66 Comments

1. Sam_S:

Wow. From author of pop drivel to lesser evil. They really think highly of you in the bastions of well-informed sophistication, don’t they?

Kael’s infamous quote is hilarious; even more so because I’ve heard more recent versions of it from Manhattan. And a writer in Salon (maybe the same person) said something like “Does anyone even KNOW any Republicans?”

I care more about today, too, but the seeming facts point out that maybe the man is right now distorting his past. The Swift boat veterans are not a case of sneaky timing, either, as John Moore can tell you.

Keep up the good work: I’ve had precious little time for reading or writing lately, but still check in every chance I get.

Aug 4, 2004 - 9:49 am 2. Rick Ballard:

Ultimately, I don’t care what a man did thirtysome years ago.

When Lt. Kerry “reported” for duty on Thursday evening he invited us to look at his record. It is his contention that his actions in Vietnam define who he is today. I didn’t bring it up, you didn’t bring it up, he brought it up, again and again and again. If he wants to focus attention on it why shouldn’t his wish be granted? He’s got his version and others have theirs. Both are prejudicial – it remains for the electorate to sort and sift.

Reporting for duty might not have been his best move.

Aug 4, 2004 - 9:51 am 3. Les Nessman:

Bush wins 40 – 45 states this November.

Aug 4, 2004 - 9:53 am 4. someone:

Well, as we all learned at the convention, Kerry actually fought for the South Vietnamese before he fought against them. A brilliant platform!

Aug 4, 2004 - 9:54 am 5. Pat Curley:

I’d be willing to cut Kerry more slack on his actions 30+ years ago if he would just show some contrition (not on his anti-war activities except for his slander of his fellow veterans as routinely committing war crimes). That said, if he in fact committed atrocities himself as the Drudge article indicates, I would not be willing to cut him any slack.

I do think Bush is going to win fairly handily, partly because Kerry is such an awful candidate, but mostly because the Democrats are unserious in serious times.

Aug 4, 2004 - 9:57 am 6. Sam_S:

P.S. (gee, lot to respond to in your short post)

I hate to predict either, out of simple fear of humiliating myself, but I gotta say….

The media has thrown everything they have at Bush. From before the election, even, with the DUI story, through Halliburton, Abu Ghraib, “election-stealing”, psychiatric diagnoses, Bush Lied ™….you get the picture. Magazine covers show KerryEdwards with a holy glow, and Bush gets black-and-white. Yet the money is on Bush about 54/46 today.

He would have to be caught on Air Force One with an intern.

An Iraqi intern.

A male Iraqi intern.

to lose. So there, I stuck my neck out.

Aug 4, 2004 - 9:59 am 7. penwil:

Just read Drudge . . . what really affected me like a punch to the belly was the story of Kerry’s wanton massacre of the villagers’ animals. If true–and these Swift Boat veterans appear pretty credible to me–then cruelty on that level indicates a sickness that runs too deep to be overlooked even 35 years later.

Catherine nailed it when she said he seemed surrouned by death.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:04 am 8. chriss:

“Kerry supporters are comparing the effort by the veterans to the Arkansas State troopers tell-all against Bill Clinton.”

… Didn’t the charges in the state trooper tell-all turn out to be true? So if the Kerry campaign is comparing the veteran’s book to that…!

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:20 am 9. thibaud:

IMHO it will come down to some last-minute judgments by a larger-than-expected number of voters in a larger-than-expected number of states.

The fact is that both candidates are pretty lame, and the world situation today, like the one in 1948, is unprecedented. No one has a good road map for it. Most Americans are showing signs of battle fatigue but are suspicious of Jimmy Carter-ism as well.

So it’s highly likely that some combination of autumn events + Bush and Kerry’s reaction to those events will cause a large number of voters– not all of them “swing voters”– to respond in highly emotional, maybe idiosyncratic, ways. My guess is that the emotional tug-of-war will come down to battle fatigue-vs-sober acceptance of war logic.

If so, then the incumbent clearly has a far greater ability to influence the voters’ emotional reactions in his favor. If I were a betting man I would bet my next paycheck on the incumbent. Smells like 1948 to me.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:20 am 10. thibaud:

And don’t misunderestimate the devastating effect of the Dems’ arrogance. As a Democrat, I find it )*(#&*&@%^#&^&@%!!! nauseating to hear the likes of Drum and Atrios and Marshall hiss and sneer at anyone who rejects the party’s catechism.

