the STOP KERRY Alliance...
 

From Salon.com:

Maybe when Howard Dean hinted he would take the No. 2 spot if it's "best for the party," late last week, he had a different John in mind for the top of the ticket. Dean was on CBS News last night talking up Senator John from North Carolina – not Massachusetts – as the more electable Democrat this November. "I've actually said on the record that I thought Senator Edwards would be a stronger candidate against George W. Bush than John Kerry, because when Senator Kerry's record is examined by the public at a more leisurely time when we're not having primaries every week, he's going to turn out to be just like George W. Bush."

Not surprisingly, John Edwards agrees with the assessment. "I think that [Dean] is a very wise man. ... The truth is that this campaign to bring about change is working with independents and voters that we will have to get in order to win the general election."

Just how far will Edwards and Dean go to stop Kerry? Might an Edwards-Dean ticket be in the works? If the Boston Globe is right, neither Edwards nor Kerry plan on pairing off on a ticket many Dems dream about this election year, anyway. And if the Washington Post's David Broder's right, sunny John Edwards could sure use a guy like Dean around, who's not afraid to do the dirty work necessary to undermine a front-runner.

But maybe Dean's praise of John Edwards is just another way of slapping Kerry for those anti-Dean attack ads in Iowa, funded in part by Kerry fundraiser and disgraced former New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli. We shall see.

Kerry scares me a little. He was tied in with Jane Fonda during her little "YAY for communism" phase during the Vietnam War. I'm not down with giving my enemies personal info on my soldiers to torture them better.

Sorry, I just can't let that one go unchallanged.

Read the other thread about Kerry.

NEITHER of them EVER said "YAY for Communism." What they said was that the US was wrong in the Viet Nam Conflict. They are way different. And they were well within their Constitutional rights as American citizens.

Remeber, too, that Kerry made his anti-war stand AFTER he had already served (voluntarily), was wounded and received the third highest medal for gallantry in combat that our country offers.

In addition, at least according to the story on the other thread, while they spoke for the same cause, they hardly even met. And, on at least one occassion when they were speaking at the same rally, it was two years before Fonda's ill advised trip to SE Asia.

I'm not sure how I will vote this year, and I'm not a Jane Fonda fan, but offhand comments like the one above are counterproductive to our political debates.

Before you "tie" two people together, get your facts straight.

Those were my words! :)

<hijacking my own thread>

DeltAlum, you're my GC hero.

</hijack>

Why don't you read the other thread on Kerry's battle history and his wounds which he himself says weren't bad at all. This guy is going down.

-Rudey

Amen what?

-Rudey

I think DA realized that. That's why he stated that neither of them said it.

Fonda's trip was ill advised. Even dumb.

My point is that, I believe the trip and the whole purpose for Vietnam Veterans Against the War were not to support Communism but rather to attempt to end what they, and many others, felt was a war being fought for the wrong reasons and executed by the wrong people -- politicians instead of warriors.