249 Comments

1. Howard:

Kerry’s post war actions are going to haunt him to his grave. Jane Fonda has said that going to North Vietnam was the worst thing she has ever done in her life. Both of them acted reprehensibly, but Fonda went into hiding and Kerry kept on keeping on. Those guys (Vietnam vets) will never forgive either Fonda or Kerry. Never. What we still need to know is if those charges about beheading, burning villages, and shooting innocents were true. If not, then Kerry deserves oblivion.

There were many bad soldiers in that draftee army. I once overheard a conversation in a restroom in Yokohama between two grunts who raped nuns and were laughing about it. I never heard of others doing that.

What will never be forgotten is the endless charges of “murderer,” “baby killers,” and “war criminals,” hurled by the Kerry/Fonda groupies upon the veterans when they returned.

Kerry has this attack coming and has had it coming for a long long time and I’m only too glad to be part of it.

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:58 am 2. John Mendenhall:

The “baby-killer” meme flows through many fever swamps: Jane Fonda, untold thousands of professors, and 3 television networks plus PBS coming to mind, and the list is overlong.

But the girlyman Kerry has always seemed the most egregious, the most consciously and easily evil, of the self-seeking liars involved in creating that damnable myth.

The second ad perfectly captures the tragedy, emptiness, and apartness of Kerry. He couldn’t experience that intimacy and obligation–trust–that soldiers get to and have to have.

He ditched, after 90 days or so, his “band of brothers.” I never knew or heard of anybody doing that. I can say with certainty that even the boy I was could not have done that. Who would have looked after my brothers?

But Kerry did, the better to embark posthaste on a career of ruining them and mocking their first acts as men. The lower he drove his comrades, the higher he rose.

This, the hole in his soul, needs no proof or documentation, no investigation by the girlymen of the press: they are there for anyone to see and they have been for these 30+ years.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:09 am 3. Knucklehead:

The only way the “Medals” issue carries significant weight is if it can be shown that Kerry did something that goes beyond “gaming” the system (forgery or whatever). I would be legitimately surprised if that were the case except that he won’t authorize release of the records themselves for inspection.

Regarding “Vietnam Syndrome” or the Unfinished Business of Vietnam…

The general “narrative” of the Vietnam war that the nation has is very well reflected, IMO, but the Vietnam Memorial. When I went down to DC to see the memorial I thought is was an extremely appropriate and beautifully done work. The “below ground” but open nature of it, the simple wall carrying all the proud names of those who served but whose lives were “wasted” by their nation’s leadership said precisely what needed to be said. I honestly believed it was the most completely honest memorial in DC (and I love the monuments and memorials in DC).

That was then and this is now. A large portion of the tragedy of the Vietnam war rests squarely with a terrible CIC (LBJ) and an even worse SecDef (MacNamara). Most of the remainder of the blame rests with that portion of the anti-war movement who willfully and with forethought and malice constructed a lie and the MSM who helped them propogate that lie and turn it into “The Narrative” so many of us (I’m just a couple years too young to be truly of the “Vietnam Era”) came to believe and which the Vietnam Memorial, IMO, reflects nearly perfectly.

The problem is that The Narrative is based upon a lie. That lie left an entire generation of veterans despised by the fellow citizens (I was a post Vietnam veteran and we were still paying the price of a citizenry that held us in contempt).

John Kerry was instrumental in constructing that lie and he did it for his own personal gain. He wasn’t just a minor participant or footnote. He was one of the Prime Lie Builders. It took this nation a decade to even bottom out from the effects of that lie and another 10 years to bring ourselves back to the break even point. We still suffer from that lie.

John Kerry caused this nation great harm. We would be fools to hire him as our president. If we do we’ll need another 20 or 30 years to dig ourselves out of the damage he’ll do again. I don’t know if he hates this nation or is just misguided or truly disturbed or demented. I don’t really care, other than curiosity which of those it is or in what combination. All I care about is that we do NOT hire him as our president.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:21 am 4. sammy small:

The past few threads on this subject have been fascinating; excellent comments as usual. I can’t measure up to the high standard of these commenters, but let me update one thing.

I happened to catch part of Scarborough Country last night on CNBC or MSNBC or whatever. He had one of Kerry’s hacks and one of the Swifties who had been on Kerry’s boat. It was amazing. Even Scarborough was astounded by the full on accusations that Kerry was lying by one of his sacred crew members.

The hack kept spitting out the standard talking points over and over. The Swiftie (forgot his name) kept piling on the history. At one point, the hack kept saying that ALL of the documentation from official U.S. Navy sources backed up Kerry’s side of the stories. The Swiftie then produced a copy of a confidential after-action report which came from Kerry which greatly exagerated the results of a mission he called the “sampan incident”. Kaboom! One of “the records” that he urged Kerry to release.

I have the feeling that these guys have more withheld Kerry records and will be trotting them out at the right time. I would assume they want Kerry to attack their facts with counter-facts first, then hit him with the documents.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:37 am 5. thedragonflies:

I just can’t trust someone who has always thought of himself as the “next JFK from Massachusetts” and who has wanted to be president all of his adult life. He seems to be a man who planned his presidential campaign in Viet Nam in the ’60s! And is now playing out his fantasy about himself. Reality is not matching his fantasy, so he sues those who are opposing him.

He looks like a whacko to me. How on earth did the Dems go for him?

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:52 am 6. Mark in Mexico:

Roger,

I would say, “Whoa” on the “…not especially concerned with the medals argument.” While the Bronze Star is a low-level award and is generally handed out like candy, the Silver Star is in completely different territory. The only higher award one can win is the Congressional Medal of Honor, almost always awarded posthumously. If one’s survival is cosidered a miracle or incredibly dumb luck (as in the cases of Alvin York and Audie Murphy, among a few others), one can receive the CMH while surviving the action, but this has been rare. You could almost go so far as to say that, if you survive the action – Silver Star, if you do not survive the action – CMH.

While the “V” designation on Kerry’s Bronze Star does admittedly put it in a higher classification, that “V” is suspect. His Silver Star appears to have been undeserved. The significance here may not seem so important to you or me, but it is of the utmost importance to those who have been justifiably awarded the Bronze Star with “V” designation, The Silver Star or the CMH, and perhaps even more important to those who performed and survived, or survived only in part, or failed to survive, and received no award at all.

To all of them, their fellows and their families, those who survived, whole or in part, and those who did not, those with awards and those without, Kerry’s awards are an insult (as was LBJ’s). Sneering contempt, at the least, is warranted, overt action to expose these frauds and insults is to be expected and understood. I don’t think that the difficulty inherent to uncovering absolute proof, even if it should prove to be impossible, should be allowed to detain or derail the efforts. Respect for the fallen demands such an effort.

Probably the first time I have really disagreed with you.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:00 am 7. Cap'n Billy:

Re: Knucklehead at August 21, 2004 08:21 AM:

If we do hire this guy as our next president that will be a clear sign that the population of this country has been so corrupted by the Democratic Party and the news & entertainment media (but I repeat myself) that it is beyond redemption. This former republic is past its expiration date, and that will be a clear sign that it is no longer safe to assume that life will continue to improve as it has throughout our history. Better take the necessary precautions.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:02 am 8. Mike:

Sammy Small:

You may be on to something here. Kerry could be getting dragged further into an ambush on the medals front. The Swifties need to start pressing the “release the records” campaign much more vocally than they have been. Because the Swifties haven’t been regularly and forcefully pushing this, particularly during interviews, the MSM has been more than happy to ignore it as well. I’ve rarely seen any suggestion from print media sources or television that Kerry is withholding part of his service record. If this becomes common knowledge among the voting public, the effect will be devastating on Kerry’s ability to counter the Swifties’ accusations.

The NY Times’highly suspicious reference to 3 bullet holes in Thurlow’s boat after the Bronze Star action, along with ” intelligence reports suggesting 1 enemy KIA and 5 wounded,” lead one to suspect there was much more to these documents than the Times was prepared to let readers see. Why weren’t these documents sourced? As I’ve said before, Thurlow’s account of the Bronze Star encounter, that there was no enemy fire, seems much more likely to be true than Kerry’s claim of heavy fire. If Kerry won’t release the remaining documents from his record, there may well be documentation elsewhere that hasn’t been found through investigation.

Or maybe, as Sammy Small suggests, the Swifties already have it, and are waiting for Kerry to fully expose himself before springing the trap.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:04 am 9. Rick Ballard:

Sammy,

You are correct that there are additional documents in the hands of O’Neill that will come to light as time passes (deductive reasoning given O’Neill’s profession). Kerry’s campaign has the same records. Everything covered by the 180 is in Kerry’s hands today. Kerry knows who signed the initial reccommendations for his awards and he knows how it iwll look when it comes out. (BTW – it is not unusual to self reccommend – if a superior directs you to do so).

I agree with Roger, however, the awards are much less meaning ful than Christmas in Cambodia and Winter Soldier. John Kerry has been willing to lie to embellish his reputation for his entire adult life. He was quite willing to betray his “band of brothers” as soon as he foresaw that it was politically expedient to do so. He has not changed, he has not grown and put aside expediency as his sole compass. I do not believe that there is anyone whom John Kerry will not use or betray for personal political advantage.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:10 am 10. Knucklehead:

Do any of the folks here at Roger’s Place have a reasonable understanding of the “ownership” of the sorts of military records in question?

I can understand that Kerry’s med records are fully “confidential” as would be, I suppose, his fitreps. Why are AAR’s and, for example, ops orders and maint records and the like require Kerry’s approval to be released by DoD. Given the depth to which some detailed military histories go it seems impossible that nearly full access to detailed military files is not reasonably common. Do files become “open” based upon some expiration of a time period?

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:13 am 11. Rick Ballard:

thedragonflies,

John Kerry in Cincinnati:

BRINGIT ON!!!

subtext:

and I’ll have Little John sue your butt off.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:14 am 12. Terrye:

The only real value the medals controversy has is that it allows men who served with Kerry the oppurtunity to refute his claims to glory. It may be that we will never know the truth to some of these incidents but it muddies the waters. I know the whole controversy that surrounded Bush’s duty in the Guard was countered by the Bush people but it still is an issue. The facts did not matter. It is the idea that drives it.

I was a amazed when the Dems chose Kerry for many reason but this was one of them. If I remember him from my days as a teenager watching the whole Viet Nam tragedy unfold then the veterans who served in the war have to remember him.

Whatever the truth of his actions in Nam it seems that his respect for the men he served with was not strong enough for him to simply take his medals and go home. I am amzed his little band of brothers can be ont eh same stage with him. I read that of the 23 commanders he served with only one is actively supporting him.

He had to make a mockery of their service. And for what? To make a name for himself. oppurtunistic and devious.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:16 am 13. penwil:

The MSM appears to have learned a lesson about trying to bury a story that doesn’t want to stay buried. The SF Chronicle this morning is carrying (on page 7) a Washington Post article on the second ad and Kerry’s anti-war testimony. For a WaPo article it is surprisingly objective to the extent that it doesn’t sound like it was canned by the DNC, but that the reporter actually went out, gathered some facts along with both sides of the story and then actually reported. (Wow, what a concept!) The article has quotes from the ad and the vets, and a new Kerry defense different from yesterday’s which is that his testimony was never directed at the men, just the leadership at home (uh huh, and so when you said “they” raped and cut off ears you were talking about Nixon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff?). It’s also got the Bush only served in the National Guard and yada, yada accusation, but that’s not looking so good any more juxtaposed up against the Winter Soldier stuff.

The article also comes right out and says that the first ad hurt Kerry in the polls, and that Democratic strategists are afraid “the new ad could prove even more damaging.”

Also http://betsyspage.blogspot.com links (you need to scroll down a ways) to a Washington Post article that talks “to some of the men who signed the SBVT ad asking Kerry to open his military records. These are the guys who are more casually involved in SBVT, but are angry nevertheless at Kerry. They are particularly incensed at his anti-war activities.” I read the whole article and it too is surprisingly objective. And I sensed an undertone in it that was a warning to Kerry to open up the records now, because you’re bleedng, man . . .

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:22 am 14. Rick Ballard:

Mark in Mexico,

Actually the service crosses rank between the Silver Star and the CMH. Lots of stars got handed out to officers – very few to enlisted men. Also, it is correct that there is no “V” for the Silver Star. Kerry’s “V”, however, may simply be a typists error on his DD214. I’d need a picture of him in uniform wearing the “V” before I’d make anything out of it.

Much more interesting is the revision to the language on his citations. That is very unusal when it is done long after the fact. Just more minutiae in reality, though.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:22 am 15. penwil:

Okay, I’m half way there with figuring out this linking stuff. . . the link above is Betsyspage. I’m a little tentative about tryting to link directly to the Washington Post article since it’s long and I don’t want to mess up the format of thread.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:26 am 16. Terrye:

ont eh is supposed to be on the. For the life of me I don’t know why I miss this stuff in preview.

Bear with me please.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:29 am 17. sammy small:

As far as the boomers dredging up old wounds and trying to heal once more, I have a couple of thoughts.

I had my four year student deferment in college and was #4 in the original draft lottery. In other words, when the draft board came calling in the spring of my last year (1972) to come take an induction physical, I was one step away from going to SEA.

Long story short, I signed up with the Air Force to fly (to avoid the draft) and as I had guessed, the war ended before I even finished pilot training. In the ensuing years, I flew with quiet a few combat vets, including one or two former POWs. I held them all in awe. I felt both lucky to miss the war, but also envious of the unique experiences that they had in this life shaping event.

Based upon my experiences, the Boomers closed the book on that era when Watergate forced Nixon to resign, followed a couple of years later by the election of Carter. Carter seemed to represent an about-face in American life at the time. It helped close the book on the previous era. At least it did for me. Of course the antidote was almost as bad as the disease.

Anyway, Kerry bringing up all of this Viet Nam stuff would not have caused such a controversy if it had been done by someone with credibility. In fact, it probably would never have been brought up in the first place by anyone with credibility. The last thing we need is to bring up a painful time and then to twist the memories of vets with self serving lies and fantasies. It’s Kerry that needs to close the book again, not the honorable vets.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:37 am 18. Knucklehead:

Terrye,

The gentlemen will wait patiently (or at least put up the best pretense we can). The ladies might get impatient, but y’all can go to the powder room later and sort that out. Which is all to say, Take yer time, no hurries Luv.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:38 am 19. Mark in Mexico:

Rick,

You’re right. One problem is that the rules get changed fairly frequently, especially with regards to the “V” designation, so that before one starts throwing rocks, one has to check to see what rules were in effect at that particular moment, for that particular campaign. Also, you are correct with regards to some very strange dates and signatures on what few records have been released. For instance, the signature of John Lehman, Sec’y of the Navy, appears on the Silver Star certificate. Lehman was Sec’y Navy in, I believe, 1982-1988, or thereabouts. Quite a long time after 1968.

My point remains, however, that the vets, survivors, award winners and their families are not going to let this die without a fight. Having said that, I believe that O’Neil is a clever fellow and will keep their collective eye on the prize. Remember that there are some 250 of them, backed up by several million current and ex servicemen, and O’Neil needs to keep everyone on board and as pleased with their progress as he can. If that means some time spent on the seemingly hopeless cause of exposing medal fraud, then so be it. I am beginning to wonder about outright forgery, how about you?

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:42 am 20. Fresh Air:

Roger’s instinct is correct. The medals, with the exception of the first Purple Heart (for which no documentation has ever been produced to my knowledge), are ultimately backed up by paperwork. The answer will always be met with a question: “Well, why did the military give me the commendation, then?”

But the bigger point–which we still can’t see until the book ships–is that Kerry’s whole narrative is shaken by these charges. The accumulated drip, drip, drip of each successive revelation (held the tiny piece of shrapnel in his arm for a day; fired his M-79 too close to the target; shot a fleeing, unarmed man; tried to conspire with other Swift Boat captains to create a medal-worthy incident; was hated and distrusted by his fellow commanders; filmed himself in action, etc) is devastating.

Roger is right. There will no knockout punch on the medals. But at some point the referee may have to stop this fight on a technical.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:46 am 21. Charlie (Colorado):

ont eh is supposed to be on the.

Don’t worry about it, Terrye. Porf readign is a learned skill, and — speaking as someone who has to read about 120 pages of proof AND INDEX the damned thing over the weekend — it’s not all that much fun.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:48 am 22. Terrye:

I think it should also be noted that one of the reasons people were going to vote for Kerry is that Bush is polarizing. Well guess what Mr. Normal ain’t so normal after all.

Americans want to get back to watching TV and to hell with all this war stuff. Just bring the boys home and let those crazy people in the ME kill each other but leave us the hell out of it.

Now we have the Democrat embroiled in a controversy that could ultimately alientate him from some of the little people he keeps saying he represents.

That is not good for Kerry. Normal is not normal anymore. As if it ever was. I mean just listen to the man. Everytime I see him I think of the Legend of Sleepy Hollow.

Man does that date me.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:51 am 23. Knucklehead:

Mark in Mexico,

Is there some link or whatever regarding Lehman’s signature on the Silver Star paperwork? Is this some “replacement” sort of thing? Lehman served as Secretary of the Navy for Reagan between ‘81 and ‘87. He was Naval Reserve for 25 years.

How is he tied to Kerry’s Silver Star? Kerry really needs to release his records and the press really needs to do an honest analysis. What are the chances of that happening?

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:52 am 24. holdfast:

Why doesn’t someone ask Adm. Boorda if the minutae of medals is unimportant?

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:53 am 25. vnjagvet:

Knuck at 9:13:

I think you “done broke the code”. The only military records that Kerry “owns” are his medical records, and his fitreps. Operational records and other official records relating to the unit are the Navy’s. There are ways to get those other than than his signing a 180. I am pretty sure senior officers like RA Hoffman would have an understanding of how to get them, and probably have already done so.