Dems’ arrogance/Kerry’s lameness + Nader + improving economy + fluid international situation = easy Bush victory.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:25 am 11. penwil:

Some interesting internals from the Rasmussen poll, which shows them tied dead-even at 46-46 today.

“Bush is the choice for 88% of Republicans, 13% of Democrats, and 41% of unaffiliated voters. Kerry is preferred by 81% of Democrats, 9% of Republicans, and 42% of unaffiliated voters.”

After the spring and summer from hell that the dems and the MSM have put Bush through, I would wager that that 9% bleedoff of Repulicans to Kerry is as good as he’s going to get. And it would seem–again given the relentless attacks–that Bush’s half of the unaffiliated is pretty solid, too. I mean, if they’ve stuck with him this far, they’re likely to be there still come November. So it could be that at 46% Bush has bottomed out.

So the question remains is the Kerry constituency equally as hardened? My take is that he’s vulnerable. A good campaign by Bush during the coming weeks, and we might start to see his numbers creep up, if enough unaffiliated voters now in the Kerry camp start to have second thoughts. Or if those lifelong, and yet non-moonbatty, Democrats who are now saying they’ll vote Kerry simply because he is the party’s candidate, start to question his ability to deal with the WoT.

And if it gets out into the mainstream, this swiftboat book could hurt him. There’s a whole lot of women out there who flatout will not vote for a man who slaughtered animals.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:33 am 12. Knucklehead:

Roger:

Ultimately, I don’t care what a man did thirtysome years ago.

This is a fine perspective to hold through life. I would prefer that people don’t care what I did thirtysomething years ago. Little, if any, of that is relevant to my life today and my dealings with the world around me. The same is true for 200+ million of Our Fellow Citizens.

All that said, there are some situations and circumstances where what a man did thirtysomething years ago can matter even now – today and on November 2. One example is criminal activity. Another example is when a person asks us to hire him as POTUS.

Some crimes carry an expiration date, other’s don’t. I’m not sure about either war crimes or slander or, possibly, treason. Mr. Kerry has committed war crimes and/or slandered other people as war criminals. I want to hear some pretty darned earnest and non-flip-flopping explanation of why that should not matter to us. As for the possible treason, I’d like to hear more regarding that since the job of POTUS carries the subtitle of CIC.

I may just be a knuckleheaded whackjob but in this case I believe that what this particular man did thirtysomething years ago, since he wants the elevated job of POTUS and the activities in question are relevant to the job of CIC, matters very much.

It doesn’t much matter to me if we talk about his palrty and dubious record since then before or after we address this little issue of Vietnam which he just couldn’t keep his mouth shut about. He’s got some real problems with this and if he thinks being the one to shout about it will get him off the hook with a sufficient number of voters, I suspect he’s mistaken.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:35 am 13. thibaud:

What’s wrong with slaughtering animals? My wife and I had a slaughtered animal for dinner last night and intend to do so again tonight.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:36 am 14. jerry:

Roger:

Young men (and now women) do strange things in war. As a certified member of the VRWC I will not beat up Kerry for what he did in Vietnam unless he lined up civilians against the wall and shot them. What it does say is that the experience of a JO in war does not say anthing about his ability to lead the nation.

Thibaud: I think you are looking for a man on horseback to lead you through the wilderness. All wartime leaders look less then stellar in the immediate moment. That includes, FDR, Chruchill and Lincoln.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:37 am 15. thibaud:

Frankly, Kerry struck me as a weird character long before I ever heard of this book.

I don’t see how anyone who’s emotionally sound can balance in his mind the competing notions of himself as war hero and war criminal.

He may well be a very bright guy and a tragic, even a noble figure in some ways– our own generation’s version of Hamlet. But I cannot see that a majority of voters in such a dangerous, fluid, uncertain and poorly-understood world situation as today’s would pull the lever for Hamlet. I suspect the incumbent will win by a much larger margin than any pre-November poll will indicate.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:42 am 16. thibaud:

Jerry,

Not looking any farther than Bush–he’s on the horse and riding it now. But occasionally he rides it the way Dudley Doright used to ride.

Is it not too much to ask of our horseman that he be sure he’s facing the right way?

