1992:

George H.W. Bush, who was shot down over the Pacific in World War II, runs against William Jefferson Clinton, who received a draft notice during Viet Nam but pulled strings to wiggle out of it. John Kerry gives a speech denouncing anyone who would "re-open the wounds" of Viet Nam.

1996:

Bob Dole, who is still suffering from the combat wounds he received during World War II, runs against Bill Clinton.

2000:

George W. Bush, George H.W. Bush's son who did more National Guard time than needed to fulfill his enlistment, ran against Albert Gore II, who as the son of a segregationist senator was also (like "W.") considered too big a target for the enemy and so served as a PR flack. Democrats belittle the risk of flying fighter planes.

2004:

George W. Bush runs against John F. Kerry, who served off the coast of Viet Nam but pulled strings to be relieved of duty after 4 months and receiving 4 medals. The Democrats try to slander Bush's service record by promoting photoshopped bogus documents, and promote Kerry as a war hero "reporting for duty" (Kerry's words). When Kerry's fellow Swift Boaters come forward with their opinion of Kerry, the Democrats cry foul (although they have yet to prove in court that anything that the "swifties" said was untrue).

2008:

John McCain, famous war hero who served time in a POW camp, runs against Barack Obama, who never served in the military and has little experience outside of it. Democrats don't let that prevent them from attacking McCain's war record.

You like being politically correct, huh?

Those are not attacks on military records they are political attacks on opponents.Service in the military is not the sum of any of those persons, you are full of it.In fact W got by with cheating, anyone who thinks his military carrer is even worth mentioning is really stretching it.

An attack on military service would go something like this:

Anyone dumb enough to join the American military deserves to serve in Iraq.

I don't think ANYBODY should be attacking ANYBODY'S military service to this country.

John McCain has NEVER said he deserved to be president just because he served in the military for 20 years. It does, however, provide him a lot of insight and knowledge of how the military works that a man who was not even in the miliatry would have.

That, coupled with 22 years service to this country in the senate compared to Obama's 143 days - well, there is just no comparison.

Clark should not even have gone down that road - he just makes the contrast between the two that much more obvious.

smelly:

You like being politically correct, huh?

Those are not attacks on military records they are political attacks on opponents.Service in the military is not the sum of any of those persons, you are full of it.In fact W got by with cheating, anyone who thinks his military carrer is even worth mentioning is really stretching it.

An attack on military service would go something like this:

Anyone dumb enough to join the American military deserves to serve in Iraq.

That's the best that you can do--confirm that liberals like you do hate the military? But Obama's spin is that he doesn't hate the military, and he has no control over the smear campaign his supporters are running against McCain.

By the way:

<link>

You like to make statements without being in touch with reality.Just because you think people that are reasonable and disagree with you hate the military doesn't make you right.

McCain helped get us into Iraq, he was very wrong.He changed his position on the new GI bill and voted against it.Do you think he hates the military?

There is no smear campaign that is just Rush Limbaugh crap.

No one has ever said tha McCain wasn't a hero, and no one will.You are just whining because you are going to lose this fall, big time.

Finally anyone who claims that W's military service is worth mentioning is really out of touch with reality.

I dare you to show me anyone's "attack" on McCain's military service, or any of those Shenk has listed.

Attacking a military career is perfectly acceptible to morally challenged Republicans. They perfected the technique. And then you have the audacity to claim your silly examples are anything like an attack on military careers? This is more evidence that conservatives have lost all sense of direction. They have turned into a rudderless lot, a vindictive mob that will blindly strike out at anything that gets in their way, truth be damned.

smelly:

I dare you to show me anyone's "attack" on McCain's military service, or any of those Shenk has listed.

The original article was about the "real reason" that McCain's military service was attacked Sunday (as he got shot down, big deal) by Clarke. Didn't you notice?

As for one of the other attacks I cited, how about Dan Rather's attack of Bush's war record?

