Kerry's medical records: still not released to the public

[hoosier]

John Kerry is releasing all his military records--but then again, he isn't. ._._. The former Democratic presidential nominee was asked if had signed Form SF 180, authorizing the Department of Defense to grant access to all his military records.

''I have signed it," Kerry said. Then, he added that his staff was ''still going through it" and ''very, very shortly, you will have a chance to see it."

The devil is usually in the details. With Kerry, it's also in the dodges and digressions. After the interview, Kerry's communications director, David Wade, was asked to clarify when Kerry signed SF 180 and when public access would be granted. Kerry drifted over to join the conversation, immediately raising the confusion level. He did not answer the question of when he signed the form or when the entire record will be made public.

Several e-mails later, Wade conveyed the following information: On Friday, May 20, Kerry obtained a copy of Form 180 and signed it. ''The next step is to send it to the Navy, which will happen in the next few days. The Navy will then send out the records," e-mailed Wade. Kerry first said he would sign Form 180 when pressed by Tim Russert during a Jan. 30 appearance on ''Meet the Press."

Kerry reiterated that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth did not tell the truth about him, and said: "The truth in its entirety will come out . . . the truth will come out." After all this waiting, it better be good.

- Opinion Journal

[DeltAlum]

Maybe someday we will hear the whole Bush/National Guard story as well.

But why drag this Kerry stuff back every other week.

Very few care.

[RACooper]

Originally posted by hoosier
Kerry reiterated that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth did not tell the truth about him, and said: "The truth in its entirety will come out . . . the truth will come out." After all this waiting, it better be good.

- Opinion Journal

After what waiting? Damn the records regarding the action where made public even up here in Canada during the election campaign... the same records that show that some of the very same Swift Boat Veterans for Truth that questioned the validity and/or reporting of 'the action' in question where in effect outright liars... these same tools had submitted AAR that collaborated, or in some cases praised, Kerry's account of the actions... hell some where even the people that recomended him for a decoration.

I may not like Kerry, but that doesn't mean I'd be so base as to impugn his combat service or record for cheap political gain... I was just as disgusted when the same tactics where used against McCain.

I guess the only way to make someones dereliction look good is to attack the record of someone who served - by redirecting or subverting the issue before it even comes up that the other candidate was drunk off his ass, living free and easy Stateside.

[hoosier]

Originally posted by RACooper


I may not like Kerry, but that doesn't mean I'd be so base as to impugn his combat service or record for cheap political gain... I was just as disgusted when the same tactics where used against McCain.

I guess the only way to make someones dereliction look good is to attack the record of someone who served - by redirecting or subverting the issue before it even comes up that the other candidate was drunk off his ass, living free and easy Stateside.

Several bloggers - including one of the conservatives' best, Opinion Journal - have followed this.

It's not an attack on Kerry's record. it's a report on his honesty. During the campaign he said repeatedly he would release all of his medical records (but didn't) and he told Tim Russert (in Jan.) that he would (but he didn't), and now once again he says he will or has or ??? Rest assured, if the release of records occurs, it will be noted. If he's been hiding something, it will be noted (and, of course, totally ignored by the main-stream media.)

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by hoosier
Several bloggers - including one of the conservatives' best, Opinion Journal - have followed this.

Bloggers, huh? Then it must be legitimate.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by DeltAlum
Bloggers, huh? Then it must be legitimate.

There are quite a few bloggers that are very legitimate. I've noticed you have quite a bit of spite for bloggers since you work with mass media, but you can't just generalize like that.

In fact it was bloggers that revealed quite a bit of news in the past few months, not the main media, wouldn't you agree? I believe some mass media people even had to resign from their jobs due to the truth coming out.

-Rudey

[GeekyPenguin]

I'd like to see hoosier's war records.

I'll put it in my blog if that will help.

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by Rudey
There are quite a few bloggers that are very legitimate. I've noticed you have quite a bit of spite for bloggers since you work with mass media, but you can't just generalize like that.

Some Blogs are excellent. I don't think they're in the majority.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by DeltAlum
Some Blogs are excellent. I don't think they're in the majority.