Seriously, Truman was widely viewed as a joke in 1948. Fumblemouth, hack, hick, not up to the job, a satyr to FDR’s Hyperion etc. I don’t make the same mistake regarding my view of Bush– he is what he is, and I admire greatly his steadfastness regarding the war. But he really needs to grow a bit more, as Truman did, in his second term, and sketch a more coherent and achievable vision of where we go from here. That’s a completely reasonable expectation of POTUS, methinks.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:49 am 17. Rick Ballard:

penwil,

I mentioned yesterday that I considered Kerry’s campaign team to be second rate. I would offer the Arkansas Trooper reference as evidence. The campaign knew that this was coming. Calling it dirty politics is OK but the trooper reference just drags the taint of scandal in. Not what Mr. & Mrs. undecided want to hear. Who’s controlling the message? Where’s the discipline? Definitely second rate.

I haven’t figured out what a decent response might be but the initial error of focusing on his Vietnam service is really going to kill him. As Roger noted, it’s mostly irrelevant but even worse, the self created myth won’t bear scrutiny.

Hell, when the “shot the livestock” story gets around even the PETA flakes are going to be upset.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:51 am 18. penwil:

“What’s wrong with slaughtering animals? My wife and I had a slaughtered animal for dinner last night and intend to do so again tonight.”

LOL. So did we–pork chops.

I guess it’s the image of him going into that village and mowing the animals down with his M-16 just because they were there. Why would a man do that unless he enjoyed killing for killing’s sake? It’s a character tell–a decent man wouldn’t do that.

Or maybe it’s just me . . . I ‘ll shut my eyes to avoid watching an animal killed or abused in a movie, and at the same time I’ve no problem watching all sorts or carnage being perpetated on humans.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:53 am 19. thibaud:

Sorry, but I really couldn’t care less about how a junior officer behaved thirty years ago. God forbid anyone should look up how I behaved when I was 22.

The problem with Kerry is that he seems a classic case of an emotionally conflicted vet. Can’t bring himself to admit that we are at war today, has had money problems, problems with women, was sleeping on friends’ couches as a first-term senator. Even Maria Thereza describes her first impression of him as an emotionally wounded, hollow-eyed “wolf.” Frankly, the poor man sounds like he needs therapy.

I’m not keen on Bush but I know that I don’t want a conflicted vet in the White House.

Aug 4, 2004 - 10:58 am 20. jedrury:

During the Clinton scandals, one of his prime accusers was this Arkansas lawyer who was defamed by the Carvilles/Blumenthals as a long time Clinton nemesis as if that would suffice to shuffle him off to the looney bin. And,one did wonder about this guy’s persistence at the time. Well, so much for those characterizations which proved so much spin. Here comes this O’Neill,

the author of the new book on Kerry’s Vietnam experience and he has been persistent in his critique for years. He debated Kerry on the Dick Cavitt Show years ago. He appeared on TV in the last couple of months; credible, well spoken,

not rabid and a war hero in his right. O’ Neill mentioned at the end of the interview that Kerry had written a book of limited edition about his war experiences but that he, Kerry, had bought all the copies because some of the statements now made by Kerry conflicted with his public utterances then. Has anyone heard of this issue or this book?

Aug 4, 2004 - 11:01 am 21. dr. sanity:

Just for Information: slaughtering and torturing animals for no purpose (i.e., you don’t need them for food) is part of an antisocial personality. This behavior is often seen in young males who later develop full-blown antisocial behavior. Antisocial Personality Disorder is closely related to Narcissistic Personality Disorder and has a lot of overlap.

This is why you might be concerned with evidence of this type of behavior, especially in young adults.

Aug 4, 2004 - 11:08 am 22. Rick Ballard:

jerry, thibaud,

You are both correct as to the value of focusing on a JO’s conduct during Vietnam as a reference for deciding on his fitness today. I think it would be silly to do so as it has minimal bearing on how a person would act or react in the present.

Kerry made the decision to place the focus where it is. The reason he did so is rather obvious. He has never had executive power other than his term as Lt. Gov. for Dukakis. He didn’t even mention Dukakis at the convention. He’s never run anything in his life larger than a medium sized office staff. In twenty years in the Senate he has been responsible for absolutely no legislation worthy of mention. The man has absolutely no credentials in his entire life that make him a worthy presidential candidate.

Aug 4, 2004 - 11:13 am 23. Rick Ballard:

jedrury,

“The New Soldier” scroll down on this Newsmax article and you can see the cover.

Aug 4, 2004 - 11:18 am 24. Pat Curley:

Jedrury, the book was called “The New Soldier” and copies of it are commonly sold on ebay for $200 or more. I have not read it yet, but it seems unlikely that there is much new and explosive there–reports are that it’s mostly transcripts of speeches and the infamous Winter Soldier investigation.

