|
Other Columns by Mike Bayham
Mike Bayham Bio
Printer-Friendly Version
John Kerry's Vietnam Quagmire
By Mike Bayham
August 23, 2004
"I'm John Kerry and I'm reporting for duty," saluted the freshly minted Democratic nominee during his acceptance speech at his party's conclave in Boston.
John Kerry wants to make the 2004 presidential election about the war, and I am not talking about the one in Iraq, but rather the engagement that took place in the former French Indochina some three decades ago.
John Kerry's military service during the Vietnam Conflict is not just a major aspect of his campaign for the US Presidency as the Massachusetts US Senator has virtually used it exclusively to define his candidacy.
Kerry never muses about his time as Michael Dukakis' understudy while Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts, nor does he ever share much about his tenure in the US Senate. One would have to wonder what Kerry would actually have to talk about had he not spent four months in the Big Muddy.
The idea is to highlight two simple things: Kerry went to Vietnam and fought while his opponent in the general election remained stateside. How the same party that championed noted draft-dodger Bill Clinton over World War II fighter pilot George H. W. Bush back in 1992 has the audacity to even try to make the contrasting service tenures of Kerry and the younger Bush an issue in this election is beyond me.
However because Kerry has constantly invoked his time in the military into the presidential campaign, it is only fair for the media and the opposition to peer past the selective facade presented regarding his involvement with the war in Vietnam.
The first sign of smoke is related to his claims that he spent Christmas 1968 in Cambodia at the behest of the tyrannical Richard Nixon. Kerry had stated as much in the well of the US Senate prior to his run for the White House. The most glaring error with this story was corroborated not by a disgruntled fellow vet but by a history book: though elected in November 1968, Nixon did not take office until January 1969, leading some to see if there were other lapses of reality with this story.
It was later admitted by some of Kerry's former comrades in arms that the presidential candidate did not cross over the border of Cambodia at that time or any other, causing the Kerry campaign to have to send the tale to their spin bodyshop for further refinement.
And then questions have arisen regarding Kerry's actual conduct under fire and whether he merited the awards bestowed upon him.
While reporters and partisans sift through the blurred circumstances that led to Kerry's battle decorations, some of which he tossed away in protest, there is less ambiguity about Kerry's post-service activities. After the end of his abbreviated tour of duty, Kerry returned home and became a leading anti-war agitator, famously testifying in Congress in uniform about the atrocities committed by America's armed forces in Vietnam.
In doing so, the ambitious shaggy-haired young man was doing far more than simply making a name for himself in anticipation of a run for office, but was indicting his "band of brothers" still fending off attacks by the NVA and the Viet Cong. Demagoguery by peace activists gave significant comfort to battle-exhausted enemies whose only hope of prevailing was for America to lose its will to fight.
John Kerry has not handled the recent missives by his veteran antagonists well, accusing the Bush campaign of secretly being behind the attacks while also trying to suppress their message through legal tactics.
But the exasperated presidential contender has only himself and his allies to blame for this political quagmire.
It was the DNC that initiated the hostilities over the respective war records by accusing President Bush of having gone AWOL during his time in the National Guard. The fervent search for damning files turned up little, though the attempt to discredit the Republican President's character merely invited a response at a time of Kerry's inconvenience.
If there were holes or inaccuracies concerning Kerry's version of how things happened in Vietnam that he did not want inspected, then he should not have intentionally called so much attention to it through a slanted biography penned by Carter apologist Douglas Brinkley and his constant McCainian references to his military career.
I can only imagine the rage that would overcome a veteran, particular from the Vietnam War, watching a man wrap himself in the trappings of a service he had vociferously denounced in the early seventies. Is it of any surprise why the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have so much fire in their belly when it comes to defeating Kerry?
Finally, had Kerry not had two positions on both Vietnam and the Second Persian Gulf War, maybe those who fought for our country would have more confidence and give more support to this potential commander-in-chief.
------------
Mike Bayham is author of the book, Right From The Bayou: The Opinions of a Conservative Cajun, which is available at iuniverse.com.
--------------------
Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.
| 