I could say the same about news networks or papers. There are enough qualified bloggers out there to provide excellent sources and bloggers have already had a major impact revealing news that the major networks ignored (hence the firings and all that).

As with everything, pick and choose what you read. But let's not just randomly bash all bloggers. I can probably see blogging becoming a new way to keep news agencies on their toes in the future and I am very content in that.

-Rudey

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by Rudey
...bloggers have already had a major impact revealing news that the major networks ignored (hence the firings and all that).

And many have been wrong. But whatever.

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by DeltAlum
And many have been wrong. But whatever.

Unlike major news sources, which (especially of late) have been spot-on?

Honestly, DA, I think here you're showing some homerism, as 'blogging has really taken a deep swipe at the modern media, and the reality is that this new sort of 'check' on 'big media' has (apparently) been needed for quite some time.

It fits the overall motif of the internet, though, and I'll grant you that - it gives everyone a voice, which is not always a good thing. However, to deny the influence or role of 'bloggers in many current media scandels (as well as the way 'big media' has to cover its own ass now against future f- ups) seems pretty disingenuous . . .

One more thing to think of - it seems you really disapprove of using these sources as 'news' compared to those souces that are governed by the rules of journalistic integrity. I'll openly question whether those rules have been taking precedence of late - perhaps instead, the balancing effect of open 'blogging can lead to a return to those ideals by media sources.

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by hoosier
Several bloggers - including one of the conservatives' best, Opinion Journal - have followed this.

Isn't Opinion Journal the Wall Street Journal's Op-Ed pieces and related material online? Or is there a different blogger Opinion Journal?

[KSigkid]

Originally posted by KSig RC
One more thing to think of - it seems you really disapprove of using these sources as 'news' compared to those souces that are governed by the rules of journalistic integrity. I'll openly question whether those rules have been taking precedence of late - perhaps instead, the balancing effect of open 'blogging can lead to a return to those ideals by media sources.

This is more in my line of thinking on the whole process. My last year of school, blogging was a big topic of conversation in all of my journalism classes. These professors (all of whom had great credentials in major media markets) also were very cautious in praising the spreading of blogs, instead taking more of DeltAlum's stance.

I really think it is a dividing line between new and old journalism at this point, and there can be parallels drawn to the journalism of the early 20th century (Hearst, Henry Luce, etc.). Granted blogs give much more people more access, which can limit credibility, but there are some bloggers out there who really are doing a great job.

I don't think the media has fallen as hard as people say it has, but at the same time I think competition from blogs can help raise the quality of all media.

[DeltAlum]

Here's at least part of what it comes down to for me.

While news media (even major ones) make mistakes, there is a certain ethical code that the majority of journalists believe in and their organizations adhere to.

I suspect that if you take the number of mistakes (or downright misconduct on the part of journalists as in two or three cases recently) that professional journalists make and compare them to the number of mistakes, or really baseless "stories" on the blogs, that the latter would win hands down.

Within the past couple of weeks, our much quoted Mr. Drudge published that the President of NBC News had been fired and even named his replacement. Remember his story about the huge misconduct story that was supposed to come out on Senator Kerry during the campaign?

Totally wrong.

So who does answer to? Only himself. Had he been writing for a major news organization, he would have been fired long ago.

Which is another point. The journalists who lied about sources or made major mistakes are out of work. The blogs go on.

[Rudey]

Is Drudge a blogger even?

-Rudey

Originally posted by DeltAlum
Here's at least part of what it comes down to for me.

While news media (even major ones) make mistakes, there is a certain ethical code that the majority of journalists believe in and their organizations adhere to.

I suspect that if you take the number of mistakes (or downright misconduct on the part of journalists as in two or three cases recently) that professional journalists make and compare them to the number of mistakes, or really baseless "stories" on the blogs, that the latter would win hands down.

Within the past couple of weeks, our much quoted Mr. Drudge published that the President of NBC News had been fired and even named his replacement. Remember his story about the huge misconduct story that was supposed to come out on Senator Kerry during the campaign?

Totally wrong.

So who does answer to? Only himself. Had he been writing for a major news organization, he would have been fired long ago.

Which is another point. The journalists who lied about sources or made major mistakes are out of work. The blogs go on.