Aug 4, 2004 - 11:22 am 25. thibaud:

Agreed that Kerry is a political lightweight. Ordinarily this would put him completely beyond the pale for me. But Bush was also a complete lightweight, in the foreign policy sphere, prior to 9/11, and he grew into the role, so it’s not fair IMO to rule out Kerry for that reason.

Clinton’s experience bestriding the colossus that is Little Rock didn’t exactly count as world-class experience in my book, either.

Aug 4, 2004 - 11:31 am 26. Knucklehead:

Jedrury:

I believe you are asking about Kerry’s 1971 book, The New Soldier. Apparently there have long been rumors that Kerry flacks ran around trying to buy up copies during some of his early campaigns. That sounds somewhat fishy to me, but hey, the guy seems fishy. If you’re willing to drop about $400 on eBay you can buy one for yourself.

Here are some links regarding the book:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/2/prweb103472.htm

http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=NewSoldier

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/002073610X/104-0272099-5619157?v=glance

http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rkba-22.html

Aug 4, 2004 - 11:31 am 27. Peter G.:

I’ve heard Mort Kondracke twice now say that he knows many Republicans voting for Kerry but doesn’t know a single Democrat voting for Bush. I don’t know what to make of this. It’s not that unusual for someone to know only one set of voters (Dem or Rep) due to demographics, but who manages to know swing voters who are all swinging the same way?

Of course I could go to the comments section on this site and decide that there are quite a few Democrats out there voting for Bush, but hardly any Republicans voting for Kerry.

Aug 4, 2004 - 11:57 am 28. Syl:

penwil

“And if it gets out into the mainstream, this swiftboat book could hurt him. There’s a whole lot of women out there who flatout will not vote for a man who slaughtered animals.”

Amen to that.

And I just had a pork chop too!

thibaud

“But Bush was also a complete lightweight, in the foreign policy sphere, prior to 9/11, and he grew into the role, so it’s not fair IMO to rule out Kerry for that reason.”

I agree. Except for one leeetle detail. His base is mostly anti-war and that could tie his hands too tightly if he hopes for a second term. ABB won’t be a factor once he’s in office and his base will be divided.

Aug 4, 2004 - 11:58 am 29. thibaud:

Peter G.,

Mort Kondracke’s friends are as representative of the voters who will decide this as Pauline Kael’s friends were in 1972.

Beltway conventional wisdom is pretty useless these days. If all of Kondracke’s friends were in Texas and Missouri and Michigan, might be a slightly different story.

Aug 4, 2004 - 12:01 pm 30. Percy Dovetonsils:

Regarding the evaluation of acts thirty years past: my sister, who is no political junkie, asked a simple question at a recent family gathering: “Okay, so he fought IN the war, and then he fought AGAINST the war, and now he’s proud that he fought IN the war. So what the hell is it? Was he for the war or against it?”

It’s not Kerry’s conduct in battle that many people are questioning, but what’s happened since he got back stateside. The “nuance” of his past actions is going to haunt him.

Aug 4, 2004 - 12:04 pm 31. jedrury:

Fellow Simon Correspondents:

Thanks for the advice on the Kerry book but even 22 cents is too rich for my interest on that issue.

Kondracke is a denizen of Chevy Chase, Maryland, the political land of Oz – nirvana – for most DC politicos. DC’s Upper East Side. Luminaries/seers/T heads like Chris Matthews live there, eat at each other’s houses, swig each other’s gin, opine from on high and isolate themselves from the great unwashed electorate.

Aug 4, 2004 - 12:17 pm 32. Katherine:

ìWas he for the war or against it?î

The answer writes itself, doesnít it?

Aug 4, 2004 - 12:24 pm 33. penwil:

I also wonder in what states most of these Republicans for Kerry (only 9 % if the rasmussen poll is to be believed) are living. Just a wild guess on my part, but I’d say in places like LA and NYC, which has been so heavily under the influence of the MSM, and where the peer pressure is so tremendous to convert to the ABB crowd. (I should know, living here in SF–I’ve pretty much shut up about who I’m going to vote for for fear of sending my ABB friends into paroxyms of purple faced rage). If these anti-Bush Republicans are in the blue states already, it ain’t gonna matter to the final outcome, except in bragging rights to the popular vote.