You know Don, most of the time most folks just ignore your adalpated and inane ramblings, but this time I have to respond. You are so full of shit. The only candidate that had his war record besmirched was Kerry, and anyone with half a brain knows 527s like the Swift boaters was a complete campaign fabrication. At least Kerry was in a combat zone, and that was more than Dubya accomplished. But the point is, a lot guys wanted to avoid being drafted and going to Nam. Dick Cheney certainly comes to mind. Actually, I don't begrudge anyone for trying to avoid that war. But let's don't be making these stupid blanket statements that all "liberals" attack war records. In the first place that would be political suicide for any one seriously running for office, and secondly, it’s usually only fringe organizations like 527s that do these kinds of smear campaigns.

Also, let's get one thing straight. John McCain isn't a famous war hero because he got shot down and spent time in POW camp. Are his fellow POWs who were there with him also famous war heroes? No. He's a famous politician whose campaign needs to glorify his combat record to make sure the voting public knows he is a hero. In that regard, he is no different than John Kerry. And I respect Bob Dole for not playing up the hero angle when he ran for president.

BTW Don, in what branch of the military did you serve in?

bordhead, smelly, and others...

Kerry got slammed not because of the 527, but because he made unfounded accusations against his former buddies. They didn't like it, and they especially didn't like him then trying to use his military experience to prop up his campaign. They brought out all the dirt they could find on him. If he hadn't made such a big deal of his military service (especially that ridiculous "ready for duty" salute at the convention), the swift boat vets would have quickly faded.

> compared to Obama's 143 days

That's inaccurate. Obama chose public service over a lucrative job when he left college, he's been serving his fellow Americans ever since.

Nice try.

> Kerry got slammed not because of the 527, but because he made unfounded accusations against his former buddies.

It was Kerry's duty as an officer to report any abuses and crimes he witnessed. Anyone who actually went to Nam knows they did happen. Kerry was unjustly attacked for doing his duty. As for the Swift Boaties, it's been long since proven they were lying. Case closed on that one, except that McCain has them on staff so we know what to expect from him this election cycle.

Deliphus:

> compared to Obama's 143 days

That's inaccurate. Obama chose public service over a lucrative job when he left college, he's been serving his fellow Americans ever since.

Nice try.

But you have to admit that John McCain served his country, both in and out of the service, for a lot longer than Obama did. And--talk about someone who could have made money big time outside of public service. John McCain the war hero lobbyist could have been as wealthy as Obama's "grey eminence" backer George Soros.

So Barack Obama doesn't have that much experience, even in Congress, but he does have a billionaire backer. While John McCain has served his country for decades.

bordhead:

You know Don, most of the time most folks just ignore your adalpated and inane ramblings, but this time I have to respond. You are so full of shit. The only candidate that had his war record besmirched was Kerry, and anyone with half a brain knows 527s like the Swift boaters was a complete campaign fabrication. At least Kerry was in a combat zone, and that was more than Dubya accomplished. But the point is, a lot guys wanted to avoid being drafted and going to Nam. Dick Cheney certainly comes to mind. Actually, I don't begrudge anyone for trying to avoid that war. But let's don't be making these stupid blanket statements that all "liberals" attack war records. In the first place that would be political suicide for any one seriously running for office, and secondly, it’s usually only fringe organizations like 527s that do these kinds of smear campaigns.

Also, let's get one thing straight. John McCain isn't a famous war hero because he got shot down and spent time in POW camp. Are his fellow POWs who were there with him also famous war heroes? No. He's a famous politician whose campaign needs to glorify his combat record to make sure the voting public knows he is a hero. In that regard, he is no different than John Kerry. And I respect Bob Dole for not playing up the hero angle when he ran for president.

BTW Don, in what branch of the military did you serve in?

I was in the Civil Air patrol for a few weeks, until I decided I better not volunteer for basic training, which still means I served longer than Obama.

"While John McCain has served his country for decades."

All that means to me is that he has more shit and blood on his hands. Bring on the new guy!