"Bubba" Kerry, The Ultimate Sociopath, Please Define "Massive Bloodbath!"

In what has to be the peak of chutzpah or the depths of stupidity, wannabe self-anointed Vietnam war 'hero' and Democratic Senator from Massachusetts John "Bubba" Kerry is once again proclaiming that there was "no bloodbath" after he and his communist friends engineered the fall of Saigon in April 1975.

Kerry, who likes to play act that he is an international intellectual, and probably dresses up like Little Bo Peep when he thinks no one is looking, originally made the "no bloodbath" claim in 1970 when he was debating Swift Boat veteran John O'Neill on the old Dick Cavett show.

Kerry said then that if the communists took over, a few thousand - perhaps as many as 5,000 - South Vietnamese would die as a result, making the point outright that the deaths of 5,000 orientals was of no consequence in the overall scheme of the universe. Well, maybe to him, but to those who were facing the communist execution squads not only in Vietnam, but in Cambodia where an estimated 3 million were slaughtered, and in Laos as well, it was a pretty big deal.

By the way, the American Terrorist Media has been trying to downsize the enormity of the slaughter in Cambodia for decades. But in the mid-1990s a team from Yale University went to Cambodia and began unearthing mass graves. They found so many graves, with so many bodies in them, that they upped the estimates to the 3 million plus mark, which is where I get my figures.

Kerry repeated that unbelievably stupid "no bloodbath" comment this week when he was being interviewed on C-SPAN and a caller told him she never would vote for him because his true expertise in the adult world is undermining American troops. She pointed out that Kerry sneaked over to Paris when he was still an officer in the US Navy in the early 70s and met with his communist sponsors which is wildly against the law, gave himself fake awards for self-inflicted wounds and non-existent heroics, using his higher up friends to sign off on them so he can say they were legitimate, and of course making the "no bloodbath" claim.

Just for the record, I didn't hear the actual interview on C-SPAN, but it was replayed on the Rush Limbaugh show Thursday where I did hear it, and he also posted the transcript on his website. I don't want to be accused of taking someone else's material without properly crediting them.

Lately Kerry has modified his position somewhat, inserting the word "massive" in front of 'bloodbath,' apparently to make believe that the communist takeover was relatively benign. I have been debating for some time now whether it is more infuriating that Kerry is this stupid, and this much of a liar, or that he thinks the rest of the free world is dumber than he is and will buy this line of horse manure.

Even his supporters have to be able to see through the hypocrisy, inconsistencies and outright racism of claiming that millions of deaths in Southeast Asia were of little to no consequence but the deaths of 3 thousand American troops in Iraq is a tragedy.

I mourn the deaths of every single American killed in combat in the War on Terror in the last 30 years, and the thousands of innocent victims here and world wide. But I also believe that the wholesale slaughter of so many innocents in Southeast Asia was another Holocaust, and using the 'Big Lie' form of communist propaganda to explain it away might work for a racist sociopath but most normal people are appalled by it.

Kerry, who tried to portray George Bush as the stupid one during their presidential campaign, apparently is so intellectually challenged that he thinks he fooled people by saying the concentration camps that housed hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese political prisoners in horrific conditions, some for more than a decade, weren't so bad. He neatly sidesteps the reported deaths of some 60,000 of these political prisoners in those camps - he uses the communist label "re-education camp" instead of "concentration camp" - obviously because that would prove the lie of his "no bloodbath" statement, regardless of whether he inserts the word "massive" in front of it.

Kerry also declined to answer to the charge that he illegally conspired against the US government when he went to Paris and secretly met with the communists while he was a Navy officer - which would get anyone else who didn't have highly placed government accomplices executed for treason. Instead he wimped out claiming that he merely stood up back then and exposed the US government's lies - which totally avoides the question and only serves to prove that Kerry isn't smart, but he can be deceitful.

A common tactic used by communists to sway public opinion is to privately review their own shortcomings and then publicly accuse their opponents of the same lapses. It is obvious that Kerry had major insecurity issues with his own level of intelligence, since he worked so hard to make it appear that Bush was his intellectual inferior.

However, while IQ test results for the two have not surfaced, their ratings on US Navy intelligence tests are in the public domain and they show that Bush scored significantly higher than Kerry. This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who has watched or listened to Kerry for any length of time.