Aug 4, 2004 - 12:27 pm 34. Peter G.:

jedrury, NYT columnists Safire and Brooks live in the Chevy Chase, MD area too. This makes them lonely Republicans both at work and at home.

Aug 4, 2004 - 12:38 pm 35. wxjames:

I wonder if kerry crawled around on the ground and got downwind before he machine gunned those pot bellied piggys and water buffalos ? He’s not a real man.

Aug 4, 2004 - 1:08 pm 36. chuck:

thibaud

But Bush was also a complete lightweight, in the foreign policy sphere, prior to 9/11, and he grew into the role, so it’s not fair IMO to rule out Kerry for that reason.

Agreed, and as you say,so was Clinton. I recall being embarassed by Clinton’s foreign policy for years. Mind, I voted for the guy. There seems to be a period of several years before the foreign policy team settles in, and I don’t want to wait for Kerry’s team. If I thought Bush’s team was just awful, my calculation would be different, but I rather like Bush’s team and would like to see it around for a bit longer.

Aug 4, 2004 - 1:22 pm 37. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

Regarding Kerry’s old book that mysteriously has a very high price… you can find most of it reprinted here.

As far as what a man did 30 years ago, it matters as a guide to his character when:

1) He focuses on it as the center of his campaign;

2) It shows character flaws with no evidence they have been corrected. Kerry was 27 years old at the time, hardly just a kid.

Bush had a period of misbehavior after the National Guard – nothing to be proud of. But Bush went through a substantial character transformation when he turned 40. There is no indication Kerry’s character has improved.

3) It caused direct harm to many people who are living and protesting today. They deserve the chance to be heard as part of any evaluation of John Kerry. I, for one, was slandered by the SOB.

4) It was egregious behavior – affecting the entire nation while it was at war. John Kerry had a right to make lies, and to be a propagandist for the enemy. He does not have a right to escape the consequences of the calculated acts of perfidy and slander.

5) It is still affecting the world stage.

6) It will affect military morale. Having a Commander-in-Chief who attacked our military and the behavior of individual soldiers, while de facto defending that of a brutal enemy is not comforting or motivating to the troops. Likewise, having one who consulted with the enemy during the war is a problem.

Regarding the book, it has two authors. John O’Neil covers Kerry’s in country behavior. John was the man who inherited Kerry’s swift boat and did a full tour of duty, He did a lot of careful research to write his sections. Dr. Corsi covers the anti-war years. He is an expert on the subject. I don’t know what research he did.

Neither author earns any money from the sales of the book. They did this out of conviction.

Aug 4, 2004 - 1:34 pm 38. RogerA:

I hate to come across as a Kerry supporter; but, as a Viet Nam vet I can say that it was not unusual for livestock to be targeted–and indeed not even livestock: elephants and tigers were sometimes the targets of helicopter gunships. Having said that, I am more suspicious of the allegations about the timing and frequency of the awards. Unless one was actively involved in one of the major campaigns, most of which occurred in the mid 1960s, it was highly unlikely to see the kinds of close combat that would result in three purple hearts in such a short period of time. But–what do I know.

I guess I come down on the side that if JFK (lite) chooses to make such a schtick of his Viet Nam service, he has opened the door.

Aug 4, 2004 - 1:35 pm 39. jedrury:

PenWil:

Let’s play the numbers game on Chevy Chase and the opinion makers!

Maryland is Democratic Country tried and true. Granted it has Republican governor which for the Democrats is highly embarassing. Almost like “what my fly is unzipped.” Anomalies happen, Mikulsi and Sarbanes not withstanding. So count the Chevy Chase crowd out as well as DC.

But the Commonwealth of Virginia is a different kettle of fish for the DC locals. Red or Blue ? It will hopefully go for the president.

Aug 4, 2004 - 1:39 pm 40. ricpic:

The Zev Chafets article is worth reading for this alone:

He [Kerry] represents the wing of the Democratic Party that is imbued with a sense of its own moral, intellectual, cultural and social superiority. In short, he is the standard bearer for the unbearable.

My only quibble with the above quote would be to ask: Is that just one wing of the Democratic Party, or the whole megillah?

Aug 4, 2004 - 1:44 pm 41. hollywood:

“If I’m right, you read it here first. If not, well, even Pauline Kael got it wrong once in a while.”

Right, but when Pauline Kael was wrong, her writing was a lot better than this drivel.

