Quote from darkhorse:
Hold on a second.
When republicans brought up Clinton's lack of military service in 1992, Kerry defended Clinton. I don't remember the exact quote, but Kerry specifically went out of his way to say that he didn't think military service should be an issue in a presidential campaign. Something about "we have all served in many ways," or something to that effect.
In this campaign, Kerry has been beating the drum for his military service nonstop. In the primaries, he used the word 'Vietnam' about as frequently as normal people use prepositions. And he did an about face in terms of whether military service "matters," because he thought it would benefit him this time around.
Kerry made his military service an issue by grandstanding on it. If he hadn't made reference to Vietnam at every chance he got, then he wouldn't have to defend his quality of service. But he did, and so he does.
To poison the well by questioning Bush's military experience is irrelevant. Bush didn't try to make an issue of it. Anyone who thinks Bush is not fit to be president because he didn't have combat action is hypocritical if they gave Clinton a pass, or if they failed to apply the same standard of judgment to every other presidential candidate.
The value of military experience in itself is an open question without the context of how it has shaped the person behind it. A vietnam vet could arguably be an extreme warmonger or a devout peacenik, either of which would be bad in the whitehouse.
This is a mess of Kerry's own making. He wouldn't shut up about his Vietnam experience, and so now he's getting what he deserves. He didn't have to falsely portray himself as a war hero, but he chose to. Do you really think the vets would be doing this if they hadn't felt Kerry was exploiting them by presenting himself as something he's not?