You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Skeery sez Bush not qualified to be disgusted
2004-05-07
ScrappleFace, natch.
(2004-05-07) -- Democrat presidential hopeful, and Vietnam veteran, John Forbes Kerry today said President George Bush is "not fit to be disgusted" at photos of U.S. military prison guards hazing Iraqi prisoners.

The president recently granted two interviews with Arab-language TV networks, telling reporters that he found the actions of the prison guards to be "abhorrent."

But Mr. Kerry immediately held a news conference to challenge the president’s credibility on the issue.

"While I was commanding a swift boat in the Mekong Delta, George Bush stayed stateside with the National Guard," said Mr. Kerry. "He never had an opportunity to commit atrocities against the enemy, like I did, so he’s not fit to judge the abuses in Abu Ghraib prison. America needs a commander in chief who knows the harsh reality of war and man’s inhumanity to man
the darkness that lurks in the soul of even the most cultured, erudite and refined among us."

White House spokesman Scott McClelland said, "Senator Kerry is entitled to his opinion. I think the president was simply reacting to the photos the same way most Americans did."

A spokesman for the Kerry campaign said Mr. McClelland’s remarks represent another example of "Bush’s right-wing attack dogs questioning Senator Kerry’s patriotism."

Later, when asked by a reporter on his campaign plane what he thought when he first saw the prisoner-abuse photos, Mr. Kerry said, "I was disgusted. They were abhorrent."
Posted by:Steve from Relto

#6  Dimocrats like Kerry are behind this whole "Iraqi prisoner abuse" thing.
They were going to make this into the "My Lai massacre" of OIF.
Kerry was already muttering about the abuse of the Enemy by the military being "systemic."
Of course, this was supposed to wedge in nicely with his post-Vietnam, VVAW allegations in front of Congress of the military being "babykillers, murderers, animals, etc."
If those lying chickens come home to roost, so be it.
And sKerry hasn't heard the last from the Vietnam vets who were maligned by him so maliciously...
Those fine men who were defamed by him, Jane Fonda and the other Leftists to secure a Vietcong victory are just getting started!
Look for the Dim Convention in Boston this summer to be the anti-Dim Convention of 1968.
Posted by: Jen   2004-05-07 3:20:12 PM  

#5  actually kaus says its looking like the worst of all worlds for Kerry. Economy strong, things going to hell in Iraq. Kerry is MUCH better off if things go well in Iraq and the economy is in bad shape. Much easier to offer clear alternatives on domestic policy. And Iraq splits us Dems, while economy unites us (more or less)
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-05-07 3:13:47 PM  

#4  The Abu Grhaib incident is very dangerous ground for Kerry. Scrappleface does a great job of parodying the danger. The Kerry strategists must be going nuts trying to figure out whether it is better to try to use war "atrocities" as a reason for removing Bush, when the guy they say should replace him has admitted to personally committing much more serious atrocities--against noncombatants no less (burning villages, random "harrassment" firing, etc). Bizarrely, Abu holds the potential to help Bush. When he learned of it he did exactly the right thing, expressed disgust, moved to punish the guards, took steps to prevent re-occurence. Compare that to Kerry who personally committed "atrocities," and heard confessions (supposedly) of soldiers who "raped," "cut off ears, head, and limbs," and used electricity to torture prisoners--and did nothing to see that they were punished.
Posted by: sludj   2004-05-07 2:26:02 PM  

#3  BigEd> Scrappleface. It's a parody.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris   2004-05-07 11:27:06 AM  

#2  He never had an opportunity to commit atrocities against the enemy, like I did . . .

Is he saying that because he's a war criminal (which he admitted to in 1971), and Pres Bush didn't, he's qualified to be the Pres. and Pres. W. isn't?

Is it just that it's Friday morning, and I haven't had my 2nd cup of coffee? Or is this about the oddest thing anyone has ever said?
Posted by: BigEd   2004-05-07 11:10:29 AM  

#1  Lol! I'd have to agree - Skeery's got disgusting pretty well locked up. He devalued patriotism some 30 years ago, so that has to go in his column. Now he's making a play for abhorrent, too.
Posted by: .com   2004-05-07 11:06:23 AM  

00:00