Aug 4, 2004 - 2:01 pm 42. Stephen:

I too could cut Kerry slack about 30+ years ago–except that Kerry keeps bringing it up in a way that invites scrutiny and remembrance. Roger, you undoubtedly know of the psychological truth behind the saying that ‘the criminal inevitably returns to the scene of the crime’–and Kerry’s compulsive need to bring up Vietnam, in a way that exposes him to critical scrutiny: what truly heroic person boasts of his heroism? Kerry behaves like someone who wants to involve us in his personal psychodrama. Why should we grant forgiveness by electing him President? Besides, I was a Navy psychiatrist during that war and remember the brave young men he slandered when he returned. It would be easier to forgive if he didn’t keep boasting about his bravery.

Aug 4, 2004 - 2:47 pm 43. OldManRick:

I hate to bring this up but killing livestock is now considered to be against the Geneva conventions. The addition was adopted in 1977, after the Vietnam war, and the actions taken in that war may have been part of the reason it was adopted. At the time is was not against the conventions but I don’t know the history of how long the article was in draft before it was adopted. In any case, it is not considered a trivial matter.

Reference: http://www.hfhrpol.waw.pl/EN-RTF/en-6-6.htm

Protocol 1, an additional to the Geneva Convention, 1977, Part IV, Section I, Chapter III, Article 54 states that “Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is prohibited.”

It further states:

It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove, or render useless objects indispensable to the agricultural area for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for the sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive.

Aug 4, 2004 - 2:48 pm 44. OldManRick:

Stephen,

Kerry as Raskolnikov, now there’s a meme I can enjoy.

LOL

Rick

Aug 4, 2004 - 2:53 pm 45. Ben:

What Kerry did 30 years ago is at least as relevant as Bush’s National Guard Service. Doesn’t fairness demand the same level of scrutiny? Remember what the Leftists have taught us, it’s not the truth that matters, IT’S THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE CHARGE.

Aug 4, 2004 - 3:06 pm 46. penwil:

“But the Commonwealth of Virginia is a different kettle of fish for the DC locals. Red or Blue ? It will hopefully go for the president.”

I lived in Arlington, VA for six years, but that was back in the late ’70s, so take my opinion with a grain of salt, but I would say: the born and raised in VA crowd will mostly be for Bush–being a Massachusetts liberal makes Kerry a damnyankee. Most of the retired military will also go for Bush (in spite of the dems fondest hopes otherwise), and there are a lot of those in the areas right outside the beltway. But there are also, of course, lots and lots of GS workers living in northern VA, and they are highly unionized and very pro-Democrat. OTH, tobacco is a big cash product in VA and the Republicans have been kinder to big tobacco than the Democrats, and with the trial lawyer Edwards on the Democratic ticket–well, anybody whose livelihood is attached to tobacco will be for Bush . . . so, bottom line I’d say it will go for Bush.

Aug 4, 2004 - 3:36 pm 47. DennisThePeasant:

…but when Pauline Kael was wrong, her writing was a lot better than this drivel…

First of all, Pauline Kael wrote most of her best stuff when she was wrong. This was not because she wrote well, it was because she was nearly always wrong. There was a much larger sample to work with.

Second of all, Pauline Kael at her best still sucked. It was affected and formulaic, and this is what she always ended serving up:

1. Start the piece with something along the lines of “I was walking out of [name-drop some 'in' NYC place] when I bumped into [name-drop some 'in but relatively obscure' NYC personality] and we talked about [name anything 'in and artsy'], which reminded me of…

2. Then go to bat for some really crappy film you wouldn’t force on your mother-in law. Or failing that, relentlessly promote the director of a whole series of really crappy films.

3. Stick some French into the article to keep it real hip and toney…

4. Close it all out by patting yourself on the back for being clever and hip and in NYC and writing about film.

The woman wouldn’t have know good film (or good writing) in it had hit her in the face, and it really is too bad neither ever hit her hard enough to get her to take notice.

Well, that’s Pauline in a nutshell. As I said, she sucked. She wrote like she was either Maureen Dowd with a private school education or Joseph Mailander’s sister…take your choice.

Aug 4, 2004 - 3:40 pm 48. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

The Swift Boaters were supposed to minimize civilian damage. That Kerry burned down a ville and shot the animals is inconsistent with their orders. It is no doubt one of the reasons his CO’s had such negative opinions of him.

Ben

When I saw all the insane attacks on bust and the National Guard, I knew that we were going to be able to use our ammunition against Kerry’s service and post-war (still in the Navy Reserve) anti-war protests. Of course, the press will never develop the level of frenzy they had when looking for gotchas on young Bush.

