2 November 2006

Is Kerry's statement true?

John Kerry is taking a lot of heat for this statement^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H, er "botched joke":
You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq.

First Kerry went on the offensive in response to wide scale backlash. Since then, he's made a formal apology.

As unpleasant and unsavory as it is, is the pronouncement true?

I bet it is. I am sure (without data; I see this feelingly) that the kids who are serving in Iraq are not nearly as well educated as, say, the kids who are getting internships at media companies that served the Koolaid on WMD, or serving as pages to closeted gay Republican congressmen.

It's an economic draft, stupid.

In days of past, I would eagerly scour the net for information and statistics to prove or disprove such assertions, but today I find myself burdened with tasks galore, and an even a "to post" list here that I need to get to ASAP, and thus I am unable to devote any attention to proper study. But I would wager that the statement is indeed true — that while there are many who eagerly volunteer to serve despite their individual economic circumstances, an equally greater lot exercise an option motivated in large part by the matter of economic livelihood.

One thing I am certain of is that Kerry's "foot in mouth" faux pas isn't anywhere near as offensive as this famous presidential indiscretion that made light of the deliberate misrepresentations fostered by the Bush administration for its illegal, immoral and unconstitutional invasion of a country that posed no threat to the United States.

And I stand by the statement that anyone who tars Kerry for this latest gaffe, yet is unwavering in loyalty to a chickenhawk president who during an age where he could have served in a war he supported, instead opted to skip out via pulling influential family strings, is a blinded partisan, impervious to reason.


My full response:


I like writing in wiki markup/language better than html. Sorry to transfer you to another site....
Trav, thanks for the feedback...

1. I'm not defending Kerry. I didn't see or read the whole speech, nor do I care to. I'm just addressing the sound bite that's throttling around Republican loyalist circles and asking that even if it is crass, is it true...

2. Sorry I didn't respond to your comment in an earlier thread (your link to another AZplace article on news media coverage - http://azplace.net/index.ph...) as I can't believe I left unchallenged your assertion that covering Benet Ramsey case wasn't cheap, easy to cover, and doesn't contain "less concern for truthfulness".. ...just because a arrest happened in a foreign country doesn't make it expensive - especially for that kind of case where a simple wire report from a local stringer suffices and the bulk of "news content" is comprised of conjecture, heresay and prattling talking heads speculating, raising ire...

3. You really underestimate the power of words and images, if the truth is exposed and beamed into living rooms and splashed on the front page... ...one doesn't have to go far back in history to see the effect of media campaigns or filtering of news to keep folks in comfortable apathy. Why do you think extraordinary resources are expended by government interests and corporate interests to achieve this end?
"I'm not defending Kerry."

Of course you are. Maybe your comments were always so shrill and partisan, and at the time I was just as shrill and partisan too so I didn't notice it.

I am still partisan, just less shrill.

"The Republican Party has no respect for democracy or the rights of those who disagree with them" 12 November 2006

Statments like these are shrill shock banners, encouraging others to get involved in the debate. It is an effective marketing technique, but the statment is dubious and untrue at best.

I need to go to class. School sucks. Can't write more.
Trav, how am I "defending Kerry"?

Again, I am a registered independent who pledges allegiance to no political party. Again, I am asking the question "is it true?", has there been research done? What are the numbers? Perhaps I did not make that succinct enough...

As for the cited post title, typically when I reference another article, I snip out an outrageous quote from the article, either a quoted source or from the writer himself/herself. It's my way of revolting against the standard journalistic practice of editors writing headlines that in no way reflect the gist of the written article. And it's a way to confuse readers who skim and don't dive past the headline, but it's something that's been in practice for quite some time...
I have a tear in my eye. I agree with Trav. If you haven't seen the partisan treatment between the Rush and Kerry articles, Naum, your goggles must be loosened. I commend Trav for calling it; I was just ignoring it.

Oh yes, the headline "Republicans have no Respect....". I have a serious question; are you revolting by going over the top, Naum; or do you believe the article was really summarized by this title? If this actually happened (I've no doubt)this doesn't ref;ect on the party as a whole, simply on asswipes and dickheads. By way of comparison, I wouldn't call actions of young punks (flattening tires of Repub volunteers picking up voters) a judgement against the Dem Party.

Hey! Enough of this shit!!
All of you have a great Thanksgiving. I'll be spending the rest of the week getting all my lights up. I'm Griswolding this year.
Well, despite soft pedaling by the MSM that "both sides" committed grievous election behavior, overwhelming evidence suggests that it was a concerted NRCC strategy (at the national level) to perform these dirty tricks - DOS attacks, phone bank jamming, repeated callings... ...I'd say that's above and beyond the fare of the random knucklehead...
Please, please, please!

"I sincerely regret that my words were misinterpreted to wrongly imply anything negative about those in uniform and I personally apologize to any service member, family member or American who was offended,"

Telling people that they misinterpreted his words DOES NOT AN APOLOGY MAKE!

Add Comment

This item is closed, it's not possible to add new comments to it or to vote on it