Good trial lawyers like O’Neill do hold stuff back for “just the right time”. Kind of like artillery “fire for effect”.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:00 am 26. Terrye:

Charlie:

It is amazing how we don’t see what is right in front of us.

I amazed I can drive a car and not kill people. People? What people?

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:00 am 27. Fresh Air:

Knuckle–

I have seen the Lehman-signed-the-Silver-Star-paperwork thing discussed on other blogs, and the consensus was Kerry probably requested a replacement and the military had lost the original paperwork. Some people pointed out this was not uncommon.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:02 am 28. richard mcenroe:

Mark in Mexico ó Sadly, medals for officers in Vietnam were greatly devalued by overissue, as part of the ticket-punching process that led to so much bad leadership over there. As an example, Colonel Anthony Herbert in his book, Soldier, reports on how it was the practice in the brigade in which he served (the 183rd), to simply assume that any line officer had performed heroic acts that had gone unwitnessed and automatically award them the Silver Star upon their departure from the unit.

Also, remember that the documentation and citations were drawn up, as a rule, by staff personnel who weren’t witnesses. This is the likely explanation for Thurlow’s Bronze Star long after his departure from the service; the personnel management system likely drew up the award from the existing documentation on that action. Documentation that seems to have been drawn up by John Kerry.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:13 am 29. julie:

I see the medals issue as only the opening salvo in a four stage Swifties attack. Next, is the senate hearings, winter soldier, and the meetings with the North Vietnamese. There is enough to keep it going for a while. And it appears, the SBVT planned it this way. But, yes, the Kerry people want to keep it all about medals. It is scary as hell to see how much the media will cover and lie for this jerk.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:26 am 30. Rick Ballard:

holdfasr,

John O’Neill is a graduate of Annapolis and a very solid trial lawyer. His primary goal is summed up in the title of the book “Unfit for Command”. The strategy of the Swiftvets was determined by the logistical backup on hand (money) and by the temporal “window of opportunity” that the 527 legislation offered. The selection of the awards as an inital point of weakness can be described as “preparing the battlefield”. In that, it has achieved its tactical purpose, the details of the tactic now become minutiae. I’m sorry for not explicating my point fully as I agree with you completely as to importance of the awards themselves.

My interest now has moved to the main battle in this sector of the campaign – Winter Soldier. I didn’t send the Swifties money before, but I am today. It is my hope that a significant portion of the electorate get to see the second ad. Its importance is directly related to O’Neill’s primary purpose of revealing just how hollow Kerry actually is.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:30 am 31. richard mcenroe:

When you have the evidence on your side, argue the evidence. When you have the law on your side, argue the law. When you have neither, shout

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:36 am 32. Jay Rice:

The medals issue is far more important to those who have served in the military than our population in general. It is dishonorable to fake or exaggerate injuries and demeans the hard-won medals of those who actually died, bled, lost limbs, or suffered for their awards.

If you lost a loved one and received a posthumously-awarded purple heart, you can understand the devaluation, the injury to justice, that Kerry’s uncooked rice wound inflicts.

That is in character for John Kerry. As in his testimony, he now admits he didn’t realize the effect on others, so, too, his False Medals based on shrapnel from his own grenade and uncooked rice (neither requiring anything more than a bandaid) are so sickly self-serving that it calls into question his very masculinity. Let’s face it, Teresa Heinz Kerry and Hillary Rodham Clinton have more balls than the husbands they dominate.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:42 am 33. Rick Ballard:

This piece from the Chicago Tribune is the rebuttal Kaus mentions.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:50 am 34. julie:

For those who do not wish to register, courtesy of bugmenot.com:

Chicago Tribune

Username : lopez505

Password : chitrib

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:57 am 35. Knucklehead:

Rick Ballard,

I sent them money yesterday also. I’m no lawyer but I’ve done my share of jury duty and observed “mock trials” and local court activity. The first ad was “gardening” prepping the ground for planting. The Swifties have gotten people to listen and planted the seed of the idea that Kerry plays fast and loose with the truth. The fact that there are witnesses for the defense who can counter some of what’s been put into evidence so far is immaterial to the overall case.

Next come the more damaging wintersoldier charges with the defendant himself providing some of the testimony. Look for some damaging evidence to be put onto the record here. I don’t know if its a three or four phase attack, but this looks like phase two of at least three to me.

It will be interesting to watch. The Dems are accustomed to doing their threats and character assination attacks on middling civil servants and women without resources. I suspect the guys running the Swifties now how to wage war and will not be put into retreat by the occassional scrap of counter evidence from a defense witness.

Now the question is whether or not the MSM, which has clearly admitted that they cannot maintain their blackout, can be pushed into covering the story with even a pretense of evenhandedness.

It will be a fascinating next few weeks. Kerry’s campaign apparently wanted no part of campaigning this month and now has to deal with this attack. And the RNC hasn’t even opened up on him about his legislative record and flip-flopping yet.

BTW, did anyone notice the VFW “Bring it on!” line re: the attacks on his service record followed within 24 hours by the NEC complaint, the try to get Regnery to stop the book, and calls for the president stifle the Sifties.

Which is it, Flippie? Do you want the opposition to “bring it on” so you can show what a fighter you are or do you want the meanies to stop picking on you?

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:58 am 36. Mark in Mexico:

Knuck,

I saw it yesterday, as did Fresh Air, but I was unaware that this was a common practice. I’ll try to find it for you and get back.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:01 am 37. devildog:

As usual Roger, you’re correct about the limitations of the medals arguments. It’s a tough sell to say all five were gamed. One, two, maybe even three using what Joe Wilson termed ‘literary flair,’ but five? At best it adds context.

Clearly the character flaws unearthed by the Cambodia claims and his post-war statements are devastating. This type of ‘No sh*t, there I was…’ storytelling is barely tolerable from the drunk at the end of the bar at the VFW. And it certainly makes the ‘I don’t fall down’ statement more scary than funny now.

What’s funny though is that contrary to what Kerry’s surrogates think, the answer to this problem has nothing to do with Bush’s TANG service.

In last night’s rerun of the ‘Rockford Files’ Rockford turns to the insurance actuary that just cheated him out of a finders fee and said ‘You know what you are?….Yeah, I guess you do.’

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:02 am 38. Connecticut Yankee:

Folks on this thread might want to go over to Captain’s Quarters to see the Oliphant cartoon that Captain Ed has posted. Ed is not exaggerating when he says it verges on Ted Rall’s style. Proof that the Left doesn’t understand the military at all.

Roger, thanks for everything you do on this blog.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:19 am 39. Knucklehead:

There doesn’t seem to be much doubt that the Kerry campaign, and even the MSM, has been knocked back onto their heels. The Swifties have them reacting rather than getting out in front and leading the story.

I sometimes like to wonder about what we aren’t hearing as well as what we are. For example, we have this from the Cleveland Plain Dealer and a story in the Chicago Tribune (I can’t get at that and I’m sick to death of registering for stupid online newspapers!). I can’t tell if these are different or the same stories. Assuming they are different, that suggests the MSM is out beating the bushes for sources to counter the Swifties. Yet they don’t seem to be following up with the Swifties themselves. Why isn’t some portion of the MSM putting some resources on this to go out and interview a few dozen Swifties to tell the story of why they are doing what they are doing? I can only speculate that they don’t want us to hear what they believe they’d discover.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:22 am 40. julie:

Knucklehead:

That’s why I posted the fake Chicago Tribune Id and password. No registration needed.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:28 am 41. Knucklehead:

Julie,

I tried it and it got me to someplace that seemed anything but a path to the story. I don’t want to poke around using somebody else’s login, so I just exited.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:30 am 42. themarkman:

William Rood’s comments in the Chicago Tribune on the Silver Star are obviously invalid. He wasn’t on Kerry’s boat. Only those guys who were on Kerry’s boat can comment. Isn’t that what you said, Kerry Campaign?

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:35 am 43. julie:

Sorry, Knucklehead. I should have explained to hit the menu bar where it says “news.” I understand your confusion. It will take you to a news page with a hyperlink to the stories. I am doing this by memory since I now seem to have access without registering. You really should look at the Trib spread.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:36 am 44. vnjagvet:

Here’s a link to the Rood story. I think Roger was prescient.

http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/381249|top|08-21-2004::12:46|reuters.html

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:44 am 45. jdwill:

Sammy, Mike, etal.

I think you are onto it. John O’Neill has been building this since 1971. I think we are being priveleged to see some world class payback. Stay tuned.

I think the MSM types aren’t really up to speed, regardless of camp. Some lefty bloggers are cursing them and coaching, but even they are weak. ref http://drlimerick.mydd.com/story/2004/8/7/14440/69263

This Newsweek article, ‘Fighting a Phony War’ – by Eleanor Clift is a good example

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5772260/site/newsweek/

Her subtext claims the article is about diverting attention from Iraq, but she basically then jumps into the catfight and doesn’t mention Iraq until the last word of the article.

I corresponded to her, I doubt she’ll ever read it.

“Never mind that almost daily there?s a retraction or a new story to discredit what these veterans are saying.”

Nice try, but circular – reporting her own flack, or pablum like the NYT pieces, as a reason that her flack is valid.

“Flanked by firefighters in Boston, Kerry stripped the mask of patriotic valor from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth by pointing out the source of their funding: a Texas Republican who wrote two checks for $100,000 to the group.”

This won’t fly either. Who did she think would help them, George Soros? Just check out the comparative dollars spent by 527’s at OpenSecrets.org (hint: others are).

She should admit that these guys with $500,000 have made a dent like MoveOn.org with its $17,000,000 spent so far can only dream about.

While her article connects with the real anger about Kerry’s 71 mouthing of the Winter Soldier smear, she is missing the point IMO that Vietnam era veterans like myself are weighing for our 2004 decision: Can Kerry be trusted?

Trust, (or honor, if you will) is big with us. This will cross over to veterans from all conflicts, not just Vietnam. I am smart enough to realize that perfect truth about Kerry’s 4 months in Vietnam is highly elusive, but for me and, I suspect, many other veterans, the message coming through is that real veterans in sizable numbers are standing up and saying Kerry can’t be trusted.

(I served at a San Francisco ARADCOM radar site from 70-73)

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:46 am 46. julie:

And don’t worry about using someone else’s registration. It’s not. And if it was, it is not a crime. Also, take a look at this: http://www.spacerook.com/archives/2004/06/05/bug-me-not/

Sorry, but I do not know how to create a link. The shame!

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:48 am 47. Rick Ballard:

themarkman just nailed the problem for the Kerry campaign. The story itself is OK from Kerry’s viewpoint and would have been an effective damper – had it been released within 48 hours of the first Swiftvets ad. A partial closing of the barn door is not going to work now. The DNC/MSM rehabilitation process is only effective if it starts immediately. It’s first aid, not a cure.

The party line on Winter Soldier, “out of context” and “he was just quoting others” is timely but draws people’s attention to the story. It is not an effective rebuttal and brings up a ton of images that Kerry really doesn’t want people to think about. The DNC/MSM is also a bit confounded in how to handel Winter Soldier. After all, for them, it was a glorious victory, Oliphant’s cartoon exhibits that in full. The DNC/MSM has never given a damn about vets. They didn’t then and they don’t now. Cut n’ run Kerry is perfectly emblematic for them.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:48 am 48. richard mcenroe:

Any vets on this board ó Here’s the Oliphant Cartoon . Pass it on, to every vet you know, every vet’s widow, every vet’s kid.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:49 am 49. julie:

Yes, the MSM coverage sucks. But most people do not read the articles that are being churned out by them with a critical eye. The Chicago Tribune article is a major and glossy hit job. I only hope the refutations that will follow will get half the press attention. Maybe, I’m too pessimistic.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:54 am 50. Terrye:

vnj:

The problem is the Kerry camp is now forced to play he said, he said. Just look at all the men who were there who are willing to say something different from this gentleman but we are told that they don’t count because they were not on his boat. Well, neither was this guy.

23 officers are involved in this effort to discredit Kerry and we have been told they don’t count. But this one does?

In truth I think if they hit a mine and laid down fire it could have been confused enough that years later people might have differing accounts, happens all the time. But what about the other guys who pulled people out of the water and are not running for president, don’t they count?

I am sure these guys had to know who was and was not there that day and on their web site they swifties said that Kerry had only one supporter among the swift boat commanders. They must be him. I doubt this was a surprise.

I think what was a surprise to a lot of people was that a guy could three purple hearts and never go to the hospital.

Aug 21, 2004 - 12:00 pm 51. Rick Ballard:

Richard,

I hope that cartoon is enlarged and printed up for distribution at the American Legion convention in Nashville. I know there is a Vets against Kerry demonstration scheduled for Sept. 12 in DC but having a few hundred of the AL attendees waving posters with the cartoon on them in Nashville on the day of Kerry’s speech would be amusing.

I don’t know what total attendance is projected to be at Nashville but in Cincinnati only 6,000 of 15,000 attendees showed up for Kerry’s speech. Perhaps a silent “no show” demonstration by AL members would be an even more effective demonstration of lack of affection for the hero of the Winter Soldier campaign.

Aug 21, 2004 - 12:01 pm 52. penwil:

I think there are often currents going on in our national psyhe that the polls and the media fail to pick up on until they erupt to the surface in a way that looks like they came out of nowhere, when in fact they have been brewing and boiling for a long time. And the unfinished business of the Vietnam War is turning out to be one of them.

I was thinking back to a couple of months ago when first Richard Clark’s book came out in the middle of the 9/11 kangaroo court otherwise known as a commission, along with Moore’s propaganda film– and the huge play all of it got in the media, how “devastating” it all was going to be to Bush, and with each new wave of attack there would be the predictions that, yes, this was the thing that would sink his re-election bid. And yet all of that stuff–very current stuff, too–barely translated into a ripple in the polls. It was as if the national psyche stopped, looked, listened and then collectively shrugged. Then along comes a group of 250 Vietnam vets armed with a puny war chest of a couple hundred thousand dollars, a TV ad they can only afford to air in three states, a book put out by a specialty publisher, and only the alternative media to get out a story about something that happened thirty years ago–and yet somehow, someway, and in spite of the MSM blackout, and in the midst of all the other noise and all the other election hoopla, this is the one thing that manages to strike a national chord.

(The latest Rasmussen poll says that 78% of Americans have read, seen, or heard news stories about “a group of veterans raising questions about John Kerry’s military service.” That is just huge.)

I’m not sure why we, as a national and cultural entity, are feeling this need to go back and revisit the Vietnam War. Is it really unfinished business, or is it rather just the same ideological and cultural divide lining up again to fight the same war only on a different battlefield? Certainly a lot of the rhetoric being thrown around by both sides is reminiscent of the rhetoric back then. For instance, the peace symbol is making a big comeback here in the Bay Area–it’s on more bumpers by far than Kerry stickers. And I talked to someone who watched the CSPAN replay of the Dick Cavett show where O’Neill and Kerry debated the Vietnam War, and she said that they could have been talking about Iraq today.

I think in many ways the world view that opposed the Vietnam War is the same world view opposing the war against Islamofacism today, and indeed this opposition (for all that he is trying to pretend otherwise) is even embodied in the same person of John Kerry. The difference between then and now, though, is that this time we were attacked on our own soil and will likely be attacked again, and cutting and running is not an option, if for no other reason than that there is nowhere to cut and run to. And it is that fear over the lack of real viable options for the Left side of the divide this time that is fueling all the anger and the Bush-hate.

So perhaps on some level the national psyche started quite awhile ago to figure all of this out. That it’s the same darn peace/war divide of thirty years ago, and the election has finally started to boil down to a choice–war and all the uncomfortable sacrifices that might entail, or peace at any price.

Aug 21, 2004 - 12:05 pm 53. Knucklehead:

Is there more meat in the Trib article than what the ling vnj gave us has:

“Before now, wanting to put memories of war and killing behind him, Rood had refused all requests for interviews on the subject, including from his own newspaper. “But Kerry’s critics, armed with stories I know to be untrue, have charged that the accounts of what happened were overblown.” he wrote.

“The critics have taken pains to say they’re not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us.

“It’s gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there,” he added.

Kerry, a former Navy lieutenant, is a highly decorated Vietnam veteran, and his war service is essential to his ability to challenge President Bush on issues of national security and leadership in the face of the Iraq war and terrorism threats.

There is nothing specific in the above. What is “untrue”? Who are “those of us who were there” who know the accounts to be untrue?

Aug 21, 2004 - 12:07 pm 54. vnjagvet:

Terrye:

I believe the Rood article relates only to the Silver Star incident on February 28. The first SB ad related primarily to the March 13 Bronze Star Purple Heart incident. My impression has been that there has been little emphasis on the Silver Star story.

This, I think, makes your point.

Aug 21, 2004 - 12:23 pm 55. John Mendenhall:

Terrye

Makes a wonderful point, about the Dems alienating “the little people” they say they adore.

However many Vietnam vets there are, and however many ground combat vets, and however many knew or knew of John Kerry, my guess is that very few and maybe not a damn one of them works as a reporter or editor at any of the big papers or TV networks.

I’m in a profession, and my age group is the one that went to Vietnam. I was a draftee, and pounded the ground, and became qualified later on. Everyone else in my profession that I’ve ever met or talked to was either college-deferred or serving as an officer “in the rear.” Never have I met anybody in my profession who lost a daddy, brother, or son in that war. I imagine the same is true in the ivied halls of CBS and them. Probably in all the upper socioeconomic groups in the USA.

There is a this-side and that-side of the track about these ads. I know they wouldn’t move my upper-middle-class acquaintances much, but the trailer park in me was just blasted by the men in the first ad. The second ad, with that sonorous upper-class snotty back-east Kerry talking about things he knew nothing of, hit me differently, but in the same place.

Aug 21, 2004 - 12:24 pm 56. Rick Ballard:

Knuck,

I sent it to you as an untitled email – word doc attached.