It really seems to me that Kerry is self destructive with his focus on Vietnam. There are so many people who saw him in action there, and his behavior since then is a matter of public record.

I’m sure it had an impact on his psyche. My service certainly did. But I don’t define myself by it now (well, as an anti-Kerry partisan, this year is an exception ).

So far, very little has been made of his protest years, but there’s a lot there too.

Aug 4, 2004 - 4:00 pm 49. Knucklehead:

Hollywood:

Right, but when Pauline Kael was wrong, her writing was a lot better than this drivel.

Ummm… is that the Form over Substance defense? Do you find it effective in the courtroom?

Aug 4, 2004 - 4:10 pm 50. hollywood:

Dennis,

You’re too clever by half. Pauline Kael was one of the better film reviewers of our time. She loved movies and wasn’t just writing about them because it was all the paper or magazine would let her do. She got canned from McCall’s because she wrote too many “negative” reviews. She wouldn’t back down and write puff pieces. At one time she ran a theater in Berkeley. She often championed films that others weren’t in tune with, but she had reasons for doing so. She wrote well about Brando, Welles, Altman, etc., etc. Even if you didn’t agree with her, she entertained and made you think. Fortunately, fans of good writing and good reviewing can now enjoy the writing of Anthony Lane in the New Yorker, which incidentally still (to this day) prints some of her capsule reviews in the front of the magazine (obviously, for older films).

Knucklehead,

I don’t think form over substance is a defense, but you use whatever you can. I don’t have the luxury of choosing my cases so I have to make do with the facts I’m given and the spin I can put on them. My point is that on a bad day, Kael’s writing was better than the guy predicting a Bush conquest. On a good day, her stuff was as good as it gets.

Aug 4, 2004 - 4:41 pm 51. Yehudit:

“He would have to be caught on Air Force One with an intern.

An Iraqi intern.

A male Iraqi intern.”

A dead male Iraqi intern.

Aug 4, 2004 - 4:43 pm 52. Ben:

John Moore –

Best of luck to you. I have a rather strong dislike for Kerry (driven mostly, I think, by his know-it-all attitudes and elitism), and I don’t like the way the media fawn over him. What is good for the goose (Dems criticizing Bush for ANG service), is good for the gander (criticizing Kerry for Vietnam & thereafter).

Also, we are being asked to accept at face value Kerry’s own evaluation of what kind of C-in-C he will be. We simply don’t know, so it is appropriate to look at his past for clues that may give insight into this very important question. I think his background is more relevant than the President’s for this reason; we already know about President Bush (his 1st term is a track record), but we don’t know about Kerry as a leader. (As an aside, how does being a rather low-level officer prepare you for high command?)

Having been born in the late 1960’s, I was too young to serve in Vietnam. For the most part, I didn’t even “live it,” in the sense that I didn’t start to become politically aware until the late 1970’s/early 1980’s. The Iran hostage crisis was really the first major news event I followed closely, and Ronald Reagan was the first President I enthusiastically supported. From my (admittedly historical) perspective, the Vietnam period looks more like a tragedy on many different levels. I cannot really identify with the people who relate everything that happens to Vietnam.

As a patriotic American, I honor those who served honorably in Vietnam. I fail to understand why someone’s participation in VVAW should be a compelling selling point for his candidacy. To some extent, it seems that the aging hippies who can’t let go of their Viennam-protesting heyday are a lot like the popular kids from high school who haven’t moved on. They refuse to grow up, and those of us who have are sick of hearing about how great things were back in the day. Just one man’s opinion, though. . . .

Aug 4, 2004 - 5:22 pm 53. Doug:

It is very simple. We CANNOT allow Kerry to play a dispicable double game. He simply CANNOT be allowed to tout his herosim in 4 months in Vietnam as the centerpeice of his qualification for the presidency while deflecting any scrutiny into, not only his behavior after his return but his actions while overseas. This is not the same as Clinton dodging the draft or Bush being a drunken frat boy. I for one have no trouble believing what the swift boaters say. Kerry has always struck me as both false and wierd.

Aug 4, 2004 - 5:41 pm 54. richard mcenroe:

“What’s wrong with slaughtering animals? My wife and I had a slaughtered animal for dinner last night and intend to do so again tonight.” ó And was that animal the only source of livelihood for your entire family? Your only source of continuing nourishment? A significant portion of your family’s entire worldly goods? Butchered for no reason by a total stranger?

