Release Your Records

John Kerry is still withholding his military records:

Remaining service record documents or portions of service record documents, including those with excised social and service number information, clearly falls within the FOIA statute’s (b)(6) exempt material contained in “personnel or medical file”. As such, the remaining responsive documentation is denied under exemption under 5 U.S.C. [Section] 552(b)(6), since release of this information would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of the former U.S. Navy Member’s personal privacy.

This was the proper thing for the Navy to do. John Kerry has not signed a Form 180, which would release his military records to the public. Why not? John Kerry has not released a medical report to the public like every presidential candidate since I’ve been alive — why not? John Kerry has still not released his tax returns or his wife’s tax returns — why not?

A lot of people like to harp on the Bush administration’s “fetish for secrecy”. It looks to me that if Bush has a fetish with it, Kerry has a pathological compulsion.

10 Comments

  1. Chase says:

    I would think that if a president had a fetish for anything, it would be better than secrecy. Although, considering the fetishes of, oh, say Bill Clinton (extortion, propaganda, obstruction, theft of public poperty) secrecy seems to be pretty harmless.

  2. The "D" says:

    Phelps,
    Just a questions. Do you think that the goverment purposely destroyed information about the military history of the President? This to me is just as bad as Watergate and Clintons lies. We have to have faith in our leaders. The problem is that it seems that there is no Great person to vote for either way.

  3. Phelps says:

    No, I don’t. The military just doesn’t destroy any records. You literally have to get an act of congress to have records destroyed. See, that is a problem that people have understanding the military mindset. The military doesn’t destroy records because they don’t have to. They can bury anything they want under miles and miles of secrecy, and no one can say peep about it.

    That is the deal with Kerry. You have to remember that this guy has been on the Senate Intelligence Committee for a decade. If the military would play games with documents he would have cut a backroom deal for himself years ago. First, they won’t do it (duty and honor mean something to military men) and he knew that even under the FOIA, none of this stuff was going to get out. I want to him to fess up to reality and let the records out. Bush knew there were gaps in his records, but he let them out anyway. That is what Kerry needs to do. Even beyond that, we still have the issue of Kerry’s medical report and tax returns.

    Bush had what looks to me like a normal ANG run. Near the end of it, the Air Force was dumping pilots, they were handing out deferments to any pilot who was willing to step down, his plane had been decommissioned (meaning another qualification on another plane with hundreds of hours of classes and training) and it was a lot easier for George to say, “hey, war’s over, I’m out.”

  4. The "D" says:

    Okay I understand it a little better now. But I have another question also. How important is the health record of Kerry? I understand from the point of view that you want to make sure he is healthy enough to finish his term. But other than that what relevant information could come out of his medical records? I hate to see anything like STD treatment, but we both know those things happen. There is no way to stop them. But to run for President and have this type of medical history would be disastrous. I mena the media would eat it up.

    You know what the scary thing to me is Phelps? There are people out there that are paid to turn up the most negative things on anyone they don’t like politically. Let’s say that one of us off the blog wanted to run for office. Do you know that everything that we have ever written on anyones blog could and would be pulled up. I hate to see some of the things I put on Mexi’s blog appear in print in the local paper. But we all know it was in fun.

    I really wish we had a (GOOD) Richard Nixon type running. he did not take any crap and he was brilliant. My opinion. I truly believe that neither of these men are the smartest or brightest (Pre-Clinton) over the last 30 years. That is including Reagan.

  5. Phelps says:

    The big issue with Kerry is that he has had cancer before, and the fear is that he still has some cancer that they weren’t able to kill. The fact that he is going the original JFK thing (let the press photograph you playing all these sports) is reminicent of the problems that JFK had with major debilitating back problems. JFK was on very heavy painkillers a lot of the time — not something that you want when you need clear-thinking.

  6. The "D" says:

    Good Point!

  7. Phelps says:

    On the blogging thing — I think that by the time we are at the age, the people running for office will all have that issue, and the people that will be having to judge that is us. It is like the issue of cohabitation. For someone our parents age, it would be a big issue if some guy had his girlfriend move in with him when he was 20. For us, it isn’t going to be an issue. (See: clinton/pot)

  8. Mexigogue says:

    I’ll just say that Phelps commandeered by persona from INTJ-Open and he blogged as me unbeknownst to the real me. Plus that he’s a weirdo split personality like the guy on “Fight Club” but I’ll advise the media not to be too harsh on him because he’s gonna be my Secretary of Offense.

    And the “D” will, of course, be Secretary of “D”.

  9. Alex D. says:

    I’ve watched clips of Kerry debating in his younger years, and I don’t see the same Kerry running for president. No, I’m not talking about flip-flops. I’m talking about attitude. I get the idea that he’s been in the Senate for so long that compromise has become a way of life, and he can’t take a stand when he needs it most. Thankfully for the Democratic party, John Edwards gives the ticket some life.

    That being said, I think maybe, just maybe, Kerry feels the same way you and I do about personal information. Would you post your name, address, social security number, medical and/or military history, bank account information, etc. here to prove that you’re a real person? Of course not. The readers here trust that you’re real and have a credible opinion. That, and not all of that information is neccessary to fulfill the objective at hand. Likewise, Kerry doesn’t need to release his military records. It’s been more than 30 years since the Vietnam War, and I doubt that what he did in the military will affect his ability to handle the presidency.

    I’m fair, too. I don’t care about what Bush did in the National Guard, either. All I want to evaluate is how well these men could handle the crises we face now.

    Besides that, if Kerry discusses cancer, he’ll be in big, undeserved trouble. Look at what the media did to Cheney when he was open about his heart condition.

    Oh, and Bush still has some gaps in his own record by some accounts.

    Saying that Bush has a fetish for secrecy has nothing to do with the records, anyway. It’s referring to a a little over 6 billion of our tax dollars to protect classified documents.

    Kerry doesn’t need to release his Navy records to prove that he can handle Iraq, the economy, or healthcare. I still can’t make the connection between Kerry’s one year in Vietnam and the office of president today. Shall we also look at Bush’s past to evaluate his character? I don’t think we can glean many positives from alcoholism.

    Again, I don’t care about their pasts. I care about what they’re going to do with my future. Recent past, as in the last 5-10 years, would be more relevant.

    Anyhow, look at what happens when Kerry simply makes statements. Releasing his records would be campaign suicide. At worst, the man is playing smart politics, even if he has something to hide.

  10. Phelps says:

    The problem with Kerry not releasing his records started when he saluted and said, “reporting for duty.” The fact of the matter is that he is running on his military record (unlike Bush, Dole, McCain, Zell Miller, etc.) That means that if he wants us to ignore his decades in the Senate (and he would be smart if he does) then he is going to have to accept some scrutiny if he wants to be president.

    And that is the difference between him and me. I don’t want to run for president exactly because it calls for that scrutiny. He’s volunteering to run, and that is one of the things he is volunteering for. Do I want my records released? No, it is inconvenient. Do I want to get woken up by a call at 4:58am that says, “Mr. President, a nuclear weapon just detonated in Seatle, there is a chemical attack in St. Louis, Paris just declared war on us, and North Korea just launched missiles at Japan”? Hell no. It is inconvenient. Kerry volunteered for both, and he doesn’t get one without the other.