Aug 21, 2004 - 12:24 pm 57. Rick Ballard:

vnjagvet,

Good point about Terrye’s post. It’s what I’m trying to say regarding minutiae. It’s also why the Trb story will prove ineffective except as “Well, look at what the other fellow said.” rebuttal. The tactical goal of the initial ad has been achieved. O’Neill now has the jury thinking about the defendant in a negative light. The next point – Winter Soldier – is the main basis for the prosecutorial case. Il Capitano Bragadoccio’s public court martial continues with a likely verdict of “Unfit for Command” becoming ever more plausible.

Aug 21, 2004 - 12:36 pm 58. Fresh Air:

John M.–

While you are no doubt right about the divide between veterans and civilians, as someone who wasn’t old enough to serve in Vietnam, I find myself mesmerized by this long-deferred rematch.

How many people of my generation had even heard of “Winter Soldier” before Kerry decided to run for president? I think this battle between the vets and Kerry will prove highly educational for those of us taught that Vietnam was an unwinnable war, in which the U.S. perpetrated many senseless, wicked acts.

I would be very interested to see tracking polls for people under the age of 50 and how this has affected their opinions of Kerry and Vietnam generally.

Aug 21, 2004 - 12:44 pm 59. sammy small:

John Mendenhall

As I posted earlier, I had the normal student deferment for four years. So I guess you could say I was upper middle class, but the ads hit home to me as well because they confirmed my gut feel about Kerry that was formed through 7 years of active duty. He gamed the system and did nothing but cover his own ass. We had a saying in the Air Force, “What looks good…IS good”. All vets have seen this type before. No one really respects them.

The point of the Swifties ads and appearances is to leave that same impression with undecided voters. One or two incidents won’t make that happen. It takes a series of stories, accounts, facts, and Kerry’s own words to paint a true picture of what he stands for and is driven by.

As far as the MSM goes, I treat them like I do the Dixie Chicks. I can never again listen to one of their songs without seeing Natalie Maines and her ugly comments to a foreign audience. It totally spoils the music for me. I can’t listen any to it longer. The MSM is similar. Their rabid one-sided stories leave me cold, frustrated, and sometimes angry. I can’t read the crap. I’m glad some of the posters here on this blog do. They can just relay the gist in a reasonable manner. I don’t read the papers or watch MSM tv news. Hell, I don’t even have local cannels on my satellite service.

Aug 21, 2004 - 12:51 pm 60. Knucklehead:

Thanks, Rick. I got it. Now I have to parse it and figure out what it rebutts, if anything. So far it seems to rebutt the claim that Kerry chased down and killed a wounded teenager.

JMO, but that’s a “charge” I never cared much about. If they were fired on then killing enemy whether they were retreating or not seems valid to me. Unless there is some evidence the guy was surrendering or whatever I don’t much care how old he was or what he was wearing.

The tactic of charging the riverbank was apparently specifically against standing SOP and seems ill-advised to me. I don’t know how often this was used, but it seems to me the type of thing that won’t work more than twice and will become a nightmare by the third time its tried when the enemy turns it to their advantage and alters how they conduct their ambushes. The “brass” chose to commend it rather than pucker the perps.

Aug 21, 2004 - 1:14 pm 61. jdwill:

Speaking to the divide. It is most noticable in the press. They don’t really know how to relate to vets, heres an indication why:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/articles/sidebyside-military.html

Look at the military service of the pundits. Not.

This profession has probably got the lowest veteran ratio going.

So we are either heroes who can’t be besmirched ala Kerry, or Pat Oliphant’s buffoons, as the case requires.

Aug 21, 2004 - 1:17 pm 62. Fresh Air:

Knuckle–

My second-hand understanding (can’t wait for the book to arrive!) is that U for C says Kerry got together with the other boat captains the night before the mission that led to the Silver Star and tried to talk them into beaching their boats and going ashore in hopes of being awarded medals.

If this is true, it by far outweighs the rest of the story, IMHO.

Aug 21, 2004 - 1:20 pm 63. jdwill:

Update: the Arizona Republic article via Donald Sensing at One Hand Clapping has an update showing some dis serve.

http://www.donaldsensing.com/2004/08/war-party.html

Aug 21, 2004 - 1:20 pm 64. ambisinistral:

I disagree that the medal issue is unimportant. Kerry established two main personas in this narrative. The extremely competent amd couragous LtJg who rushed into walls of enemy fire to do his duty, and the tired and cynical veteran who had seen untold horrors of war and atrocities. This second world weary Kerry was built of such stout moral fiber he would throw his own medals away and confess to his own crimes to stop the violence.

Those two Kerry’s, to the extent they were connected, were connected by the epiphany that occured one Christmas while illegally in Cambodia.

That narrative already had a few problems, for example the war crimes confessed to by Kerry II that were never mentioned, or even possible, by Kerry I for example. However, the Chritmas in Cambodia story held it together enough so that one could skip over the vast contradictions between Kerry I and Kerry II.

Chritmas in Cambodia is now dead, and with it any semblance of linkage. Keep pushing events on both sides of that barrier and Present Kerry faces the contradiction presented by these two vastly different Young Kerry’s. The contradiction at the heart of Present Kerry, his ability to hold both sides of an issue simultaneously, is what bothers people about him. Let it be magnified.

Aug 21, 2004 - 1:29 pm 65. ambisinistral:

Bah, you can tell I am not a copy editor. My first sentence should read, “I disagree that the medal issue is unsolvable, but it must be pursued.”

Aug 21, 2004 - 1:31 pm 66. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

I don’t believe that John O’Neil has been working on this sinced 1971. That would have been rather silly – what were the odds that it would ever be useful.

There are open issues with the Vietnam War. Many of us feel betrayed by those who caused us to betray the Vietnamese. Why spend 58,000 lives, and at a point of satisfactory victory, bail out. When Saigon fell in 1975, I felt ashamed and angry, and that anger hasn’t gone away. A large amount of the blame has to fall on the MSM and the anti-war movement. In fact, the enemy strategy after 1968 specifically targetted those groups with the (successful)intent of breaking the US will to fight.

It will be interesting to me to see how the silver start issue plays out. That is the one that has seemed the murkiest. Also, it’s been a long time, but I think there are several medals between the silver start and the MOH.

Another interesting question is whether Kerry’s meetings with the enemy will become part of the campaign. I don’t know who said what, but Kerry’s 1971 speech contained some items that seem likely to have come from the communists (such as the bizarre racism charges). If Kerry tailored his propaganda to match the enemies (and in late 1972 VVAW sent a person to Hanoi to operate as a liaison), then he could guilty of treason, probably too strong a charge to be made directly.

But an ad which highlights Kerry’s first meeting with the enemy (a meeting where he did not meet with our ally), followed by some of the most specific phrases, which the picture of Kerry now in Saigon in the background, could be powerful.

Finally, does anyone know how these new, insane incumbent protection (”campaign finance”) laws work. I hear there is some deadline after which ordinary citizens can’t campaign on their own or in a 527. Does anyone know?

Aug 21, 2004 - 1:32 pm 67. Fresh Air:

John Moore–

My understanding is that 527s may not run ads within 60 days of the election. That gives the Swiftees only another 10 days to run the second ad (one reason why I don’t think there will be a third ad as one of the posters suggested earlier).

I don’t know about what “ordinary citizens” can or can’t do relative to 527s.

Aug 21, 2004 - 1:44 pm 68. jdwill:

John Moore,

I believe he (O’Neill) has at least been think about it since 1971. He describes being outraged then, when he debated Kerry on the Dick Cavett show. I believe there were other skirmishes involving O’Neill during earlier Kerry campaigns for senator.

I think Sept 2 is the deadline. Note that most of the 527’s money as listed by http://www.opensecrets.org/527s/527cmtes.asp

has been spent.

PS The gray lady takes a swat:

In fairness to Mr. Kerry, his aides were faced with a strategic dilemma that has become distressingly familiar to campaigns in this era when so much unsubstantiated or even false information can reach the public through so many different forums, be it blogs or talk-show radio.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/21/politics/campaign/21assess.html?ex=1250740800&en=81466b5be7a46b0d&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

Aug 21, 2004 - 1:58 pm 69. Godzilla:

My latest conspiracy theory: the MSM were hoping to ride this out until the 527 timeout on September 2, then begin ripping into the Swift Vets. They found out that they couldn’t wait that long, and are coming out now. Can the Swift Vets counter hit journalism past Sept 2?

Aug 21, 2004 - 2:19 pm 70. sammy small:

If any source could recognize “unsubstantiated or even false information” it would be the NYT.

Aug 21, 2004 - 2:20 pm 71. Joe:

I’ve just skimmed over the ChiTrib article, having seen synopses and excerpts earlier. While Mr. Rood does answer questions surrounding the “Silver Star” incident, Roger (and others) are quite right that, at this point, the medal question is really an irrelevance, especially since most people, whether left or right, don’t dispute that Kerry _is_ entitled to those medals (well, there are still some real questions about the Purple Hearts…), but Rood doesn’t even touch the two real issues:

1) “Christmas in Cambodia”

2) “Winter Soldier”

As others have mentioned, Rood’s article is a day late and a dollar short. It would have been _much_ more effective had it been released when the first Swiftie ad was first broadcast. It’s been a characteristic of the Kerry campaign throughout this whole incident that they’ve been trying, and failing, to play catch-up.

Also, I agree that Kerry has blundered badly in giving the Swifties national attention by blasting them personally and having his campaign try to sic the FEC on them. Up until them, the playbook had been for the campaign to ignore them as much as possible while the MSM snowed them under with disdain. However, Kerry’s blast blew that whole plan to smithereens, and the MSM was _forced_ to finally give the issue front-page coverage. It’s wretched bad luck – for the Kerryites, that is – that the Swift Boaters had their _second_ ad, with its far more serious slams, ready to unleash at that very moment. What Kerry has done is guaranteed that the Swifties and their claims will be at the top of the MSM agenda for the next week, until the GOP convention, and _that_ means that a lot of people will be exposed to those ads and will have the chance to judge for themselves. Not to mention that “Unfit for Command” will become one of 2004’s top bestsellers, with 500K+ copies already in print – huge for any political tome – and probably more printings to come.

Aug 21, 2004 - 2:29 pm 72. Joe:

Fresh Air -

At this point, the next 10 days are going to seem like a veritable eternity for the Kerry campaign. Their blunders have guaranteed that the Swifties will dominate the news cycle until the GOP convention. Given that. Mr. O’Neil et al. are probably well-content, or more than content. Even once the ads have to be withdrawn, the book will still be out there, and as a #3 entry on the NYT bestseller list and a continuing #1 on Amazon’s sales list, it’s going to be just as hot a topic of continuing discussion as “Fahrenheit 9/11″, possibly even hotter.

Aug 21, 2004 - 2:33 pm 73. Terrye:

I have not got the book yet and so I am getting kind of confused as to the details of all the incidents and if I am a lot of other people will also and they will not read the book so the details will be lost on most folks. What they will remember is the bad taste it will leave in their mouths.

The thing about Viet Nam is that the morale was so low they were givng medals out for things that might not have merited them in other conflicts. As if a medal could make up for all that.

I learned from Viet Nam that you can’t run away.

Kerry learned there is a sucker born every minute.

The prick.

I don’t know if he earned some of his medals, he may have. However a lot of the men he served with ended up hating and distrusting him enough that they had their doubts.

That tells you something. I bet Kerry’s campaign has been out there beating the bushes for vets to come to his rescue and so far they have one vet in one article to add to his band of brothers.

Where is everybody else? Maybe the little lady ought to get out her checkbook.

Aug 21, 2004 - 2:46 pm 74. DennisThePeasant:

The past week or so we have been spending a lot of time and effort trying to figure out to what extent the Swift Boat Ads (especially the ‘Winter Soldier’ ad) and Unfit For Command was going to have on the election. In doing so, most have discussed these controversies in terms of how they would effect undecideds/nonpartisans and/or veterans. I’m not so sure that the effects of the Swift Boat Ads, Unfit For Command and Kerry’s ‘Winter Soldier’ testimony are going to be limited to those two groups. In other words, I am starting to think that these controversies may start causing problems for Kerry with the very group that he (and most of us at this site) are taking for granted as in his campaign bag…the ‘Anyone But Bush’ crowd.

Here’s why I think Kerry is headed for trouble with a significant portion of the ABBers:

As anyone who has paid attention has already noted, it is quite clear from Kerry’s rightward drift on the Iraq War, the Iraq Reconstruction and the War On Terror that his internal polling is telling him that he cannot allow himself to be overtly associated with the Anti-War wing of the Democratic Party (Deaniacs, Kucinich’s Klowns, etc.) or their primary stances on each of the three issues mentioned. Irrespective of the merits, the Kerry campaign understands that they must get as close as possible to the Bush Administration’s positions in these three areas to have a chance to win in November.

Given that, for the ABBers, who are by definition Anti-War, Anti-Reconstruction and Anti-WOT, to be able to support Kerry in good faith, they must take the leap of faith that Kerry is lying through his teeth to Middle America about all three issues. Wasn’t that the unspoken subtext of the Democratic convention? John Kerry may have “reported for duty”, but he made very sure it was the outspoken Anti-War Max Cleland that introduced him, right? There was Michael Moore sitting with Jimmy Carter for all to see, and for the Anti-War ABBers to draw the appropriate conclusion as to what that really meant.

This need to appear ‘as tough as Bush’ while still winking at the Anti-War crowd in secret empathy lies at the heart of Kerry’s strategy for winning in November. Roger and others had wondered why Kerry has chosen to emphasize his Viet Nam experience in his campaign. The answer, at least to me, is quite simple and straightforward. In a nutshell, it allows him enough wiggle room to try to satisfy two groups of voters with diametrically opposing views on the Iraq War and the War On Terror. These are the groups that he must have to win the election. If Roger has mixed feelings about Viet Nam, I am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that there are a few others who feel exactly the same way. It is the combination of warfare and ambiguity that makes Viet Nam appealing to the Kerry campaign.

However, the success of all of this is predicated on the Anti-War ABB crowd being able to trust John Kerry. It is fairly clear that he does not arouse the kind of passion that Howard Dean did, but, if Kerry is willing to come through on their agenda, the ABBers are (for the most part) willing to overlook his flaws and his obvious mediocrity when it comes time to cast their votes. But the key here is the issue of trustworthiness. Being dishonest to Middle America doesn’t bother the ABBers, but the potential of being dishonest to the ABBers does! If nothing else has been made clear by the separate but related controversies of Kerry?s medals, service record, ‘Winter Soldier’ testimony and ‘War Hero’ campaigning is that he will do whatever he feels necessary to advance himself. If Kerry’s behaviors are sowing the seeds of doubt in the undecideds, it is probably doing the same with a portion of the ABB crowd. Some may simply walk away from him because they believe he will not actually come through for them when he is elected…in other words, he could be lying about lying.

There is another reason all of this could be damaging to Kerry with the ABBers. As anyone who has spent time talking with members of the Anti-War/ABB cadres can testify, the one thing that overwhelms all else amongst those people is their unflinching belief in their own moral superiority. Look at the prominent Anti-War bloggers such as Atrios, KOS, Marshall, Drum and Yglesias and what you see is just that…the sense moral superiority in spades. It is exactly what allows them to dismiss Bush and all Republicans as evil primitives, to vilify former comrades such as Roger Simon and Ron Silver as traitors, to gloat over each Iraqi setback we might encounter, or to feel no pain over the deaths of ‘mercenaries’ helping to rebuild Iraq…while remaining very, very moral indeed. At some point, and I don’t know where that point is, some of the ABBers will simply not be able to reconcile that need for moral superiority with the desire to oust President Bush. At some point, Kerry’s antics over the past 35 years will overwhelm their desire to see George Bush gone. At some point, it becomes clear that associating with Kerry ends up being little more than associating with the ‘evils of Bush’, i.e. lying, cheating stealing. When that happens, ABBers will start to drift towards either Nader, or if Nader is not available to them, towards abstaining come election day. Look at today’s Doonesbury…it makes this point in no uncertain terms.

Aug 21, 2004 - 2:58 pm 75. jdwill:

Terrye,

You can read two important chapters (5, and 6) for free online.

http://humaneventsonline.com.edgesuite.net/offer.html

Chapter 5 gives detail o the medals controversy

Chapter 6 lays out the issue with the Winter Soldier ‘investigation’ and Kerry’s use of it.

Aug 21, 2004 - 2:59 pm 76. Fresh Air:

Everyone—

Interesting interview with John O’Neill at Human Events Online. He gives a little more color on the Silver Star and Bronze Star incidents.

This guy knows his stuff.

Aug 21, 2004 - 3:02 pm 77. Joe:

Dennis, you are absolutely right. In fact, I know a couple of ABB’ers on another message board that I frequent who are quite unhappy with Kerry. One of them, in fact, frequently says that when he goes into the booth on 11/2 to vote for Kerry, he’ll be wearing a clothespin on his nose while he’s doing so, because as much as he hates Bush, he’s nearly as disgusted with Kerry. In fact, he said just the other day that while he believes Nader will repeat his spoiler role in this year’s election, he’s looking like a “prophet” compared to the major candidates and that Kerry had better “disinfect his campaign” soon or he’ll abandon Kerry and switch to Nader. The other gentleman won’t go as far, at least not yet, but he’s very unhappy with the incompetence of Kerry’s campaign staff.

Aug 21, 2004 - 3:32 pm 78. Barry Dauphin:

I just caught the CBS Evening News. It was basically a hatchet job on the SBVT. The Chicago reporter who was a swift boat commander backs up Kerry’s story re: Silver Star. But as Roger said (and Hugh Hewiit too) the medal count is the diversion. Teasing out the facts about medals was never the big issue. Cambodia, baby, Cambodia. He has yet to explain the stuff about the CIA drops. His Christmas carrolls have struck a false note, and everyone knows it.