Thibaud ó Kerry can easily balance those two conflicting stories in one of two ways… either he doesn’t believe either one of them or he’s stone fugbuck.

Roger ó As to what a man did 30 years ago, well, has he done anything better ó or even different ó in the 30 years since?

Aug 4, 2004 - 6:04 pm 55. penwil:

Polipundit (polipundit.com) has his impression of the ad the swiftboat veterans are running (I couldn’t get it to load onto my mac), and he says it’s “devastating.” It sure sounds devastating. Does anyone–John Moore?–know where they’ll be running this ad and how often?

Aug 4, 2004 - 6:04 pm 56. richard mcenroe:

BTW ó Roger, if you want to post the title of Chafets’ old book, folks can probably find it on abebooks.com and biblioteque.com

Aug 4, 2004 - 6:05 pm 57. richard mcenroe:

Yehudit ó A dead male TG Iraqi intern.

Aug 4, 2004 - 6:10 pm 58. richard mcenroe:

All I know is, I don’t want the defining image of this next election to be the last helicopter lifting off from the room of the US Embassy in Baghdad…

Aug 4, 2004 - 6:28 pm 59. richard mcenroe:

roof, not room… feh…

Aug 4, 2004 - 6:29 pm 60. sammy small:

The Swift Boat vet video is excellent. I’m surprised that the GWB campaign hasn’t yet demanded Kerry release his Nam medical records and award citations. Inquiring minds want to know.

Aug 4, 2004 - 7:25 pm 61. mudmarine:

My 2 cents. I have not seen the actual medical record of Kerry’s injuries for which he received his PH’s, as far as I know, no one has. He, without doubt, is aware that this is a problem. If he is proud (may be wrong word) and/or using them as a basis for receiving my vote, he should produce such records. Be a man about it.

From someone who could have technically qualified for 3 of those myself, there was no way in hell I could accept such with the knowledge that others so more greatly deserved them. I would have been ashamed. That was what I thought then and it is what I think now. I would not have been able to live with myself, then or now.

I do not agree entirely with those who think events of thirty years ago do not matter. I believe they do. If you say you are better now than then, how can I judge unless I know what the ‘then’ was? I did do some ‘bad’ things thirty years ago, one of which was joining the protest against the VN war. I did not realize this until post 9/11. I now see it was the coward’s way out. It caused millions to die and millions more to be living under communist subjugation.

If JF’nK wants to run on SVN, then itís all on the table.

Aug 4, 2004 - 7:37 pm 62. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

I knew the commercial was being produced. I don’t know the schedule and whether there are other commercials, and if I did I probably couldn’t say.

To the person who wonders why the Bush campaign isn’t doing this sort of thing – they don’t have to. We are doing it. They can do whatever they want (the Vet groups cannot coordinate with them), but maybe they don’t need to. The question would be how much money is available to the groups (hint, hint):

Swift Vets and Vietnam Vets for the Truth

Aug 4, 2004 - 7:48 pm 63. PeterUK:

John Moore,

I couldn’t get a link with the details to come up but did Kerry leave his vessel to sack the village? I thought that the Swift Boats were conducting riverine patrols not land raids.

There was no picture on the ad I connected to but the Swift Boat captains all sounded eminently reasonable men.

BTW Roger Is “well known author of pop drivel” a euphemism for “How on earth does he make more money than me?”

Aug 4, 2004 - 8:13 pm 64. M. Simon:

The key is not what Kerry did 35 years ago. Hell I did some really stupid stuff back then, myself.

Like believing Kerry.

But to all the millions whose deaths I am in part responsible for due to my incorrect beliefs, all I can say is I will do better this time.

What is Kerry’s excuse for not apologising? He has learned nothing and forgotten nothing.

A man grows or dies. Kerry died in ‘71.

Do we really want a dead man for President?

Aug 5, 2004 - 1:22 am 65. M. Simon:

mudmarine,

I’m surprised the boat people and Cambodia didn’t change your mind earlier. It worked for me.

Well any way. Welcome aboard, shipmate!!!!

Aug 5, 2004 - 1:51 am 66. Patrick Banks:

“He would have to be caught on Air Force One with an intern.

An Iraqi intern.

A male Iraqi intern.”

“A dead male Iraqi intern.”

A dead, underage male Iraqi intern. Tied to a leash.

Aug 6, 2004 - 7:35 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: