Kerry's Yale Grades no Better than Dubya's

[I miss Reagan]

Ya I know who cares. But it's still interesting considering the bitter campaign trying to project Kerry as brilliant and Bush as an idiot. (Although evidently the Bush=Idiot campaign is alive and well here in MLW )

At least Bush was honest from the beginning.

WASHINGTON -- During last year's presidential campaign, John F. Kerry was the candidate often portrayed as intellectual and complex, while George W. Bush was the populist who mangled his sentences.

But newly released records show that Bush and Kerry had a virtually identical grade average at Yale University four decades ago.

In 1999, The New Yorker published a transcript indicating that Bush had received a cumulative score of 77 for his first three years at Yale and a roughly similar average under a non-numerical rating system during his senior year.

Kerry, who graduated two years before Bush, got a cumulative 76 for his four years, according to a transcript that Kerry sent to the Navy when he was applying for officer training school. He received four D's in his freshman year out of 10 courses, but improved his average in later years.

The grade transcript, which Kerry has always declined to release, was included in his Navy record. During the campaign the Globe sought Kerry's naval records, but he refused to waive privacy restrictions for the full file. Late last month, Kerry gave the Navy permission to send the documents to the Globe.

Boston Globe

[Black Dog]

Poor John Kerry. After folding like a cheap lawn chair in the election (his performance in which wAs no doubt affected by the Swift Boat Veterans for Bush campaign), no he's having his intellect dispariged because of the sam edocuments the right-wing was demanding he release in the first place:

On May 20, Kerry signed a document called Standard Form 180, authorizing the Navy to send an ''undeleted" copy of his ''complete military service record and medical record" to the Globe. Asked why he delayed signing the form for so long, Kerry said in a written response: ''The call for me to sign a 180 form came from the same partisan operatives who were lying about my record on a daily basis on the Web and in the right-wing media. Even though the media was discrediting them, they continued to lie. I felt strongly that we shouldn't kowtow to them and their attempts to drag their lies out."

Many of the records contain praise for Kerry's service. For example, the documents quote Kerry's former commanding officers as saying he is ''one of the finest young officers with whom I have served;" is ''the acknowledged leader of his peer group;" and is ''highly recommended for promotion."

Kerry's refusal to waive privacy restrictions dates back to at least May 2003, when the Globe asked in writing for Kerry to sign the Form 180. As questions were raised about various actions in Vietnam, the Kerry campaign gradually released documents last year, but had not authorized the release of the entire file until now.

In April 2004, Kerry said he had already released his military records. ''I've shown them, they're available for you to come and look at," Kerry said in a television interview. But when a reporter showed up at campaign headquarters, he was told that no new records would be released. That prompted a flood of Republican criticism, and the campaign responded by gradually releasing more military records on its website. Kerry then released his ''fitness reports" -- evaluations by commanding officers -- on April 21, 2004.

Two days later, the campaign allowed some reporters to view Kerry's medical record but did not allow copies to be made and did not post that information online.

By signing Form 180 now, Kerry may hope to achieve several goals: settle the question of whether there is an explosive document in the file; put pressure on critics to release their military records; and try to put to rest an issue that dogged his 2004 campaign and would probably come up again if he seeks the presidency in 2008.

The file does not provide new documents about various combat actions. It contains mostly a repetition of Kerry's citations for the Silver Star, Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts. For example, it does not include the combat ''after action reports" that detail what happened in some of the firefights in which Kerry participated. Those reports are available for public inspection at the Navy historical center in Washington and have already been widely disseminated.

John O'Neill, the leader of the Swift Boat veterans group and coauthor of the book ''Unfit for Command," said yesterday that he would be disappointed if Kerry's files do not contain new information. ''I would still have the same beliefs expressed in my book," he said.

O'Neill, who said he has already authorized the release of his records, has questioned a number of Kerry's combat actions involving the first Purple Heart, the Silver Star, and the Bronze Star.

For example, Kerry received his first Purple Heart for action on Dec. 2, 1968. Kerry told historian Douglas Brinkley that ''I never saw where the piece of shrapnel had come from." Kerry's critics have questioned whether the wound came from enemy fire, and his former commanding officer said the wound resembled a ''scratch." The file includes a previously reported reference to Kerry being treated for the wound and that he was awarded the Purple Heart, but it does not address the details of the combat that night. No after-action report for the incident has been found.

[August1991]

An American once explained to me that Canadians mistakenly consider news about losing candidates as important - perhaps because we have an opposition and the loser is still important. In the US, my freind explained, the loser is a nobody the day after the election.

I suspect that the Boston Globe is interested because Kerry is still a senator.

[I miss Reagan]

An American once explained to me that Canadians mistakenly consider news about losing candidates as important - perhaps because we have an opposition and the loser is still important.  In the US, my freind explained, the loser is a nobody the day after the election.

I suspect that the Boston Globe is interested because Kerry is still a senator.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...and because Kerry is from Mass. Being a Senator just gives him to beak off a new excuse every week as to why he really lost. Ya, gotta know before hand though, that running for president is a risky move. If you lose you're destined for obscurity. Poor Mike Dukakis, the last memory we have is the image of him looking like a dork riding in that tank. At least Dole found viagra. Anyway, I just thought the article was interesting considering the Dems often chose to fight Bush on his intelligence.

[Guest eureka]

Did we not go through all this in the campaign period? I believe the illusion that Bush had any intelligence was put to rest there while it was demonstrated that Kerry must have had some.

Kerry graduated from law school: Bush was denied entry to one. That speaks volumes.

[Technocrat]

You guys clearly have not gone to school. If you had you would have found that there is a large difference between being book smart and being smart.

Go to school and get yourself an edumacation

[shesgg]

Ya I know who cares.  But it's still interesting considering the bitter campaign trying to project Kerry as brilliant and Bush as an idiot.  (Although evidently the Bush=Idiot campaign is alive and well here in MLW )

At least Bush was honest from the beginning.

I don't think these portrayals are very far off, really.

If you listened to the debates at all, clearly Kerry was informed and knowledgeable. Seriously, Kerry's campaign was somewhat trusting where it shouldn't have been and he could have made better decisions in staffing but of the two, on the issues, Kerry is on the ball. Bushie was out of his league in those debates.

Imo.