Kerry is slip-sliding into a trap named Tommy Franks, who may be assisted in his mission by McCain and/or Powell.

And, yes, his tactics reek of facism.

Read the interview with Karl Rove that Hugh Hewitt has on his blog: http://www.hughhewitt.com/index.htm#postid846. Karl Rove was in high school at the time.

Didja hear BOB Kerrey's statement? Essentially that "Rove has now proven his connection to the SwiftVets 527 (with these remarks), and thus must resign".

Has the entire Democratic Party gone completely insane?

_Again_ with the "fascism" canard about _Starship Troopers_. This is one of my favorite pet peeves. No matter what Paul Verhoeven wanted moviegoers to think, Heinlein was _not_ pushing fascism in his classic novel. He even said explicitly at several points that the Terran Federation was a democracy, where the only rights that you had to earn through Federal Service (and Heinlein also explicitly said that FS could be, and often was, non-military) were the franchise and the ability to hold public office (and presumably join the civil service). Maybe it was the flogging scenes that got people going.

On the other hand, if you want to whip up on Heinlein's later work, starting with _Stranger In A Strange Land_ (_especially_ that noxious counter-culture classic), don't let me stop you. :)

Who the hell is Karl Rove to talk about Kerry's war record? He's an American citizen. We can still talk freely about books that have been published. I know the Dems are working on getting books banned, but so far they haven't been successful.

Remember the "Chickenhawk" flap? The lefties have been saying all along that only a veteran can understand war enough to declare one, which begs the question how their guy, a millionaire by marriage, is the better guy to understand the plight of the poor.

Kerry's been operating under the assumption that vets like him should be immune to criticism. Cleeland relied on the same assumption to his detriment. This assumption is one of two major flaws of the otherwise honorable man.

This stance is problematic on several levels, one that he made a name for himself by questioning the honor of all his fellow unquestionable veterans by tarring them all with the "war criminals" brush, another that the swift vets he condemns for attacking him have the same "I'm a veteran therefore you shouldn't question me" status he does. Another is that while McCain objects to the attack on the medals, he's backing Bush anyway. And finally, if the US followed the rules alluded to in the title (only veterans can vote) this election would already be over and Bush would be touching up his inaguration speech.

When you say Starship Troopers, are you referring to Heinlein's classic novel, or the angst-filled neo-Nazi movie version?

In the original novel, the Mobile Infantry were clearly based on the USMC.

However, Starship Troopers the movie:
1) Set designs by Albert Speer & Associates, Architects.
2) Costumes by House of Goering.
3) Graphic design and overall "look" and "feel" of The Military in five words: National. Socialist. German. Workers. Party.

McPeak is confused. Rove commented on Kerry's antiwar activism, not his war record. Or does the Kerry camp now concede that the two were concurrent?

Dont' you realize that only if you were an anti-Viet Nam War protester do you have the right to criticize those protesters? Only if you served can you know what horrors those people went through.

Back in the day, I served under McPeak.

We called him Skeletor. He was universally loathed. Near as anyone can tell, he got pushed ahead of the career line due to having been picked to be Thunderbird Lead.

Which made him part of the Air Force aristocracy.

Scarcely a suitable subsitution for merit.

More than a whiff of fascism. When Kerry picked Edwards, he was banking that his service in Vietnam would be enough to cover the 'soft on defense' label that would be thrown at the Democrats. Now that the curtain has been torn (via the anti-war stuff and the duplicity in Kerry's own words about Cambodia), all the Democrats can do is shriek and hope that the press points a finger at Cheney or some other Republican.

Mort Kondracke said it well tonight - Kerry is incoherent and getting worse. Fred Barnes (and Mara Liasson) echoed that by saying that what Rove actually said was pretty bland. And still McAuliffe shrieks.

Bob Kerrey is turning into Howard Dean before our eyes. After his comments on tape, he finished by dropping the f*** word on the Swift Boat vets. I guess the atrocity boys are sticking together.

The election should be moved up to, oh, next week. 9 more weeks of shrieking is just too much.

This from a General whose greatest accomplishment was introducing a new uniform.

And they are ridiculous. The officer dress uniform looks like a United Airlines pilot. The AF enlisted BDU looks like a smurf in cammo. (Quip: "Well, if we are in a blue forest I guarantee we wont be seen.")

The longer Kerry focuses on Vietnam, the weaker he becomes.

First, if he tries to talk about the nobility of his service, then all his statements in the antiwar movement come back to haunt him. It is a simple fact that the overwhelming majority of Vietnam Vets would walk barefoot over a football field of broken glass to vote against him. When he launches into that 'Band of Brothers' blather, and that is combined with the vitriol of his antiwar protests and statements under oath, he opens up a bigger can of worms. Either he is himself a war criminal, or the vast majority of Vietnam vets are war criminals or he was lying in the 70s.

Second, when the Democrats prattle on about failure to serve in Vietnam, they insult literally millions of registered voters who engaged in all manner of legal means to avoid military service. That may not have been morally correct for them to do, but it was legal and it was certainly considered an acceptable response by American society at the time. Kerry has tried to mine these voters for votes based upon making them feel guilty for wangling their way out of service. How long does that work?

Finally, all of Kerry's focus on Vietnam begs the question,'What have you done for me lately and what are you going to do as President?' His legislative record is sadly lacking, mostly consisting of votes against defense spending, intelligence services, sucking up to Ortega and Castro, along with the occasional piece of legislation relating to National Rutabaga Day or somesuch. His Senate career was too meaningless to be inconsequential. By contrast, Bush has been President for 4 years, there is a clear economic recovery going on and we are winning a war whose causes clearly arose and were ignored or swept under the rug by his predecessor. He has substance whether one likes him or not, Kerry does not seem to.

Actually, I rather liked the new uniform. It got rid of a lot of fussy gewgaws.