maybe he'll keep talking until the 7th.

Posted by: Retired Navy at October 31, 2006 03:02 PM

Why, though, doesn't it cut that way for Murtha, or even for Kerry?

Because they've said stupid shit that neutralized any gravitas they may have ever had?

Posted by: Purple Avenger at October 31, 2006 04:10 PM

The criticism spewing from Bush administration, Republican congressman, senators, and other right-wing talking heads of Senator John Kerry’s comments in California rings hollow, meaningless and without substance in light of the more serious changes occurring in our government today.

“Take note: On October 27th President Bush, quietly and almost unnoticed by the mainstream media, signed the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007," which allows President Bush to declare a "public emergency," station troops anywhere in America, and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder." This was passed with no public discussion.

This changes a law passed in the 19th century prohibiting military troops from enforcing domestic law - one of the safeguards that prevents our government from becoming a police state. It’s why we have a National Guard and a Coast Guard (which are law enforcement organizations) that are not a part of the army reserve and the navy (which are military organizations.) President Bush continues to dangerously concentrate the power of the president – and the Republican congress, as usual, rubber-stamps it!

Regarding Senator John Kerry’s inappropriate comment: “…you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq." He should have pointed out the fact that under Bush’s miserable leadership, the only way the army could keep it’s minimum enlistment numbers up is by dropping the requirement that army recruits be high school graduates, raising enlistment bonuses while focusing recruiting efforts in economically depressed areas of the country, implementing a stop-loss program and recalling troops from the Individual Ready Reserve.

Since the Bush administration came into power it has fabricated evidence to justify an invasion, condoned torture, eliminated habeas corpus, set up secret prisons around the world, established an unconstitutional domestic wiretapping and spying operation, denied science in favor of corporate interests as it dramatically lowered environmental standards, favored the teaching of creationism as if it were a scientific theory and cut useful social programs to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy.

That the right wing is spending time criticizing a mildly inappropriate comment by Kerry, instead of debating the continuing degradation of our Constitutional rights really shows their twisted priorities. The right wing will never understand why, of the ten Iraq/Afghanistan war veterans currently running for congress, nine are running as Democrats opposing the war.

I, an Iraq war veteran, will never vote for a Republican.

J. Williams

Posted by: J. Williams at October 31, 2006 06:28 PM

J.Williams, thank you for your service.

At the same time, I'd like to know where you get your information. The Warner Act you referenced is indeed a real act signed into law, it just doesn't do anything you say it does from what I read. What it does do

The fiscal 2007 National Defense Authorization Act provides more than $530 billion to maintain the military in the shape it must be to win the war on terror.

President Bush signed the bill, officially called the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, during a small ceremony in the Oval Office this morning. Warner is Virginia’s senior senator and the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The act provides $462.8 billion in budget authority for the department. Senate and House conferees added the $70 billion defense supplemental budget request to the act, so overall, the act authorizes $532.8 billion for fiscal 2007.

The $70 billion supplemental provision covers the cost of ongoing operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Horn of Africa, as well as other expenses affiliated with the war on terrorism. The supplemental funding also provides $23.8 billion to help “reset” Army and Marine Corps equipment, which is wearing out faster than originally planned because of the war.

The supplemental measure further provides $2.1 billion for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Task Force, $1.7 billion to train and equip Iraqi security forces and $1.5 billion to help train and equip Afghan security forces.

The authorization act provides a 2.2 percent pay raise for American servicemembers, effective Jan. 1. It continues the Army at its end-strength of 512,400 and raises the Marine Corps end-strength to 180,000. The Army National Guard end strength is set at 350,000.

The act authorizes the expansion of eligibility for the Tricare health care program to all members of the Selected Reserve while in a non-active-duty status and their families. Payment is set at 28 percent of the premium amount established by DoD. The act also prohibits any increase in Tricare Prime and Tricare Select Reserve in fiscal 2007.

The act authorizes $36.6 billion for operations and maintenance costs, including $700 million for body armor and $149.5 million for ammunition.

The act authorizes construction of seven warships, including the next-generation destroyer and the amphibious assault replacement ship. The act also provides $794 million in advance procurement authority for the next generation aircraft carrier, the CVN-21.

The act sets aside $4.4 billion for 22 C-17 Globemaster III airlifters, $1.4 billion for procurement of 14 Marine V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and $1.5 billion for 43 MH-60R/S helicopters.

The act authorizes $841 million for 122 Stryker combat vehicles, including $41.5 million to replace combat losses. The act also provides $1.4 billion for 20 F/A-22 Raptor fighters and reduced funding for the F-35 Lightning II fighter due to schedule delays.

Your other comments also seem to be either ill-informed agi-prop, or flat out, bald-faced lies.

As for the ten Iraq War vets running for office, it is easy to explain why nine are Democrats; many of the conservative veterans re-enlisted and remain in the Armed Forces, while many who left the service seem to still beleive in the mission.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at October 31, 2006 07:04 PM

Oh, and in response to what you apparently regard as our "low quality" troops:

Our review of Pen­tagon enlistee data shows that the only group that is lowering its participation in the military is the poor. The percentage of recruits from the poorest American neighborhoods (with one-fifth of the U.S. population) declined from 18 percent in 1999 to 14.6 percent in 2003, 14.1 percent in 2004, and 13.7 percent in 2005. . . .

In summary, the additional years of recruit data (2004–2005) sup­port the previous finding that U.S. military recruits are more similar than dissimilar to the American youth population. The slight dif­ferences are that wartime U.S. mil­itary enlistees are better educated, wealthier, and more rural on aver­age than their civilian peers.

Recruits have a higher percent­age of high school graduates and representation from Southern and rural areas. No evidence indicates exploitation of racial minorities (either by race or by race-weighted ZIP code areas). Finally, the distri­bution of household income of recruits is noticeably higher than that of the entire youth population.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at October 31, 2006 07:21 PM


I haven't read the Warner bill, nor will I, but isn't it the case that bills like this always have bizarre riders attached to them? I was under the impression that a brief 300-word summary such as the one you presented would be incapable of listing each and every provision of the bill. Isn't it possible that the clauses that J. Williams mentions are actually there, but buried in fine print?

Posted by: Doc Washboard at October 31, 2006 08:27 PM

Doc, it is possible. It is also possible I'll get hit by a meteor tomorrow.

It is all but impossible that a concept as important as Posse Comitatus would just get swept aside without anyone noticing or commenting on it.

Think Pinch and the NYT would let that pass without several months of hysteria?

Nah, me neither.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at October 31, 2006 08:42 PM

Hanoi John may not have said what he wanted to say but he sure said what he was thinking. No one can alibi him out of this. You can only make yourself appear as stupid as he has proven time and again that he is.

You could look at it this way. If you stay in school, study hard and do your homework you can grow up to be president. If you are a stupid drunken slackard you can grow up to be an also ran, aka a loser like me.

Posted by: Scrapiron at November 1, 2006 02:16 AM


You can find the offending provision here:

Take a peek at Section 1076 entitled, "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies." and Section 333, "Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law"

Also, don't put words into my mouth - I don't regard our troops as low quality. The training we receive is very good. I pointed out that the army dropped the requirement that recruits have high a school diploma and took the other steps I mentioned to keep it's minimum enlistment goals.

Your recruitment statistics refer to all branches of the military. I spoke of the army specifically - The bulk of our troops in Iraq are army and the army has taken the bulk of "enlistment strain" (and the bulk of the casualties in Iraq.) The other branches, especially the Air Force and Navy, have not had the enlistment problems of the army.

I appreciate your constructive criticism. These issues, and the others I mentioned in my previous post, are the ones that deserve public attention and debate.

J. Williams

Posted by: James Williams at November 1, 2006 02:55 AM

Actually, the National Guard ultimately answers to the Federal Government. This was established during the integration of schools in Arkansas so that the Arkansas National Guard would not have the legal ability to oppose the 101st Airborne. Granted, governors still do have some control of their state's National Guard, but they do not have the final say.

As for the Coast Guard, they recently became a department of Homeland Security, yet in times of crisis defer to the Navy for commands---just as the Merchant Marines do.

Posted by: Thomas Copious at November 1, 2006 10:22 AM

He's right. Who wants to get stuck in Iraq?

If you all disagree with his thinking so much, why aren't you in Iraq?

Posted by: Another View at November 2, 2006 10:23 AM

Wow, where do people get their info regarding the military. Especially the National Guard. If it were not for Federal funding, there more than likely would not be a National Guard. The Feds pay my salary for my weekend duty, the equipment is owned by the feds, our guard bases/armories are owned by the feds. The only real thing a state governor has to do with the Guard is the ability to call us up for state emergencies.
Like stated above, the USCG is a Dept of Homeland Security entity and was a Dept of Transportation entity unless there was an all out war and then they become one of the navies fleets.

Posted by: USN_USA_USAF_VET at November 3, 2006 08:43 AM