But why take my word for it. Here, is a verbatim rendering of his bloodbath comments:
"Let me just say to the first part of your question with respect to boat people and killing, everybody predicted a massive bloodbath in Vietnam. There was not a massive bloodbath in Vietnam. There were reeducation camps, and they weren't pretty and, you know, nobody, you know, likes that kind of outcome. But on the other hand, I've met lot of people today who were in those education camps, who are thriving in the Vietnam of today."

Scratching your head yet? Feel a bit nauseous? You didn't vote for this baboon did you? Shame on you! He's a dolt.

By the way, the boat people he referred to aren't the members of his Swift Boat crew. They are the estimated one million South Vietnamese who fled their country in terror at the carage inflicted by the communists, most taking to the South China Sea in anything that would float. Some estimates put the number who were killed by sharks, pirates or drowning at 300,000. Kerry ignores that little issue too, but then what's the big deal about 300,000 South Vietnamese deaths if you don't care about 3 million Cambodian deaths?

There is one other matter to address here, that beng Kerry's false claim about deserving the medals he picked up off the ground in Vietnam. His phony Purple Heart claims are well documented, but I'd like to focus on his Silver Star which he was awarded after he supposedly left his post and ran up on the beach of a village where Viet Cong had fired on nearby Swift Boats.

A VC who is said to have been hiding in a spider hole at water's edge had jumped up when Kerry's boat was about 10 feet away, pointed a rocket launcher at the boat, but then turned and ran. The boat's bow gunner mowed him down with a burst of machine gun fire.

The wounded VC, who by now was unarmed, was crawling around to the back of a nearby hooch when Kerry left the boat, ran up on the beach and behind the hooch where a shot was fired and the unarmed, wounded VC was killed. Kerry claims that he was under fire at this time, but still ignores the prohibition against killing unarmed, wounded combatants. (If Kerry had been in Haditha and made a claim like this he'd be confined to a Navy brig for life.)

Here is the point that most people who didn't serve in the military miss when discussing this issue. When you are in the service, and you are assigned a job, especially a combat job, you are supposed to do that job when under fire. Leaving your post and going off to do something else is not just a no-no, it is a court martial offense, possibly punishable by the death penalty depending on the circumstances.

Kerry was commander of a Swift Boat. As such, his first, last, primary and only job was to ensure the safety of the boat and its crew, and the completion of its missions. There simply was nothing in Kerry's area of responsibility that included leaving his boat!

Kerry's boat's mission that day was to aid in suppressing sniper fire. When his boat came under fire it was Kerry's job to make sure his crew was actively engaged in suppressing the fire, taking out the snipers, and maintaining the safety and integrity of the vessel. In no way, at no time, for any reason, was it his job to abandon his post, leave his vessel, run up on shore behind a building, out of sight of his boat and crew, and shoot an already wounded, dying combatant.

His actions that day, if they actually happened, are akin to a helicopter pilot flying into a hot zone while his gunners are exchanging fire with enemy forces on the ground, and upon landing, running out into the jungle to shoot a wounded enemy leaving his helicopter and crew exposed to additional fire and possible ambush.

How did Kerry know, for instance, that a squad of VC wasn't hiding in the brush along the river's edge, waiting for an opportunity to board and capture his vessel? It is common to develop a sort of tunnel vision when under fire, and gunners tend to keep an eye on their own fields of fire, which is why someone is supposed to be watching the overall situation and warning of danger from other directions.

Kerry certainly couldn't do that when he was on the beach behind a building, leaving his vessel vulnerable to attack with no one in command. How do we know Kerry wasn't just running away in fear and hiding behind the hooch in case his boat got hit? How do we know he didn't just fire his pistol into the ground to give the impression he was involved in - what would you call it when you shoot a wounded unarmed guy? Murder?

A wounded, unarmed, dying man posed no threat whatsoever to Kerry's vessel, and thus there was no reason for anyone on the crew to leave their assigned position. The entire premise behind the Silver Star awarded for this action is false and mocks the sacrifices of the thousands of real heroes who were awarded that medal for true acts of courage, some at the cost of their own lives.

In any case, Kerry either deserted his post under fire, or if there was no firing, which others on the scene have said, then all he did was leave his boat, desert his post, and shoot a wounded man. In either case what he did never deserved a medal, and quite possibly deserved a court martial.

In either case Kerry was never a hero, but rather is a thoroughly despicable individual who has brought disgrace onto himself and his family name. His recent comments on the "no bloodbath" also show a total disregard for humans of other races and ethnic backgrounds, and that he is either a consummate prevaricator, in total denial, or an unmitigated racist.

Which would you pick? Or would it be a combination of the three?