Kerry has been trying to square a circle, and attempting that always has a short half life. He wants to be both the Dean anti war lefty and the gung ho take no prisoners WoT butt-kicker. The only reason he has been able to sustain it this long is how much the ABB crowd loathes Bush. I look for Kerry to throw a Hail Mary pass in the coming weeks in the guise of “reaching out” to the Vietnam vets to “heal old wounds” so we can “move the country forward again.” To which many vets will say, too late buddy boy.

Aug 21, 2004 - 3:50 pm 79. rgvdh:

Fresh Air sez:

“I have seen the Lehman-signed-the-Silver-Star-paperwork thing discussed on other blogs, and the consensus was Kerry probably requested a replacement”

Would that be a replacement for the one he either did or did not throw over the White House fence?

Aug 21, 2004 - 4:02 pm 80. Kyda Sylvester:

John Kerry more and more embodies the axiom that each of us is the architect of his own fate.

Years ago Mr. Kerry slimed, maligned and used as a springboard to his political career a group of American soldiers and veterans. Now members of the same group may effectuate the end of that career.

There’s a certain poetic justice in that.

Aug 21, 2004 - 4:02 pm 81. RayC:

Re: Rick Ballard’s comment Aug 21, 2004 at 10:30 AM

Rick, like you, I have been intending to send some financial support to the Swifties and haven’t gotten around to it. I’m sending $100.00 right now. If everyone on this thread who hasn’t contributed would do so today the SBV could buy more airtime. I’m off to my check book right now.

RayC

Aug 21, 2004 - 4:28 pm 82. WichitaBoy:

Excellent post, Dennis. Thank you for providing another piece of the puzzle, to wit, that part of the source of BDS is the sense of self-righteous moral superiority which these people possess. That’s one of the reasons why I choose to name them Neopuritans. It takes an essentially religious conviction about one’s beliefs to provide that level of confident self-righteousness.

As for having an effect, absolutely, every one of these pieces of information, as it comes in, has an effect across the full spectrum of the electorate. It is often stated that only the independents matter, but that is wrong, everyone matters and everyone is affected.

Aug 21, 2004 - 4:33 pm 83. Rick Ballard:

Great analysis Dennis. I’m really beginning to have doubts about the actual size of the true ABB group. I’ve seen claims that it exceeds 20%but I can’t find any evidence of it. I think I’ll stick with 13-15% and lean to the low end. I keep remembering the media clamor about the hordes of Deaniacs in Iowa in contrast to the actual result.

I would also note that there is very little “how dare you impugn the character of this fine man” type of response. Typically, I would expect to see at least a little “Look at all his wonderful accomplishments…” but I guess reality is a limiting factor.

Aug 21, 2004 - 4:38 pm 84. Fresh Air:

rgvdh–

Would that be a replacement for the one he either did or did not throw over the White House fence?

Answer: Yes.

Aug 21, 2004 - 4:48 pm 85. Terrye:

jdwl:

Thank you, I will check that out.

Barry my dear I have not watched Dan Rather in ages. Of course CBS did a hatchet job on the vets. For years I watched CBS everyday and listened to NPR every day. I have made a clean break and that is why I have time for you guys.

Wichita boy you are right. The abb people are zealots. They have reacted to this much the way the church congregation might react to catching the minister with the choir leader.

Aug 21, 2004 - 4:58 pm 86. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

Barry writes

I look for Kerry to throw a Hail Mary pass in the coming weeks in the guise of “reaching out” to the Vietnam vets to “heal old wounds”

This Vietnam veteran would remove the pin and throw it back.

(That’s assuming I could figure out how – zoomies and hand grenades are strangers)

Aug 21, 2004 - 5:12 pm 87. Terrye:

Roger:

Contenitti states in his article that Thurlow has not released his records. Correct me if I am wrong somebody but I think this is not true. I believe the man said he stood by what he said and that if he got a citation then he did not deserve it either and he did agree to release his records.

Can you be named in a citation and not know about it? Could it be that he knew and just did not say anything at the time? In any event he is standing by what he has said. But you are right, thirty years is a long time to reconstruct events.

Aug 21, 2004 - 5:44 pm 88. Mork:

The shorter Roger Simon:

Well, we’ve all had fun smearing the candidate, but the lies are starting to blow up in our faces, so we’ll just declare the whole thing a draw and hope that everyone drops it before they work out what sleazy hacks we all are.

You are a disgrace.

Aug 21, 2004 - 5:51 pm 89. richard mcenroe:

Rick Ballard ó I e-mailed the Oliphant cartoon and the CQ comments on it to the American Legion national HQ as soon as I posted here.

Aug 21, 2004 - 5:53 pm 90. Charlie (Colorado):

(That’s assuming I could figure out how – zoomies and hand grenades are strangers)

John — it’s a lot like tossing a cold beer to your friends in the hot tub, except you pull the ring-tab first.

Oh, and it’s good to toss it a little further.

Terrye:

Can you be named in a citation and not know about it? Could it be that he knew and just did not say anything at the time?

Yes to one and yes to two.

On one, it appears that the citation paperwork was filed three months after Thurlow separated. The first time he heard about it may have been when he got the medal. On the second, as a stand-alone citation it may well have been very valid; the descriptions I’ve read of Thurlow’s conduct sound pretty impressive. But it kind of sounds like the after-action report doesn’t single out Thurlow, and it was sort of “bronze stars all around”.

Mork:

Well, we’ve all had fun smearing the candidate, but the lies are starting to blow up in our faces, so we’ll just declare the whole thing a draw and hope that everyone drops it before they work out what sleazy hacks we all are.

Mork, has anyone mentioned recently that you’re not just a troll, but a moronic troll?

Aug 21, 2004 - 6:02 pm 91. Fresh Air:

Charlie, if no one has recently, I’ll say it: Mork, you are not just a troll, but a moronic troll.

Aug 21, 2004 - 6:22 pm 92. devildog:

The Diminutive Mork:

Nothing is blowing up in anyone’s face and no one is calling it a draw. These are serious matters worthy of serious review. If these allegations are lies, then they should be easy to dispatch with Mr. Kerry’s signature on a Standard Form 180 and a subsequent press conference.

You are a disgrace.

Aug 21, 2004 - 6:27 pm 93. holdfast:

Holy projection Morkman!!

“Well, we’ve all had fun smearing the candidate, but the lies are starting to blow up in our faces, so we’ll just declare the whole thing a draw and hope that everyone drops it before they work out what sleazy hacks we all are.”

1) Isn’t that sorta what the Dems and the MSM did regarding the Bush AWOL thing? Yes, we all know he served the the TANG – didn’s see combat and didn’t claim to (take that Harkin!) – yes it was less brave than going to Vietnam – but the Chairman of the DNC accused Bush of a crime (AWOL), with no evidence to back it up (or even basic knowledge of how the ANG works). Give me a call when Gillespie or Racicot accuses Kerry of a crime (though he did admit to some in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Cmte) – until then, STFU.

2) Nobody’s dropping anything. The Swift Vets scored a home-run on Christmas in Cambodia. Kerry lied, Nicaraugans died! Apparently Kerry thinks that lying to the Senate to make a political point (or at least score some points) is no biggie. He did it in the 70s and he did it again in the 80. He’s totally nailed on that – and patrolling the “watery borders” from 50 miles away won’t cut it. He can’t get any of hi pet vets to back up the Cambodian thing – his 1986 testimony was pure BS, right out of Apocalyose Now.

3) Silver Star – There actually is not too much variation in the different accounts. I don’t think what he did was particularly medal worthy, but it was not necessarily wrong either. Beldar has a great discussion on the point, so I’ll leave it there, except to say that I wouldn’t want to hang my case on this point.

3) Purple Heart 1 – There is a lack of conclusory evidence on this one – it seems to come down to eyewitness testimony (the crappiest kind of evidence – give me circumstantial any day). There is, however, a direct contradiction with Kerry’s account of “going into battle for the first time” in the Brinkley book – several days later. Also, I think that anyone who served in the infantry or other combat arms would be disgusted at Kerry’s getting the award for a scratch, even if it was an enemy-inflicted scratch. This is a personal value judgment, but voters who are ex-combat arms ought to have the info to be able to make that judgment. Some people will judge Bush harshly for avoiding service in Vietnam, others will do the same to Kerry for getting a cheesy (though possibly legitimate) purple heart.

4) The Rassman – Bronze Star / 3rd PH incident. Nothing that I’ve seen in the NYT or other media has convinced me that there was “heavy fire” at the time. I could conceive of some light, harassing fire, maybe, but I cannot believe that anyone would spend over an hour trying to salvage a boat on a narrow canal while under heavy fire. It just defies logic. Thurlow jumped onto a sinking boat, and in fact fell in the water – that might justify the Bronze Star, since he was in some personal danger, though seems kind of weak to me. The lack of other casulties (except possibly Kerry’s bruised arm) seems to support the notion that there was no heavy fire.

Kerry advanced a thesis. The SwiftVets provided an antithesis. We are now working our way towards a synthesis. Some of the Vets’ claim will likely be proven false, or at least not entirely true, but we will also unmask Kerry’s lies.

Aug 21, 2004 - 6:30 pm 94. holdfast:

15 minutes and no further postings – did I accidently kill this thread?

Aug 21, 2004 - 6:46 pm 95. Terrye:

Mork:

you coward.

The disgrace is a man who would be president after he called his fellow soldiers war criminals and disgraced the men still in country as well as the tens of thousands who died. I guess respecting the vet only counts if the vet is kissing John Kerry’s boney ass.

Aug 21, 2004 - 6:46 pm 96. jdwill:

Nice post, Holdfast

I agree about the Silver Star, in fact the whole medals controversy is just the tar baby opening.

Yet to come are the details of how dishonest the Winter Soldier testimony was, how Kerry carried it whole to the Fulbright comittee,

yet to come are the Kerry linkages to VVAW people whose names are infamous,

then the meetings with North Vietnamese officials in the light of his reserve naval officer status,

then the POW-MIA comittee and the shredded documents,

then the linkage to businessmen who stood to profit from normalization of relations with N Vietnam.

Are we to November yet? Can every MSM editor hold this back with the internet and Fox carrying it? All it took was to initially draw blood.

What puzzles me is why the Chicgo Tribune article that brings Rood to the surface is only coming out now

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/specials/elections/chi-040821rood,1,1611037.story?coll=chi-news-hed

This seems like a believable, straightforward rebuttal to the O’Neil version. Why didn’t they get this out right away? then they might have derailed it before half the country had the meme.

Aug 21, 2004 - 6:53 pm 97. Charlie (Colorado):

I guess respecting the vet only counts if the vet is kissing John Kerry’s boney ass.

Strong letter follows.

Aug 21, 2004 - 6:54 pm 98. holdfast:

Terrye:

Thanks for reviving the thread- and using the term “bony ass” – though I think “bony, lilly-white ass” might be even better : )).

i was trying to come up with the perfect descriptor for Kerry’s speaking style; I settled on “Hectoring” – any other suggestions?

Aug 21, 2004 - 6:55 pm 99. holdfast:

C’mon Mork – I’m calling you out. Rebut by post – please! I’m no DtP, but I think I can punt a Trollette like Mork.

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:00 pm 100. richard mcenroe:

John Moore and Charlie (Colorado) ó And whatever you do, don’t chug it…

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:00 pm 101. Charlie (Colorado):

This seems like a believable, straightforward rebuttal to the O’Neil version. Why didn’t they get this out right away? then they might have derailed it before half the country had the meme.

Reading it, it doesn’t appear as if Rood is all that thrilled about talking about it, and he says straight out that he wouldn’t come forward at Kerry’s personal request. Nor does it refute the idea that the maneuver was preplanned, just the opposite — although he doesn’t comment on the imputed motivation.

Rood is definitely not coming out in Kerry’s favor in any way except the limited one to say the Silver Star citation was arguable.

By the way, did anyone notice this:

Months before that day in February, a fellow boat officer, Michael Bernique, was summoned to Saigon to explain to top Navy commanders why he had made an unauthorized run up the Giang Thanh River, which runs along the Vietnam-Cambodia border. Bernique, who speaks French fluently, had been told by a source in Ha Tien at the mouth of the river that a VC tax collector was operating upstream.

This sounds a lot like what we’re hearing now about the Cambodia thing.

Kerry’s division wasn’t in the area at all, but someone else did act on the Giang Thanh River.

Sounds like a source for more confabulation.

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:06 pm 102. richard mcenroe:

So Rood, who was there but not on Kerry’s boat, which according to the Kerry campaign already disqualifies him, defends Kerry’s actions.

There were 18 Navy men and an unspecified number of army personnel (between the three boats, at a squad a piece, that could be over 30 men) involved in that action. Rood is the only one who leaps to Kerryís defense aside from the problematic “band of brothers”? Don’t you think those other men would be lining up to defend Kerry by now, seeing a brother vet being abused and all?

Oh, well, maybe they were busy posing for Pat Oliphant…

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:16 pm 103. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

OK – I get it… pop the top and throw it a long ways, and duck.

Regarding the first purple heart, there are two special things other than the testimony of the doctor and the CO denying it:

1) It was Kerry’s first but I believe it was the last to be awarded.

2) Kerry had asked both the doctor and his CO for a purple heart recomendation and been turned down.

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:17 pm 104. Charlie (Colorado):

So Rood, who was there but not on Kerry’s boat, which according to the Kerry campaign already disqualifies him, defends Kerry’s actions.

Oops, that’s right, Rood “didn’t serve with Kerry”, did he?

But seriously, it’s a pretty pale, wan bit of support; Jamie, you’re the MD, get out the smelling salts.

John, I can’t recall — do we know who did sign the papers for the first PH? Is that the thing the Corpsman signed?

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:27 pm 105. Charlie (Colorado):

Wow. I wonder what’s up: just tried to get over to swiftvets.com, and I can’t get it.

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:39 pm 106. Terrye:

If you read the account it seems the difference is one of degrees. That is how many enemy and how much help did Kerry have? To a large degree there is no significant difference. I mean, it is kinda thin. Rood does make the point that Kerry did not charge like the Light Brigade all by himself nor was it all his idea.

It seems that Kerry does not always lie, but he often takes poetic license.

I am surprised there was not more to this. I am sure that Kerry supporters will heave a sigh of relief and think. Oh God I am glad that is over.

All I can say is remember AWOL. No amount of evidence was enough. Once the thought is there you gotta wonder, who to believe? hmmmm

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:41 pm 107. holdfast:

It appears that most or all of the Army guys (which may have meant US officers and some kind of local troops) were at the first ambush mopping up – which is why it was just Kerry and Rood’s crew at the second. The tactic of heading straight on into the ambush makes a lot more sense if you have a landing force to deploy – in that sens, Rood’s story adds some useful context. The idea of doing it with just the crews still seems pretty stupid to me, but if you knew there were only a couple of guys on the bank, it might make sense (though it makes no sense to have the skippers of BOTH boats lead the charge.

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:42 pm 108. Terrye:

Charlie:

I got there. seems ok.

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:45 pm 109. Mork:

OK, Holdfast, taking your points in order:

1) I agree with you about MacAuliffe’s remarks – they were out of order. But I seem to recall that a number of the Dem candidates in the primaries, including Kerry, specifically disowned the AWOL charge, and I can’t recall it having been repeated.

But I don’t accept the equivalence of Bush’s pretty clear failure to complete his guard service and Kerry’s service. The differences are these:

A: In Bush’s case, we’re dealing with a simple factual point which would be easy to disprove if untrue (and note that the White House never asserts positively that Bush completed his duty in Alabama – the standard line is that he completed his service and was discharged honorably).

B: No-one is running ads accusing Bush of being a liar, unfit for office or morally deficient on account of his guard service.

That said, I think we’d all be better off if neither subject were thought a legitimate or significant election issue.

2. So, Kerry was in Cambodia in January, not December. Maybe he confused Tet with Christmas. Big deal. If the evidence showed that Bush had shown up at Alabama in June 1973 rather in than May 1973, when he was due, do you think that there’d be any issue about his credibility or service?

3, 3, 4) I’m sorry, Holdfast, but it seems perfectly clear to me what the story is here. The events happened. The official after action reports and citations cast the events in a way that, consistent with the facts, cast the most favorable light on all the U.S. service personnel involved, as they always tend to do (and please don’t tell me that Kerry wrote all those reports – that canard is well and truly exploded). At worst, Kerry has been content to run with the official story where modesty might have called for a little more circumspection.

But what we have from the SBVFT is an overwhelming desire to hurt Kerry, absolutely regardless of the truth, decency or any sense of proportion.

And it’s all been orchestrated on behalf of a man for whom no depth is too low to have his rich friends descend on his behalf.

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:46 pm 110. Knucklehead:

Charlie,

I think I’ve got this correct, but take it with a grain of salt.

The record of treatment for the first WOUND was signed by the medic. It was the doctor who actually treated the wound. IIRC that’s the 0.25 in. piece of shrapnel in the arm. It is still a question of whether or not it came from enemy fire or Kerry’s own firing of an grenade launcer and the exploding grenade launched back at him. This is the wound that seems to have happened two or three days before Kerry records his first experience of receiving enemy fire in his journal.

This is also the last of the three PHs he was awarded. The claim here against Kerry, if I understand it correctly, is that Kerry asked the doctor to submit whatever was required for him to get a PH and the doctor refused. So Kerry went to his CO and asked and the CO denied the request. So after both the doc and CO were gone, apparently Kerry mined the files and turned this wound into the third PH that got him his ticket out.

So, chronologically speaking, it is the first wound but the third purple heart.

I don’t know where this impression came from, but I have the distinct impression that there seems to be a claim that the “three PHs is a ticket home” rule was neither widely known or applied, was not an automatic thing but required command approval, and that the command used the opportunity to unload Kerry.

Unless there is something really nefarious in the other medal awards, it seems to me this First Wound/Third PH medal is really the only particularly interesting one.

Christmas in Cambodia, the Winter Soldier testimony (the subject of the current ad) and the meetings in Paris with North Vietnamese officials seem to be the real issues – a least to me.

OT, but someone somewhere in these recent threads thought the Silver Star is second only to the CMH. Someone else thought there were three other medals. I believe I have this correct, but am too lazy to look it up… There is one medal for valor that lies between the SS and the CMH but it is service dependant (Navy Cross?) and, therefore, is known by several names.

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:46 pm 111. Tom O'Bedlam:

Two things:

First, does anyone have a link to a website that explains the medals and what they are awarded for? I’m interested because of Thurlow, who received a bronze star, and has said he thought it was appropriate (even though he didn’t know it was coming), although there was no enemy fire at the time he earned it. I’m wondering if it fits in with the “V” discussed above, which apparently may or may not come with the medal.

Second: just guessing here, but I think a third ad is coming, say next Wednesday or so. My guess is that it will address Kerry’s dealing with the enemy in Paris, while he was still a commissioned officer in the Naval reserve. So the first ad would have set the stage by casting doubt on his self-created narrative, the second ad would have highlighted the betrayal of his comrades-in-arms by his Senate testimony, and the third ad would then top it all off with his betrayal of his country, and arguable treason. Maybe I’m just talking through my hat here, but it sure would make dramatic progression of accusations.

Aug 21, 2004 - 7:57 pm 112. Knucklehead:

Mork,

But what we have from with John Kerry is an shameless opportunist with a well document habit of manufacturing stories about his Vietnam service who perpetrated an outright fraud which did great harm to the US in general, led to additional deaths and other casualties for those fighting in the war as well as additional pain and suffering for POWs.

He willfully slandered Vietnam veterans and was a strongly contributing factor to events that led to the unnecessary deaths of many thousands, if not millions, of Vietnamese.

And Kerry did this with absolute disregard of the truth, decency or any sense of proportion.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:00 pm 113. Richardphx:

No matter how you want to spin this, the fact remains….

Merrie Spaeth who orchestrated the appalling character assassination of McCain in 1999 is leading the charge yet again, and it’s an instant replay of the McCain assault. Have you seen the new ad that simply shows what McCain said to Bush four years ago? It is absolutely devastating. It is the proof America needs that this is an exercize in shamelessness.

And then there’s the new revelations in the Knight Ridder media and Chicago Tribune and NYT and WaPo. There’s no getting around the fact: The SBVFT made statements 30 years+ ago that are in gross contradiction to what they are saying now. They were rounded up by Spaeth and O’Neill in a shameless attempt to assassinate Kerry just as Spaeth did to McCain. It’s all a sham, a canard, and hopefully the voters will now have a little more understanding of how the bush slime machine operates. Thank god the major media are finally exposing this for what it is. It will solidify the bush camp, but it will only serve to repel and alientate the all-important swing voters, who want answers to the pressing problems they are facing: lower salaries, fewer jobs, despair over an endless war in Iraq that was clearly misrepresented to them, and the loss of America’s honor in the world. Whether Kerry was in Cambodia in December or January will be their last consideration. One needn’t be a Rhodes scholar to see the SBVFT for what they are, and in such a critical election it will take more than blatantly dirty tricks to sway the electorate. It drives home just how little bush has to run on, and how desperate and pathetic he is. It is so depressing, so ugly. I remember his father’s call for a kinder, gentler nation, and I cringe. We’ve hit a new low, and Americans are going to express their disgust in the voting booths.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:04 pm 114. Knucklehead:

Tom O:

Here’s a site about medals.

I didn’t find anything about he “V” – don’t know what it is.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:05 pm 115. Terrye:

Mork:

I heard the guy who runs the Democratic Party [Terry Mcwahts his fac] say, “I can’t wait for my war hero with his chest full of medals to debate the deserter”. The whole awol thing was done over and over again in two campaigns, kinda ridiculous to bat your eyelashes and play innocent now.

Soros, a billionaire says he will give his entire nine billion dollar fortune to get rid of Bush a man he compares to Hitler. He gives millions to organizations like moveon.org whose do ads for Democrats. Do the Democrats have a problem with that? Hell no.

Michael Moore, the multi millionaire, does the hit propaganda piece F9/11 with more than 57 factual errors and do the Democrats refute it? Hell no, they invite the sob to sit next to former president Jimmy Carter at the Democrat National Convention.

Notable and pissy Dems like Joe Wilson and Richard Clarke write their tell all books and does the president call the publisher and try to have the books stopped like Kerry did when the Swift boat guys wrote their book? Hell no and no doubt if he had we would be hearing no end of the crushing of dissent bull shit.

Movie Stars and over the hill rockers give money and concerts to remind us of whose values the Democrats represent.

the list goes on and on…

Kerry lied to the Senate. I am 52 years old, I remember when that happened and what the reaction of a lot of veterans was even then. Kerry was less than honest about where he spent Christmas 1968, which would be no big deal if he himself had not made it one. He used his service and the men who served with him.

250 men who risked their lives and served their country say Kerry lied and disgraced them. They have a right to have their say whether you approve of it or not.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:12 pm 116. Mork:

Terrye, I, too have the right to tell lies about all sorts of things.

Doesn’t make it right.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:16 pm 117. Charlie (Colorado):

Mork:

But I don’t accept the equivalence of Bush’s pretty clear failure to complete his guard service ….

The difficulty here is that this is bullshit. It’s been disproven. Time and again. Bush did more than his obliged number of days of service. He finished his contracted time. He then requested a release from the inactive reserve a few months early. He got an Honorable Discharge. He’s published a specific statement on the part of the Air Force that he fully fulfilled his obligation.

The Alabama thing is either a demonstration that you’re ignorant, or purposefully willing to mislead. Guard service isn’t like normal active duty; you miss days, you make them up. Bush misssed some days, and made them up.

If you believe Kerry so much, and Kerry has disavowed the “AWOL from the National Guard” story, why do you continue to bring it up?

Especially when it’s false?

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:17 pm 118. Charlie (Colorado):

Merrie Spaeth who orchestrated the appalling character assassination of McCain in 1999 is leading the charge yet again, and it’s an instant replay of the McCain assault.

Wow, Mork, you’ve discovered that the PR firm that did an anti-Kerry ad had been used in a previous campaign.

Isn’t that special?

If Kerry’s all distressed about this, let him demand MoveOn.org to stop running ads against Bush.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:22 pm 119. Mork:

Charlie:

Re: AWOL – my understanding is that “AWOL” has a technical meaning that is not necessarily established by Bush’s failure to show up in Alabama, and also that it is a criminal offence.

So, I believe that it is a serious charge that has not been proved, and so it should not be made.

But it’s also clear that there is no evidence that Bush completed his service.

If you are confident that the evidence does exist, please direct me to it.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:23 pm 120. Charlie (Colorado):

I got there. [SwiftVets.com] seems ok.

I can get there now; they’ve got a rather better site design up. I probably caught them as they cut over.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:24 pm 121. Richardphx:

Terrye, you are wrong. Richard Clarke is a long-time Republican, and has worked for Reagan and Bush I and Clinton and Bush II.

What did Kerry say in front of the Senate that was a lie? I think he did us all an invaluable srvice, telling what Vietnam was all about and what it did to the Americans serving there. Invaluable.

If the most atrocius lie is the Cambodia kerfuffle, I beg you to reconsider. Maybe he got a date wrong, maybe he embellished, as all politicians do at times. Wrong perhaps, but certainly not comparable to distorting the situation in Iraq the way bush has done, intentionally attempting to muddy the waters and portray the threat or Iraq in dire terms that did not correspond to reality. All politicians will lie at some points; you’ve lied, and I have too. But there are lies and there are lies. Kerry, if he was lying, harmed no one. bush’s lies have been lethal; they have cost American lives. Remember how he declined to go after Zarkawi because if we caught him it would have been harder to lobby for the Iraq invasion?

Let’s look carefully at the lies and make a distinction between the foolish and the deadly. When bush tells us emphatically we are safer now that Saddam Hussein is gone, I wonder what he means. Are we so much safer that 1,000 young American lives were worth sacrificing, all to oust an old dictator in his twilight years, who had abandoned WMDs 10 years ago and who, no matter how vile, certainly posed no true threat to us? And that’s for starters; bush’s litany of half-truths and lies are a matter of fact, not conjecture. Kerry’s Cambodia “lie” is still only conjecture, and amazingly irrelevant at a time when America is in deep crisis. Please, don’t surrender your critical faculties: bush’s lies are extraordinary, terrible and lethal. If Kerry lied, it was an embellishment, harmless and trivial. Let’s focus on what really matters. Don’t fall for the republican talking points. Our situation is too dire, the juncture too critical; let’s look at what really matters, not at what Karl Rove wants to use as a smokescreen and a distraction. Please. Please.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:26 pm 122. jdwill:

Mork,

1B No one is showing …

http://www.opensecrets.org/527s/527events.asp?orgid=41

4/27/2004

Title: ?Kerry/Bush?; The newest ad from MoveOn.org shows the differences between the military records of George Bush and John Kerry. It opens with scenes from the movie Brothers In Arms, a documentary about Kerry and his crew. The ad mentions that Kerry braved enemy gunfire to rescue one of his men. It then shifts to Bush?s record with the National Guard, pointing out that he missed physicals, wasn?t seen for several months and was released early from the Guard to attend business school. The ad cost $115000 and airs nationally on Fox News Channel and on CNN in the New York and DC metro areas.

According to Dem rules you are completely discredited now

;-}

in another MoveOn ad:

This ad, funded by MoveOn.org PAC, speculates about what ?President Bush would say when he testified before the Sept. 11 investigatory committee.? A male voice, imitating the president, ?testifies? that he was ?obsessed with Iraq and used terrorists attacks as an excuse to invade Iraq.?

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:27 pm 123. Mork:

By the way, Charlie, while I’d love to take the credit for the post on the links between this and Bush’s slimes against Sen. McCain, it was written by Richardphx.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:27 pm 124. holdfast:

Mork

1) Terry McAulliffe – THE HEAD OF THE FREAKIN’ DNC accused the sitting President of having committed a CRIME. With absolutely no eveidence to back it up, beyond some spotty records (that being a lack of evidence). Did Kerry -the titular leader of his party disown TM – I don’t think so. Michael Moore accused the President of an even more serious crime – while Kerry “disassocated” himself from those remarks, the Dems put MM in the seat of honor at their convention. If that isn’t a ratification of his remarks, I don’t know what is. Unlike Kerry, Bush did release all his records – and the media spent weeks poring over them.

Both Bush and Kerry applied for an early release – and both got it (except that Kerry was still in the Naval Reserve when he met with the enemy in Paris). As we’ve all learned (and I think we can all agree), military records from that era can prove to be surprisingly inconclusive. You put the burden of proof on Bush to refute his detractors – yet you would put the burden of proof on the Swift Vets to refute Kerry. Seems pretty one-sided to me.

“B: No-one is running ads accusing Bush of being a liar, unfit for office or morally deficient on account of his guard service.”

Well, if any of Bush’s fellow Air Guardsmen want to they’re free to do so (until the end of the month anyway). Maybe they like him. And Bush isn’t running adds saying this about Kerry (despite what Kerry may say) – these are guys who really hate him. They seems like normal, nice guys – so maybe there’s something to their anger after all…

“That said, I think we’d all be better off if neither subject were thought a legitimate or significant election issue.”

Too bad – the Dems started down this road, but now they’re whining for their mommy. Tpical really. Let’s talk about Kerry’s Senate record instead – oh wait, that would also be an “attack”

“So, Kerry was in Cambodia in January, not December. Maybe he confused Tet with Christmas. Big deal. If the evidence showed that Bush had shown up at Alabama in June 1973 rather in than May 1973, when he was due, do you think that there’d be any issue about his credibility or service?”

Um, no – Kerry now has asserted that he was in Cambodia in January, but beyond Brinkly’s repitition of that assertion, he’s offered no proof. How may white-bread Bostonians have “visions of sugarplums” during Tet? He kept very detailed diairies of his time in Vietnam – let’s see what they say about Cambodia. If we have some specific dates, maybe we can find some coroboration (beyond a magic hat). The Kerry machine has offered a series or half-hearted, sometimes contradictory theories on this one, most of which don’t even pass the laugh test. Kerry lied to the Senate in 1986 and you can’t spin it away no matter how hard you try.

“I’m sorry, Holdfast, but it seems perfectly clear to me what the story is here. The events happened.”

Just not like Kerry thinks they did.

“The official after action reports and citations cast the events in a way that, consistent with the facts, cast the most favorable light on all the U.S. service personnel involved, as they always tend to do (and please don’t tell me that Kerry wrote all those reports – that canard is well and truly exploded)”

I don’t really know where it’s been “exploded” though I think it’s statistically unlikely that he wrote all of them for every mission at issue. It would help a lot if Kerry would release his file – even the WaPo says he’s holding back a lot. Most of the reports I’ve seen are pretty sketchy and I’ve neither seen nor heard anything that would explain how you could spend an hour or so salvaging a boat in a narrow canal under heavy fire without taking a lot more damage and casulties. Nobody has even come close to exlaining this to my satisfaction. i don’t think that he was a coward or an incompetent – he was probably a pretty fair Swift Boat skipper (or at least it has not been proven that he wasn’t). Unfortunately, he is also a man given to gross and serial fabrication and exageration. And he chose to lie about some things (medals and wounds) that miltary folks take very, very seriously. For me, and for many other (ex-)military people, this demonstrable lack of honor should morally disqualify Kerry from becoming CinC. You seem to disagree, and it is likely you will act on that on November 2nd – that’s fine, it’s called Democracy, but these Swift Vets have a position (just like Soros, Bing et al appear to have a position) and they are going to take it to the American people. If Kerry thinks they are lying, let him sue for slander. If he can prove that they really are lying, with malice aforethought, then he can overcome Sullivan. Otherwise, let him sign the 180, release his records and let the chips fall where they may.

Look, viewed objectively, Bush is a prettty weak candidate with a few glaring vulnerabilities, but, so sad for you, Kerry is even weaker, and has never before been “seared” by the heat of a really down and dirty campaign. Bush has.

Also, you do not address his “first combat” account from the Brinkly book that contradicts the first PH story.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:34 pm 125. Terrye:

Richard:

McCain is a Republican and he supports Bush not Kerry. And nothing the Republicans have done is in the same league of dirty politics as the Dems. not even close. Ads like these do not deal with the issue, which is Kerry himself. Not Bush.

Wapo and NYT have been carrying water for the Democrats for years. Tell me if either of those papers had published the fact that Clinton had been charged with and accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault not to mention the numerous affairs do you think he would have been president? Do you think for one moment they would not have made an issue of all that if he had been a Republican? I supported the man but if people had paid attention to his faults earlier we would have been spared a lot later.

Now Kerry makes an issue of his Viet Nam years when everyone over 45 who was not stoned back then knows there is a lot of controversy there. That is no one’s fault but his own.

Some of these men have changed their minds because they have learned addtional information about Kerry, some of them always hated his guts. It is not fair to assume that they are liars. Especially when your own candidate changes his mind as often as his underwear.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:35 pm 126. richard mcenroe:

Mork ó It’s plain you’ve never served or known anyone who served.

An honorable discharge AS BUSH HAS is the proof that you completed your service obligation properly. If you haven’t, you get what is called a “general discharge,” which is a handicap later in life as it indicates a less-than-satisfactory performance. If you really screw up, like oh, going AWOL for several months, you get a DIShonorable discharge, which may also be accompanied by prosecution for whatever offense you committed to earn the DD. It’s that simple.

And aside from what the Kerry Cambodia “kerfuffle” shows us about the man, beyond the burned villages, slaughtered livestock, and dead women and children Kerry tried to cover up, not to mention his willingness to take credit for the heroism of an enlisted man, the real issue about his service is his testimony before Congress in ‘71, 86 and later, about which you seem unable to say anything. Do try to keep up.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:39 pm 127. richard mcenroe:

Terrye ó Could you do me a favor and address Richardphx as same, to avoid any confusion? You know how shy and sensitive I am…

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:41 pm 128. Acme:

I read this disgusting post over at Atrios today:

Rove can’t keep the focus off the 1000th US military death in Iraq. Set to come on the anniversary of September 11th, if the current rate of attrition holds true. (958 @ 2/day = 1000 by Sept 11th.)

I’ve been tracking it recently — it’s been up to three or four a day recently.

There’s an outside chance — not that I want any more dead — that we’ll reach 1000 during the RNC.

Erik | Email | Homepage | 08.21.04 – 5:11 pm | #

I had no idea the ABBers cared so little about anything but their cause.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:44 pm 129. Jamie Irons:

River must be running high tonight.

Flushed the trolls out from under the bridges.

Jamie Irons

(Charlie — I think more than smelling salts are needed. That Kerry defense was so anemic, an emergency transfusion is called for.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:44 pm 130. Charlie (Colorado):

But it’s also clear that there is no evidence that Bush completed his service.

If you are confident that the evidence does exist, please direct me to it.

You bet.

A lengthly list of notes by Bill Hobbs.

Link Link Link Link Link Link

Link Link Link Link Link — especially good, since it’s an eye witness to Bush’s drilling in Alabama. This is the George magazine article that debunked the story. Link

By the way, the standard tropes are now “Bill Hobbs isn’t a credible source” (so follow the links), “Bush’s records were sanitized” (the guy who claimed that recanted), and “Nobody can prove he was there” (there are a couple of eye-witnesses in the list, and on-base dental records from Alabama. I’d have a helluva time proving where I was in that stretch of the 70’s and I was in high school.)

Do try to keep up.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:46 pm 131. Mork:

You put the burden of proof on Bush to refute his detractors – yet you would put the burden of proof on the Swift Vets to refute Kerry. Seems pretty one-sided to me.

No: I think that in both cases, the burden of proof lies with those who wish to dispute the official record. In Bush’s case, the official record shows no guard service in Alabama.

Well, if any of Bush’s fellow Air Guardsmen want to they’re free to do so (until the end of the month anyway). Maybe they like him.

Um, the point about Bush here is that his fellow Guardsmen at the relevant time didn’t have the opportunity to form an opinion of him, because he wasn’t there.

Let’s talk about Kerry’s Senate record instead – oh wait, that would also be an “attack”

Stop whining. No one has ever suggested that Kerry’s Senate record is not a prime topic for debate. Go for your life.

The Kerry machine has offered a series or half-hearted, sometimes contradictory theories on this one, most of which don’t even pass the laugh test. Kerry lied to the Senate in 1986 and you can’t spin it away no matter how hard you try.

Well, I don’t know for sure that he lied – maybe his recollection was “seared on his brain”, but clearly his recollection was wrong.

But I’m still filing it under “big deal” … if I had the time, I could compile a list of a thousand lies, half-truths, evasions, inaccuracies and deceptions by Bush and his administration that had far more consequence and bother me a great deal more that that one.

Unfortunately, he is also a man given to gross and serial fabrication and exageration.

That’s just wishful thinking on your part. Apart from his presence in Cambodia (which wouldn’t be whether it were factual or not) everything he says is supported by the official record.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:48 pm 132. blogaddict:

Richardphx, you ask for some information: “What did Kerry say in front of the Senate that was a lie? I think he did us all an invaluable srvice, telling what Vietnam was all about and what it did to the Americans serving there. Invaluable.

…Kerry, if he was lying, harmed no one.”

I guess you haven’t heard about Kerry’s Winter Soldier hearings, the basis on which he made his 1971 Senate testimony that you think so “invaluable.” Here’s an account of what was going on at those hearings on which he based his testimony, from a book entitled “Stolen Valor.” http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=20040216184347380 . The gist of it is–and, as far as I know, this has never been disproven–Kerry based his testimony before the Senate on the Winter Soldier hearings, in which most of the men describing atrocities were lying through their teeth about virtually everything–including, in many cases, whether they even served in Vietnam, and whether they saw combat. The point is that Kerry, wanting to make a name for himself as an antiwar hero and be elected in liberal Massachusetts, traded on his truncated “war hero” record to trash his fellow vets without bothering to authenticate the people or the stories on which he based his Senate testimony in even the most rudimentary way.

The consequences of his testimony, which he based on the lies of imposters, were huge, and the casualties were legion–the myth that the Vietnam war featured atrocities that were commonplace and sanctioned at the highest levels. Atrocities did occur (witness My Lai), but they were absolutely not commonplace nor sanctioned at high levels. Even Kerry has said in an interview in the last few months (I saw the interview myself, but am having trouble locating a link to it right now)–that he may have been exaggerated a bit in his Senate testimony!

Other consequences of his testimony based on lies? Well, it not only defamed the men who served in Vietnam, but it helped turn American opinion against the war, leading to the ignominious abandonment of the South Vietnamese to their fate (many thousands killed there, not to mention probably millions who died in boats trying to flee after the US left). Oh, and another little detail, the killing fields of Cambodia, where millions more died.

I won’t even bother to try to point out to you that Bush didn’t lie about WMDs, he was relying on poor intelligence that the entire world (including the Democratic party) believed. Or to say that the net number of deaths in Iraq in the past year has been far less than Saddam would have killed, if he’d remained in power.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:49 pm 133. Terrye:

Mork:

Bush was not awol, the fact that Dems are too dense to comprehend this is sign of a thinking disorder. My brother in law was also in the Guards for some time. He had a death in the family and missed some meetings and stuff and had to make them up later. Happens all the time. Only some one who is extremely anal would make an issue of something like that.

Tell you what Kerry can do what Bush did and release his records.

He does not have to “bring it on”, all he has to do is sign his name and release them.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:50 pm 134. penwil:

“Our situation is too dire, the juncture too critical; let’s look at what really matters, not at what Karl Rove wants to use as a smokescreen and a distraction. Please. Please.”

See this is what so impresses me about today’s Democrats: They always have such fact-based arguments that are cleverly designed to appeal to reason, rather than emotion.

Kerry lied/the hat died.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:52 pm 135. Mork:

John Calhoun, Charlie?

Are you trying to convince me or amuse me?

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:53 pm 136. Charlie (Colorado):

By the way, Charlie, while I’d love to take the credit for the post on the links between this and Bush’s slimes against Sen. McCain, it was written by Richardphx.

Apologies. You and he tend to seem pretty indistinguishable.

Wrong perhaps, but certainly not comparable to distorting the situation in Iraq the way bush has done, intentionally attempting to muddy the waters and portray the threat or Iraq in dire terms that did not correspond to reality.

Okay, RichardPhx, so let’s see the documentary evidence of that. Let’s see any examples you can provide of Bush saying anything that (a) wasn’t supported by the intelligence he had at hand, and (b) wasn’t also said before the war by members of the Clinton administration.

You might, before you hurt yourself, want to consider the 9/11 and Senate Intelligence Committee reports, which pretty thoroughly refute this.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:55 pm 137. Charlie (Colorado):

No: I think that in both cases, the burden of proof lies with those who wish to dispute the official record. In Bush’s case, the official record shows no guard service in Alabama.

But it’s also clear that there is no evidence that Bush completed his service.

If you are confident that the evidence does exist, please direct me to it.

You bet. Do try to keep up.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:58 pm 138. Terrye:

Richard, the pain in the ass: [not richard mcenroe the good guy]

Clarke was a registered Democrat who voted for Gore.

he crossed over to vote in a Republican primary but he was a democrat.

And Kerry lied in front of the Senate, half the testimony he cited was from men who had never even been in Nam. He now says it was “over the top”

I feel safer without Saddam in power and so does Bill Clinton, remember him? The man who said we had to effect regime change in Iraq because not only did Saddam have weapons of mass destruction, Bill guaranteed us Saddam would use them. 1998, not nearly so long ago as the Viet Nam War.

Aug 21, 2004 - 8:59 pm 139. Charlie (Colorado):

He does not have to “bring it on”, all he has to do is sign his name and release them.

Exactly. Form 180. Let’s see’em.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:00 pm 140. DennisThePeasant:

When bush tells us emphatically we are safer now that Saddam Hussein is gone, I wonder what he means.

Of course you do.

If you have been unable to puzzle this out for yourself over the period for the past 2 years and 10 months, have been unable to listen to and understand Bush, Cheney, Powell and Rice, or Blair, or Havel, and have been unable to find, read and understand the works of people such as Victor Davis Hanson, Bernard Lewis, Christopher Hitchens or Paul Berman in that same interval, then the reasonable conclusion would be to assume you’re dumber than a box of dead crabs.

Wonderment at the obvious is almost invariably a very good indicator of stupidity. This isn’t rocket science. A passing acquaintance with reality and an I.Q. slightly above the drool-on-yourself range is really all you need. You figure out why you can’t figure it out, and you’d best keep your “Dean 2004″ lobster bib on until you do.

In the mean time, if you’re really keen on why finding out why we are safer with Saddam Hussein gone, go back in the Congressional Record, or any of the major MSM players such as the Post or the Times during 1998 and start reading quotes from Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy and Tom Daschle on the pressing need to remove Saddam Hussein from power sooner rather than later and by force if necessary.

Duh.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:04 pm 141. Charlie (Colorado):

John Calhoun, Charlie?

Follow the links. Read the materials. Read the George mag article.

Do something to demonstrate that you’re not a mindless troll.

At least try not to repeat the nonsensical two minutes after you’ve been rebutted. That’s just dumb.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:05 pm 142. Charlie (Colorado):

Charlie, if no one has recently, I’ll say it: Mork, you are not just a troll, but a moronic troll.

Thanks. Someone had to do it.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:07 pm 143. holdfast:

Mork

You failed to address the McAulliffe AWOL charge and Dem embrace of Moore’s “deserter” meme – I’ll assume you folded on that.

“: I think that in both cases, the burden of proof lies with those who wish to dispute the official record. In Bush’s case, the official record shows no guard service in Alabama.”

Untrue – some of the record was inclonclusive or ambigous, which is what the Dems/MSM pounced on. I direct you to Charlie’s post above

“Um, the point about Bush here is that his fellow Guardsmen at the relevant time didn’t have the opportunity to form an opinion of him, because he wasn’t there.”

Well then they can make an add about that – I’m sure Soros will happily fund it.

“Stop whining. No one has ever suggested that Kerry’s Senate record is not a prime topic for debate. Go for your life.’

Excellent – let’s start on his waffling on funding for Iraq, move into his embrace of Communist dictators, look at his attendance record at the intelligence committee (I assume you’re OK with the current Bush add on this point) and then we’ll talk about his legislative record …… oh well

“Well, I don’t know for sure that he lied – maybe his recollection was “seared on his brain”, but clearly his recollection was wrong.”

Clearly my recollection of hot, steamy sex with carious supermodels is wrong – but it sure seems real to me, especially if I want to convince people that I’m a super-stud. Too bad it’s not true – but if I tell it to myself and others often enough, it might begin to feel true to me. Seriously, Kerry spoke in the most unequivocable language, to make an important point on the floor of the Senate – and it was flat out untrue. That’s the definition of a lie – deal with it.

“But I’m still filing it under “big deal” … if I had the time, I could compile a list of a thousand lies, half-truths, evasions, inaccuracies and deceptions by Bush and his administration that had far more consequence and bother me a great deal more that that one.”

You don’t need to – you’ve got reputable folks like Joe Wilson and Sandy Berger to do it for you, and at least $150 mil in 527 money to work with. Apparently for you, being wrong when one relies on information prepared by government professionals is “lying” but but telling false tales about one’s own (purported) experiences is just a faulty recollection.

That’s just wishful thinking on your part. Apart from his presence in Cambodia (which wouldn’t be whether it were factual or not) everything he says is supported by the official record.

-His multiple statements about his presence in Cambodia

-His entire 1971 testiony (though that was ENTERED into the official record his chagrin)

-His attemts to take credit for Lt. Peck’s exploits

-His stories about his time on the Gridley

And you STILL refuse to address the “heavy fire” dilemna

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:10 pm 144. DennisThePeasant:

Do these morons really think that we Pro-Liberation types would forget John Kerry’s public pronouncements regarding the clear and present danger Saddam Hussein was to the United States during the Clinton Administration?

We were convinced that John Kerry’s arguments were correct then. We still are…because John Kerry has never renounced what he said in 1998, nor has he ever explained what changed between 1998 and 2001, or 2002, or 2003 to make his own 1998 arguments invalid.

Gee, what did change between 1998 and 2003? Who changed their mind, based on what, and why? Who has been consistent and who hasn’t? And why?

Duh.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:16 pm 145. Charlie (Colorado):

Mork, make sure to follow the “further comments” link on the George story. The authors are hardly Bush fans, and george was hardly a right-wing mag (remember who the founders were?), but they still say:

Mr. Heldt’s piece in TomPaine.com contains even less information on this score. There, Mr. Heldt included a link to the May 1, 1973 document ordering Bush to attend active duty training, but he did not provide a link to Bush’s 1973-74 Statement of Points Earned. Instead, he wrote that Bush “began serving irregularly with his unit” in May, 1973. That’s true, but it’s also true-and highly relevant-that Bush’s Statements of Points Earned show him serving on the days he was ordered to attend active duty training. Mr. Heldt further writes that “Nothing indicates in the records that he ever made up the time he missed.” (Emphasis added.) Again, the 1972-73 and 1973-74 Statements of Points Earned, in conjunction with the April 23, 1973 and May 1, 1973 orders, show that is wrong.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:17 pm 146. DennisThePeasant:

And these guys wonder why they are driving monkey-shit brown Hyundais and working at Taco Bell…

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:23 pm 147. Mork:

Charlie – I followed all your links (though one was broken) and the only affirmative evidence they contained of Bush showing up in Alabama was Bill Calhoun’s testimony, which is laughable.

The rest were attempts to explain why the absence of evidence of Bush’s attendence did not necessarily demonstrate that he wasn’t there, or if he wasn’t, why it didn’t necessarily mean that he was AWOL.

So, there’s nothing there to change my conclusion that there is no evidence that he showed up in Alabama.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:25 pm 148. DennisThePeasant:

So, there’s nothing there to change my conclusion that there is no evidence that he showed up in Alabama.

Of course there isn’t…

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:27 pm 149. holdfast:

Mork:

Well testimony (even the laughable kind, which this is not) is actually evidence. You on the other hand, seem to have no evidence, only an absence thereof (which is not evidence).

See, you LLLs seem to have a real problem distinguishing “evidence” from “proof”, thus statements like “there’s no eveidence of cooperation between OBL and Saddam.” Of course there’s evidence, even the Dems on the 9-11 Commission agree that there’s evidence, it’s just not evidence that you find compelling.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:29 pm 150. Terrye:

Did they run away?

Remember Monty Python? run away run away…

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:29 pm 151. ambisinistral:

Have you seen the new ad that simply shows what McCain said to Bush four years ago? It is absolutely devastating.

Richard,

Yea, but who is it devestating to? McCain is angrily berating Bush for besmirching a veteran. The latest SwiftVet ad and issue is Kerry calling his fellow soldiers War Criminals who are worse than Ghengis Khan. Seems like a wee bit of besmirching to me.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:36 pm 152. Terrye:

If the subject is compelling evidence then we should note that there is no compelling evidence that Kerry did not write at least some of his own citations either. And three purple hearts without a day in hospital? Sheesh my uncle had to take two Nazi slugs, save a couple of other men’s lives and live in pain for 40 years just to get two lousy medals.

I guess the fact that other pilots remember Bush being there does not count does it? Maybe he should round some of those guys up and drag them all over the country with him.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:37 pm 153. DennisThePeasant:

You know, I can’t tell you how clever I think it is of Mork to bring up a months old, long forgotten non-controversy that was beat to death, then dropped by the MSM and which had absolutely no impact, even at it’s non-height, on Bush’s polling numbers. Now that’s a sterling example of how to win an argument and influence people!

He may be too dumb for Taco Bell, but I imagine there’s a prominent spot for him in the Kerry Campaign.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:37 pm 154. DennisThePeasant:

Did they run away?

Nope. Got an order for half a dozen chalupas with sides of nachos. First things first, you know.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:42 pm 155. holdfast:

DTP – Actually, I used the Bush-AWOL story to counter one of Mork’s laughable assertions, to wit:

“Well, we’ve all had fun smearing the candidate, but the lies are starting to blow up in our faces, so we’ll just declare the whole thing a draw and hope that everyone drops it before they work out what sleazy hacks we all are.”

I really thought that he was having a flashback to few months ago. Or was that me having a flashback to my pre-natal days, sailing a swift boat, oh hell, let’s make it a missile cruiser, along the murky, watery border between Cambodia and Vietnam, dropping off CIA agents and collecting their fare in hats. Then there was my shore leave in Olangapo, where raw sewage ran in the streets and the dead whores were stacked knee deep.

Of course, he was just walking into my cunning trap : ))

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:46 pm 156. Terrye:

Just the other day I saw McCAin saying we owed George Bush our respect and our love. Yes, he said love. strange, no?

Maybe the Republicans could make an ad about that.

You know Dems you might want to have your little love affair with McCAin but he is pro liberation. This is the guy that said France was like the old movie star trying to dine on her looks when she no longer has the face for it.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:46 pm 157. Charlie (Colorado):

Nice try, Mork, but you quietly changed the subject.

First off, your dismissal of Calhoun rings a little odd, seeing as he’s a decorated war veteran. I thought we weren’t supposed to question them?

However, you also ignore a couple of other points: the dental records from Alabama, and the fact that Calhoun wasn’t the only person who remembered Bush drilling in Alabama.

That’s not enough, however: you also have to ignore the George story, which specifically notes that the “Statement of Points Earned” disproves your point.

Even that’s not enough, because you also have to ignore the Honorable Discharge, which is the official statement that one has successfully completed one’s obligation.

In the face of the Honorable Discharge, which is generally considered disposative, all you offer is that it’s “not enough”.

Pathetic.

So, there’s nothing there to change my conclusion that there is no evidence that he showed up in Alabama.

Yeah. Eyewitnesses, dental records, attendance point records, and the Honorable Discharge aren’t enough.

Just out of curiosity, what would be enough? If official papers, DoD records, dental records, and eyewitnesses aren’t enough, what would be? Other then Mr Peabody taking you through the Wayback Machine?

Of course, it’s also worth nothing that you’ve subtly warped the question from whether Bush completed his Guard service into whether or not he showed up for every drill in Alabama.

As Dennis said, of course there’s nothing there that would prove his atendance to you. You’re not particularly interested in considering that.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:47 pm 158. Terrye:

Dennis:

You are a hard hard man.

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:49 pm 159. Rick Ballard:

Terrye,

When the frontal eminence is fused to the sacrum “running away” is no longer an option. You have to think more in terms of crab like movements. So, “scuttle away” is probably the appropriate term.

Why are we discussing Bush?

I understand that Mork and Dickphx finally got their faxes but de we really have to follow them down the rabbit trails? If we’re going to play with them we could at least ask them for their explanations of Kerry’s lieswhile we’re at it.

Mork – Bush was honorably discharged. Do you think that Kerry wrote himself up for all his awards or just most of them? My best guess is at least two hearts plus the bronze star. What do you think?

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:50 pm 160. devildog:

The questions about Kerry’s character can not be answered by questioning what Bush did or didn’t do in the TANG. Hello. HELLO! He doesn’t get a pass because someone else did or didn’t do something else.

Can you imagine the outrage if the answer to the Dems charge that “Bush lied about WMD” was that Kerry lied about Cambodia?

Aug 21, 2004 - 9:51 pm 161. Rick Ballard:

Dear Memebots,

Do you consider giving false testimony to a Senate committee to be perjury?

If not, why not?

Would you consider meeting with enemy leaders in a time of war as a commissioned officer of the United States to meet the standards of treason?

If not, why not?

Do you consider telling demonstrable lies on the floor of the United States during a speech in support of a would be communist dictator to be conduct befitting a Senator?

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:04 pm 162. Godzilla:

How about this? Kerry will not go head to head with the Swift Vets because he is ashamed to. They are his peers (and superiors in rank, many of them). He cannot lie to them. You can’t like to someone when you know that they know the truth. You just can’t. I believe that this is tearing Kerry up inside, ripping him apart. This is never going to go away.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:09 pm 163. Terrye:

Rick:

Let us not forget scurry and scamper and flit away.

They forget how many men died in that war. Today we look at the casualties in Iraq and we have to remember that while each loss is a tragedy, these numbers are a fraction of the men lost in that long ago war.

And John Kerry called them war criminals and a lot of people took him at his word.

mistake.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:13 pm 164. Godzilla:

That was “lie to them” not like, and my reason for believing this is that Kerry’s persona is based on his Vietnam experience. This has got to be a living nightmare for him.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:13 pm 165. Godzilla:

There seems to be a distinct lack of support from his colleagues in the Senate and in the wider Democratic Party, outside of MSM and his campaign handlers.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:16 pm 166. devildog:

Memebots. I love it — good one.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:23 pm 167. penwil:

Is it just me or do Mork and Dickphx seem a tad desperate tonight? I mean, Bush was AWOL and Bush lied about WMDs are both so yesterday’s smears.

I spent a number of years in pubic relations and I can say from experience that when a story breaks as big as the swiftboat vet ad story did this week, nine times out of ten the initial perception of the story is the one that sticks in the public’s mind. Kerry and the Dems can come out now and spin pirourettes in a phone booth, and they’ll be lucky to make even a dent the current public perception–whatever it might be, and I think it’s too early yet to tell for sure–of the vets’ accusations against Kerry and the ads and who’s telling the truth and who isn’t, and what it all means about Kerry’s character or lack thereof. By the time Kerry decided to make an appearance with a rebuttal, the story had already started to gel. Kerry’s got his work cut out for him now to get those voters who were actually swayed away by the vets’ accusations to sway back again. A lot more people will have ended up seeing or hearing about the ad, than will ever hear or see Kerry’s defense. That isn’t always fair, but that’s life.

The fact that Mork continues to believe that Bush was AWOL from the National Guard in spite of all evidence to contrary is a perfect example of how this works.

Aug 21, 2004 - 10:44 pm 168. hollywood:

Roger,

I’m not sure I get your point: “His willingness to testify before Congress on behalf of the Winter Soldiers, likening his former comrades to “Ghengis Khan” without seeming to question whether his sources (those same Winter Soldiers) had gone off the deep end (boy, had they ever!)raises significant questions about Kerry’s ambitiousness, values and loyalty. Speaking personally on that one, I was completely anti-war at that time, but thought the Winter Soldiers were nuts (to put it bluntly). And I wasn’t the only one on the anti-war side who felt that way.”

It was a difficult time. It was a disputed and controversial war. Many, including you, were conflicted about it. Kerry had served. He had won medals. Wouldn’t it have been the simplest thing in the world (if he were ambitious, as so many here charge) to run as a war hero and not contest the war? Maybe, he would have had to run in another state, but it surely would have been a far easier path to take than contesting the war that he and his comrades had fought. He may have made some bad judgement calls about who to believe or who to align himself with, but it was very courageous of him to question the war given the obvious alternative. It was against his own self interest. Now, contrast this with the other side. You didn’t see Bush questioning the war. Or Cheney. Or Wolfowitz. Or Feith. Or Ashcroft. Or Rice. Their avoidance of the war suggests they didn’t think much of it. But they knew that if they spoke out against the war it could come back to haunt them in public life. So, they wouldn’t dare chance it.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:06 pm 169. holdfast:

Condi Rice was 17 when Kerry testified/lied/repeated scurilous hearsay to the Senate Foeign Relation Cmte in 1971.

As I recall, Kerry initially tried on the war hero persona, but it didn’t play so well at the time, so he adopted a different schtick. His sudden “reversion” to the war hero theme is what has triggered this outpouring of bile from the Swift Vets. Dumb move Johnny boy, though this all comes down to the fact that he KNOWS that he cannot run on his 20 years as an ultra-lefty Senator – not in a post 9/11 world. This is not a Dem-Repub thing either – guys like Lieberman and Bob Kerrey could legitimately run as tough on terrorism guys based on their records. Even Al Gore (pre 2000) and Bob Graham (pre 2002) could have done so, and there are others I’m probably forgetting, but Kerry can’t. The votes are just too damn clear, which is why the whole nation is sailing its metaphysical swift boat down the twisted rivers that mark the watery border between fact and the fiction that is seared – seared I tell you – into John Kerry’s memory.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:23 pm 170. Fresh Air:

Hollywood–

First of all, Kerry was from Massachusetts. You remember, the most liberal state in the country? The easiest path for a Mass politician was to be anti-war.

Also the supposedly tranformative moment in his conversion to being anti-war–his being shipped over the Cambodian border while the president said no troops were there–has now been thoroughly debunked. So I don’t really buy Kerry’s decision to run as an anti-war candidate was due to some personally transcendant experience. Rather I suspect it was due to something he has become rather well-known for: crass self-interest.

Second, Kerry’s “bad judgment calls” as you put them caused incredible grief to hundreds of thousands of veterans and to millions of South Vietnamese. He, as much as anyone alive, was responsible for the terrible epithets that were hurled at G.I.s coming home from Vietnam.

I’m not sure even if Kerry gave the mother of all apologies it would sooth any of the anger towards him, but it would be a start. Tellingly, he has not only never apologized, he has never even admitted what he did was wrong. He should be deeply ashamed. Instead he is smug.

Unfortunately for Kerry, this is becoming etched in the American peoples’ minds now: I don’t fall down; it was somebody else’s fault; I won’t release my records; I didn’t do anything wrong; I was in Cambodia (”seared–seared”) except on a different date than Christmas Eve. John Kerry is merely a vainglorious politician with feet of clay and a spine of mush.

As to your comments about Cheney and the rest, I suppose you voted for Bob Dole and George H.W. Bush, then, eh? Oh, and one other little bit you wrote…

Their avoidance of the war suggests they didn’t think much of it. But they knew that if they spoke out against the war it could come back to haunt them in public life. So, they wouldn’t dare chance it.

Or maybe they didn’t “avoid” the war? Or maybe they did but it was because they thought going to college was a better idea than getting shot? Or maybe 20 other maybes. You can’t get inside their heads, and you don’t and won’t ever know what their motivations were unless they tell you. Personally, I think the country is better off since they are in Washington, in one piece, serving the country ably, and not buried at Arlington National Cemetary.

But I will remind you again, because you keep forgetting: Kerry’s war record is the one at issue. And it’s at issue because he made the central focus of his campaign. That’s why we’re discussing it. When Condi Rice runs for president in ‘08 you can explain to us then why her failure to serve in Vietnam or in the anti-war movement is worth a hill of beans.

Until then pipe down and pay attention.

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:40 pm 171. ambisinistral:

Hollywood,

Perhaps you’ll notice that Kerry isn’t really being criticized for speaking out against the war. What he is being criticized for is the manner in which he spoke against the war.

Specifically, he aligned himself with a completely unreliable group. He then swallowed everything that group said in an indiscriminate manner. He then chose to act as spokesman for that group, to go before Congress, and to accuse the US of committing widespread and officially sanctioned war crimes in South Vietnam.

You’ll also note that he used his experience in Vietnam to add validity in that claim. That is, no matter how you try to spin it 35 years later, he used his medals to bolster his claim that he had both witnessed and even participated in war crimes.

That is not just the actions of an over enthusiastic youth. That is the actions of somebody with incredibly bad judgement. That person with the horrid judgement is now trying to run for President. Do you really want to risk having a person of such demonstratably poor judgement sitting in the white house in charge of the US nuclear arsonal in these dangerous times?

Aug 21, 2004 - 11:58 pm 172. devildog:

Is anyone able to confirm that Kerry had several draft deferments, then when they ran out he tried to be assigned to a post in France, and then he tried for some other non-combat post in the Asian theater before being assigned to the brown river bunch?

Aug 22, 2004 - 12:14 am 173. Sandy P:

Cabana Boy met w/the enemy at least 1x in gay Paree while in the Naval Reserves.

He is a communist sympathizer, appeaser, and traitor.

A perfect president of Europe.

Aug 22, 2004 - 12:27 am 174. Sandy P:

–Did they run away?

Remember Monty Python? run away run away…–

Or the Teletubbies….

Aug 22, 2004 - 12:32 am 175. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

Notes…

There are a 4 awards between the Silver Star and the CMOH. I don’t have the link handy. Knucklehead’s understanding of the firstt purple heart situation is correct, and is the reason that it is clear that of the 3 PH’s, the 1st was clearly bogus. As I understand it, the day it arrived, Kerry left. At least one Swift Boat officer said that they told Kerry to leave immediately, and left some hints that could translate into having arranged for his PH to be issued so they could be rid of him.

I tire of hearing people with an inadequate knowledge of the Guards and Reserves attack Bush’s service. It’s really simple: Bush did the job, when his model of aircraft was discontinued, he ended his pilot’s status. He risked his life for his country, just as I did as a Naval Air Reserve crewman (who was almost killed a few times, and who did end up in Vietnam) except that I flew on a safer aircraft that Bush. Even so, our 15 aircraft squadron lost one aircraft and crew (13 people). My best friend was killed in the NMANG doing the same thing Bush did hundreds of times. It was this latter event, brought back to become fresh grief, that caused me to start acting against Kerry. Thanks, Terry McCauliffe for reminding me when you said National Guard people took the easy way out. Like my friend?

If there was any symmetry in the situation, there would be a bunch of former TANG officers making claims about Bush’s defects. Not one has stepped forward. At least 60 swifties have come forward and signed affidavits against Kerry, knowing all the dangers of opposing a powerful man (such as the PI’s now dogging them). As far as the site going down, there was a little computer warfare involved.

RichardpHX

Once again, instead of dealing with the facts, you use guilt by association to attack the messenger. Spaeth doesn’t run the organization. She is the widow of O’Neil’s law partner and he has used her in a number of non-political issues.

As to the disputed statements from 30 years ago, we hashed that out here a long time ago. I have seen only one new allegation today – from the skipper who had previously been silent – and although it adds support to Kerry’s version of one incident, it also confirms and in no place denies the assertion of SBVT. You have simply made up a conspiracy theory, that rests, among other things, on O’Neill having Svengali powers to convince 253 other Swift Boat sailors to be against Kerry, and for 60 of them to make out affidavits. Now you’ve got to admit that your theory is a little absurd – it sounds like the conspiracy theories showing how the US never actually landed on the moon. Furthermore, if you paid any attention, you would know that the SBVT cannot be part of a “bush slime machine” because any coordination is a serious crime. I know – I’m in another 527 (Vietnam Vets for the Truth). You’ll be calling us liars pretty soon, except everything we have to say is public record.

What is happening is a battle of credibility. The SBVT has seriously damaged Kerry’s credibility. Kerry has been unable to make much of a dent in SBVT credibility, which is hardly surprising. SBVT has nothing to gain from attacking Kerry. No money, no jobs, no nothing. They simply want justice for what Kerry did to them (and me and all Vietnam Vets).. As O’Neill said, if Bush asked him to stop running the ads, he’d ignore him. I believe him, and I have an advantage over you: I have discussed this with him, talk to people who know him well frequently, and know several swifties. So when I see your preposterous theory, I have a little ground truth that says ROFLMAO. You haven’t a clue what you are talking about. By the way, here are three of the evil SBVT conspirators. Nasty looking sneaky political operatives, right?

I guess I have to repeat my anecdote yet once again. If you were to get my military records (as I did last year), you would find not a trace of my last reserve service. No pay stubs, not even records showing I was a member of the squadron (don’t even remember the designator). And yet I flew as a crewman in that squadron, with a security clearance for many months until the aircraft tried to kill me with 2 in-flight and one ramp fire in one day – at which point I went to the inactive reserve. My point it that the frantic hunt for Bush’s Alabama service is just plain silly.

By the way, if you go to John Kerry’s site and read his detailed military history, it lies. It fails to mention that he was a Naval Reserve officer until 1978 – which includes all of his anti-US activism and his meetings with the enemy. It ends in 1970 with language carefully constructed to make you think he left the military at that time. And for whichever of you guys said that Kerry did the right thing by testifying about the war. What planet are you on? Kerry didn’t present what was happening, but rather the North Vietnamese propaganda. He slandered his country and his “brothers in arms,” – he created myths that hurt Vietnam Veterans for decades (like the myth of the psychologically damaged veteran – he claimed we all were). The actual state of the war by the time he was mouthing off was quite good. We destroyed the Viet Cong in 1968. And not that long after Kerry’s testimony, we defeated the North, got our POWs back, and had armed and trained SVN to the point it could take care of itself as long as we provided supplies, advisers and air support in case of a major invasion. Because of people like Kerry, all of those were banned by congress and millions of people died as a result.

Kerry’s activities with VVAW were terrible, and constitute the main reason that when the smoke clears, very few veterans and active duty military personnel will vote for Kerry. He wants to be a war hero, but he betrayed America and all of his brothers in arms, not to mention the Vietnamese. In that sense he resembles Benedict Arnold. If you want to read his speech, check This. When I heard this (thanks Hugh Hewitt), I was incensed. I don’t remember him from those days, but now I know who started a lot of the lies about Vietnam and Vietnam Veterans, and that person is John Kerry. Read it. Read every damned word. Notice the lies in it. Notice the uncritical acceptance of Jane Fonda’s “Winter Soldier Investigation” – an “investigation” that was a standard guerilla theater event where 150 veterans made all sorts of bizarre claim, not one of which could be confirmed. Kerry wasn’t protesting the war. Kerry was was trying to cause the US to lose. The troop drawdown was already in progress – Amercans were losing. By the way, most of what he says that is true applies to the pre-Abrams war, which was irrelevant in 1971. That he did so after meeting with the enemy is very suspicious. That his organization established a liaison in Hanoi is even more suspicious. Kerry betrayed us. KERRY BETRAYED US. I would vote for a yellow dog before I would vote for that low-lilfe, untrustworthy, America-betraying son of a bitch. We know from his own words that he met with the communists once. The swifties tell me now that they know of another instance (not counting the Sandinista meeting affter he was out of the service).That the Communists today have a picture of Kerry in a room that honors foreignerrs who “aided the revolution” and are still using his quotes in current propaganda is telling. By the way, the latter should be interesting for those not familiar with totalitarian propaganda.

In answer to another question… when Kerry’s draft deferments ran out, he tried to get a one year extension for a trip to France. When that was denied, he joined the Navy. At least I joined the Navy because I wanted to, not to avoid the draft. The Navy was generally very safe, unless you were an aviator, a carrier flight deck person, a SEAL or UDT, a corpsman (with the Marines), or a brown water guy (and probably a few specialties I left out). Kerry first was assigned to blue water duty on the Destroyer Gridley. He then volunteered for Swift Boats at a time that such duty was relatively safe – they were coastal gunboats, According to the book, when operation SEALORD was ordered, sending Kerry up the river, he bitched and moaned that he hadn’t signed up for it, resulting in his first commander sending him back to Cam Rahn because he was useless. If you look at the detailed military ‘history” on his site, you’ll see this.

Another comment: I don’t condemn anyone for not serving in those days. I condemned Clinton, but that was for protesting the war while in a foreign country (and why did he go off to Russia in thos days?). It was a time when the entire generation wasn’t needed for the war. The only bad effect was that the deferment system ended up filling our university humanities departments with leftists.

Finally, a Kerry quote from Nov, 1971

The political power structure within the United States can and must change if the nation is to avoid violent efforts to seize power. John F. Kerry, a member of the executive committee of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, said in Oklahoma City Saturday.

Meeting with reporters before speaking at the University of Oklahoma, Kerry said, “If it (the government) doesn’t change we are asking for trouble. If it is not done, those who are talking about seizing it will have every right to go after it.”

Kerry emphasized that he and those he represents are totally opposed to any such violence.

Aug 22, 2004 - 1:57 am 176. Charlie (Colorado):

The questions about Kerry’s character can not be answered by questioning what Bush did or didn’t do in the TANG.

Good point, and I stand corrected. I just get so tired of that particular bit of nonsense.

It is a glaring example of the way that mere facts don’t dent the Received Wisdom.

Aug 22, 2004 - 6:56 am 177. Charlie (Colorado):

He had won medals. Wouldn’t it have been the simplest thing in the world (if he were ambitious, as so many here charge) to run as a war hero and not contest the war?

Maybe if he’d have been running in Texas, but I’m not sure it would have played in the early 70’s even there.

In any case, it wouldn’t have worked in Massachusetts at the time.

Aug 22, 2004 - 7:12 am 178. Charlie (Colorado):

Jarh .. er, devildog

Is anyone able to confirm that Kerry had several draft deferments, then when they ran out he tried to be assigned to a post in France, and then he tried for some other non-combat post in the Asian theater before being assigned to the brown river bunch?

I think that overstates it a bit. (I was just re-reading the Boston Globe bio.) He was deferred through college, so that would have been “several deferments” because the deferment was renewed annually. As I understand it, he then requested a deferment for grad school, didn’t get it, and then enlisted. He was then assigned in the Gridley, where he was a damage-control officer, spent about five months there, volunteered to go to the PCFs, which were in coastal patrol, when back to the US for school to be a CO of a PCF, came back for the four months.

Just by the way, I wasn’t going to bring up the “Bush was AWOL” thing again, but I just read Kerry’s published FITREPs again, and it’s worth noting that most of them are “Not Observed”.

I’ve noticed the “not observed” on one of Bush’s records is no longer showing up in the AWOL-meme much, but in case someone wants to bring it up on either side, “Not Observed” just means that the reporting officer hadn’t had enough time to observe the officer involved to make a fair call. It doesn’t mean “wasn’t there.”

Aug 22, 2004 - 7:27 am 179. richard mcenroe:

They just had John O’Dell and the suit up front on Veterans for Kerry on Fox News Sunday.

Chris Wallace was pretty even-handed. The SUF tried to repeat the “Well, he really was in Cambodia he’s just confused about when,” meme but Wallace pinned him on there being no documentation. The SUF also repeated the “Republican smear meme” and claimed thaty Kerry’s Senate testimony was misrepresented. Wallace then waved all the after-action reports from the Rassmann incident at O’Dell and asked him if he had one piece of paper to contradict them. O’Dell said he didn’t, but that all the paperwork originated from Kerry’s after-action report; what he had was the eyewitness testimony of himself and the crew of the other three boats.

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:31 am 180. devildog:

Thanks for clarifying the timeline Charlie. I had read that Kerry requested a posting in France, but I didn’t know if it was credible.

Knuckhead — I’m not sure if anyone has answered your question on the ‘V’ but it’s called a Combat V and is selectively awarded with either the Bronze Star or Silver Star to signify valor. It’s a small metal ‘V’ pin that is stuck through the ribbon and the silk part of the medal. It’s subjective and is typically awarded for extraordinary courage in battle.

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:35 am 181. richard mcenroe:

More Kerry Courage

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:37 am 182. richard mcenroe:

Juan Williams is talking again. Where’s my stick? He’s accusing the swifties and changing their stories…

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:39 am 183. Charlie (Colorado):

Just read a pretty insightful post over on a new blog, Varifrank:

So, why is the press unhinged and supporting John F. Kerry like crazed moonies?

It’s for the redemption from their sins and the return of a moral order that they can understand, more importanly a moral order on which they sit at the top.

(Emphasis in original.)

Read the whole thing, but I think he’s on to something.

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:44 am 184. richard mcenroe:

Juan Williams is just ranting now, repeating every slander about the swifties the Dems have drummed up, including the “conspiracy”.

These guys need to do more homework, they keep harping on the paperwork, while ignoring the fact that all the paperwork appears to have originated with Kerry. They talk about his “band of brothers” at the convention, without mentioning that at least two of them (Alston and the Marine) didn’t serve with Kerry for most of the events they testified to, or at all. They talk about Republican “conspiracies” and don’t mention that two of Kerryís “band” were paid Democratic organizers in their home states…

Bill Kristol just talked about “goofing around, flying a few planes” in the National Guard… they do not get it.

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:49 am 185. Charlie (Colorado):

Dog:

Thanks for clarifying the timeline Charlie. I had read that Kerry requested a posting in France, but I didn’t know if it was credible.

I’ve heard the grad school he wanted to attend was in France — maybe the Sorbonne — but I haven’t seen it somewhere that I’d say was authoritative.

On the ‘V’ — I’ve seen it authoritatively stated that the Silver doesn’t get a ‘V’ because you can’t get a Silver without being in combat and getting it for valorous acts. Still, Kerry’s records specifically say “Silver Star with a V”.

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:50 am 186. richard mcenroe:

Juam Williams just called Kerry “the patriot,,,:

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:52 am 187. Charlie (Colorado):

By the way, I’m disappointed that I didn’t get a rise out of you on the “Jarh..” thing.

I suppose I could try the joint operation time joke….

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:54 am 188. DennisThePeasant:

Hollywood states: I’m not sure I get your point…

Of course you don’t.

Getting the point would require the ability to marshall, organize and prioritize all relevent facts, then attempt to analyze them in some sort of logical fashion within a coherent conceptual framework. You’re still trying to figure out how to properly tie your “Dean 2004″ lobster bib.

Anyway, your defense of John Kerry’s ‘Winter Soldier’ testimony is lame…even by your standards. The idea that anyone’s service record somehow exempts them from the requirement of ensuring the accuracy of their own sworn testimony before a Congressional committee is beyond stupid. As is the suggestion that because members of the present Administration did not service in combat, the inaccuracies and falsehoods of Kerry’s testimony are somehow negated. I suppose Kerry’s 4 months in combat also renders his visit to North Viet Nam and meetings with the representatives of the Viet Cong while still an officer completely acceptable.

Beyond that, one needs only an overview of John Kerry’s life and career, sans details, to arrive at the conclusion that the one and only constant is that he has always been will to do whatever it took to advance himself and his career. Kerry’s ‘Winter Soldier’ testimony and actions at Laurel Canyon III were not, as you trying to suggest, the actions of a thoughtful, traumatized young man. They were the actions of a calculating, hyper-ambitious carpetbagger who saw an opportunity to further his career, just as his attempts to celebrate his combat record at the Democratic convention was. The idea that Kerry did anything with regards to Viet Nam that wasn’t in his own self-interest simply melts away when one actually examines the facts.

Finally, Hollywood, how does one reconcile the Kerry of ‘Winter Soldier’ with the Kerry of the convention? Could any moral person, even after 30+ years, proudly proclaim himself “Reporting for duty” when, by his own sworn testimony, “reporting for duty” meant the systematic and deliberate murder, rape and pillage of noncombatants in violation of international law?

Did ya think of that?

Duh.

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:06 am 189. Tom O'Bedlam:

I just saw O’Neill debate a Democratic spokesman (can’t remember his name, but perhaps Rahm Emanuel?) on the Stephanopoulos show.

I’m not an objective observer, but my reaction was that O’Neill took him apart, took the remains to the cleaners, and mopped the floor with the result.

O’Neill was not only impressive factually, but he did all sorts of small things that were stilettos inserted into the corpse of his opponent’s case. He mentioned in passing that Dr. Letson had written a note last spring to his local “Democratic chairman,” thereby establishing the bipartisan character of the Swift Vets. He pointed out when the Dem was evading the question, at one point saying, “The whole world is watching him avoid the question.” There was more that I can’t remember now.

It was, in my opinion, the debating equivalent of a massacre.

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:06 am 190. Charlie (Colorado):

By the way, I just linked in some money info on the money thread here.

The gist of it is that the anti-Bush 527s have far more glaring connections to the Democratic Party than the Swifties have to any Bush connection, and that the anti-Bush 527s have seventeen times — yes, 17 — the finances of the anti-Kerry ones.

One hundred seventy times the funding of the Swift Vets.

One interesting side effect here is that Kerry had been depending on the DNC and the 527’s to carry him through August. If he were to really press the FEC thing and win, it would probably mean MoveOn.org et al would have to disband as well.

<ArtieJohnson>

Verrr-rry interesting.

</ArtieJohnson>

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:23 am 191. Charlie (Colorado):

Finally, Hollywood, how does one reconcile the Kerry of ‘Winter Soldier’ with the Kerry of the convention? Could any moral person, even after 30+ years, proudly proclaim himself “Reporting for duty” when, by his own sworn testimony, “reporting for duty” meant the systematic and deliberate murder, rape and pillage of noncombatants in violation of international law?

I stand in awe.

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:26 am 192. richard mcenroe:

John Kerry in US News and World Report

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:38 am 193. devildog:

Hey Charlie, I’ll take the moniker Jarhead anytime.

I could be wrong on the Silver Star with combat V — I thought I’d remember seeing them from time to time, but they could have been second-award stars. Ah, the fog of dress messes…too much drink and cigar smoke.

Now that I think of it I think I’ve seen a combat V on a Naval Commendation Medal, so I’ve come the conclusion that I’m completely unreliable on this front.

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:39 am 194. richard mcenroe:

John Kerry in US News and World Report

One interesting thing ‚Äî Based on the Vets for Kerry SUF and Juan Williams, the Democrats are actually going to try to defend Kerry’s testimony in front of the Senate.

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:40 am 195. Terrye:

What Juan and people like him fail to understand is that the American people have been watching and listening to Democrats and their surrogates attack the president all the time every day ad nauseum for longer than anyone cares to think about without so much as a kiss my ass from the likes of Juan Williams.

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:40 am 196. richard mcenroe:

Dennis the Peasant, Charlie (Colorado) ó That’s my next placard for the marches:

Big ole picture of John Kerry testifying. Caption: WAR CRIMINAL- ELECT ME

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:43 am 197. richard mcenroe:

Richardphx ó Yes, and I’m sure President McCain could tell you exactly how devastating it was…

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:49 am 198. Charlie (Colorado):

Hey Charlie, I’ll take the moniker Jarhead anytime.

Well, darn. It’s so much fun teasing Marines.

Anyway, I’m sure not certain about this, but I can imagine a Commendation Medal with ‘V’. Say someone who rescued sailors during one of those big fires that carriers seem prone to — if no “state of active hostilities” existed, you couldn’t get a Silver Star, but you sure as hell could be “valourous”.

I wonder if the Medal could be awarded for something like that?

Aug 22, 2004 - 10:02 am 199. devildog:

Charlie,

For what it’s worth I found this link that makes reference to a Silver Star w/combat V. Clearly not definitive and I can’t find anything official.

Aug 22, 2004 - 10:06 am 200. devildog:

Charlie,

My HTML skills are only surpassed by my research skills — here’s the link I booted:

http://www.cap139.homestead.com/CAP139Yearbook1970.html

Aug 22, 2004 - 10:08 am 201. jdwill:

As mentioned earlier, the expose keeps coming.

Now Instapundit is pointing to the POW/MIA story

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0408/schanberg.php

Et Tu Vilage Voice?

Aug 22, 2004 - 10:12 am 202. Charlie (Colorado):

More interesting stuff.

This is a formal analysis/finding-of-fact of the after action reports and so forth by a Marine officer, Grant K Holcomb.

I’d cut-and-paste some of it, but for some reason I can’t select the text. The gist of it, though, is that Holcomb believe Rassman is telling the truth as he knows it, but that the facts don’t support the contention that the operation was under fire.

By the way, it’s also instructive for those who haven’t got military background that there is a formal method for making a determination like this, and supporting it. If you look way back at the Feist memo about Iraq intelligence, you’ll see the same format. The point is that the standard procedure in these things is to present the evidence, summarize each finding and its support, and make a conclusion that really ought to follow from the findings.

Lovely format. Shame the press doesn’t use it.

(Hmmm. I’ve been thinking of starting/reviving my own blog. Maybe doing these things would be good?)

Aug 22, 2004 - 10:18 am 203. mcat:

Oh, Lordy–Kerry is never stuffing this genie back in this bottle!!

mcat

Aug 22, 2004 - 10:23 am 204. Charlie (Colorado):

As long as it’s link-everyone-day, might as well check out today’s Captain’s Quarters as well.

Aug 22, 2004 - 10:43 am 205. Charlie (Colorado):

In the process, I ran into Jamie McIntyre’s story on LBJ’s Silver Star.

I have a more than passing interest in this one, as my father was in the unit LBJ flew with. Long before this story came out in Caro’s book, he told me the version that had the plane turning back as soon as the squadron came under fire; it’s certain that LBJ, the Navy observer, got a Silver Star and no one else on the mission got anything.

Including the ones who actually completed the mission.

Aug 22, 2004 - 11:00 am 206. DennisThePeasant:

Please note that the second you press these little shits for answers they fold and run as if they were French. Maybe they are.

Aug 22, 2004 - 11:12 am 207. Charlie (Colorado):

I can’t find a transcript, but it appears from this story on The Corner that on This Week (ABC) John Podesta today was complaining that while Kerry was getting shrapnel in his ass, Bush got “two fillings in Alabama”.

But… but… I thought there was no proof that Bush was ever in Alabama?

I know, I said I wasn’t going to say anything more about it. I’m weak.

Aug 22, 2004 - 11:16 am 208. richard mcenroe:

Charlie (colorado) ó I don’t know about the other services, but the army has an award for courageous actions in peacetime called The Soldier’s Medal (I had a rifleman in my first platoon who had won one for pulling several people out of a crashed and burning helicopter) . I think that would be awarded in lieu of an ARCOM with “V” device.

Aug 22, 2004 - 11:43 am 209. Terrye:

Yeah well while Kerry was testifying in Washington American POWs were being tortured in Hanoi too.

Someone should tell Podesto that.

Aug 22, 2004 - 12:06 pm 210. jdwill:

Just finished watching Fox News Sunday. Hurley and Juan Williams both fell into the trap. In the heat of their partisan defence of Kerry they would not repudiate the 71 testimony and went further (especially Williams) to say that the atrocities were real. Because of Hurley, I expect the news shark will now begin nosing and publishing on the Winter Soldier farce. Kerry, of course, get dragged thru the mud for another week.

Brit Hume highly recommends the new WAPO account.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21239-2004Aug21.html

The crunch point:

“Much of the debate over who is telling the truth boils down to whether the two-page after-action report and other Navy records are accurate or whether they have been embellished by Kerry or someone else.”

No matter, the 71 testimony and then the POW/MIA issue await. Talk about your gauntlets.

Aug 22, 2004 - 3:08 pm 211. Terrye:

jdw:

I saw that too and Williams was just nuts.

I worte an email to fox about his remarks. The man was frothing.

It is time these people started acting like reporters and talked about the facts. If Juan is right and all the paper work backs up Kerry and the swifties are just a partisan attack squad then it should be a piece of cake to shoot them down. And yes I thought his praise of Kerry’s Senate testimony was interesting, considering that even Kerry does not stand by it today. It was he now says “Over the top.”

Aug 22, 2004 - 4:54 pm 212. jdwill:

Terrye,

Yeah, the veneer has really been peeling off from Juan. I catch him pretty regularly on Brit’s show – I like the panel.

But, I would have to say: Juan, keep it up, I think you are helping us towards filibuster proof judicial nominations in 2005.

Aug 22, 2004 - 6:26 pm 213. jerry:

Mork:

I am getting tired of idiots like you with no understanding of military service running off at the mouth and spouting some MOVEON.org/ANSWER/Michael Moore BS. During GWB’s time of service the ANG has point system to measure a drilling reservist’s completion of his annual obligation. It took 50 points to complete the year tour. You got 5 points for each drill plus 5 point just for being a drilling reservist. GWB had 55 points in each of his last two years. He did not apply for early separation until he completed his 50 (actually 55) for his 6th year. At that point he would never have drill again. His records have been made public. You can check out the facts yourself.

Aug 22, 2004 - 6:33 pm 214. Charlie (Colorado):

He did not apply for early separation until he completed his 50 (actually 55) for his 6th year. At that point he would never have drill again. His records have been made public. You can check out the facts yourself.

This is why the constant repetition of this trope pisses me off so thoroughly. It’s not true. It’s been documented out the ass. It’s been explained a thousand times. They shut up about it.

Until there’s a real issue of some sort, at which point this freaking zombie argument shows up again.

The continuing trope is “Bush lied!” … but the AWOL story is a real lie, an untruth told knowingly, with intentional malice. In fact — look, I’ll resist the urge to rant at length, but this has been on my mind for a while — what seems to be the pattern is that every more or elss true statement that might be used against a leftie has to be returned against Bush, and everything on which they might agree has to be reversed against Bush.

Clinton lied under oath, eventually was disbarred and fined a million bucks for it — the trope becomes “Bush lied!”

Clinton fudged a draft notice, joined the ROTC then left the country — so Bush is a draft dodger for joining the National Guard.

Teddy Kennedy co-writes the No Child Left Behind Act — so Bush’s education policy is suspect.

There’s a tax change that makes the tax system more progressive and removes a bunch of low-invcome people from income tax completely — so Bush is favoring the rich.

Bush pushes forward to act on the intelligence that Tom Daschle, Bill Clinton, Al Gore and teh Seven Dwarves agreed on in 1998 — and every one of them (except, to his credit, Bill Clinton) turns it right around to say Bush was slanting the intelligence.

If there’s a little congitive dissonance when we put the quotes together, we hear about Rove’s mind control rays and Carville shouts more.

Are Bush’s faults so few and so trivial that the only arguments available are made up?

Aug 22, 2004 - 6:57 pm 215. Terrye:

Charlie:

You forgot that Bush is the first president to fund stem cell research but he supposedly banned stem cell research.

It is hard to debate with the deliberately stupid is it not?

One of the reasons I will vote for the Bush is the opposition. I find them extremely annoying.

I don’t want to be on the same side with them.

Aug 22, 2004 - 7:19 pm 216. Charlie (Colorado):

You forgot that Bush is the first president to fund stem cell research but he supposedly banned stem cell research.

Yeah, you’re right. I don’t even agree with Bush on this one, but at least I can remember what he actually did.

It is hard to debate with the deliberately stupid is it not?

I’m generally the first person to quote the line about never attributing to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity … but it’s worth remembering, on the other hand, “one is accident, twice is coincidence, but three times is enemy action.”

It is becoming difficult to ascribe the resurrection of this to mere stupidity, even willful stupidity.

Aug 22, 2004 - 7:28 pm 217. hollywood:

Dennis,

“Please note that the second you press these little shits for answers they fold and run as if they were French. Maybe they are.”

Please note that if it hadn’t been for the French, we’d be British. If they’d lent more money to Davis, we’d be flying the Confederate flag. If they hadn’t been engaged for 170 days at Dien Bien Phu, we might never have gotten involved in Vietnam.

Meanwhile, the French have routinely graced us with some of the best literature, art, fashion, philosophy and food in our lifetimes.

Aug 22, 2004 - 7:40 pm 218. Terrye:

Hollywood:

Please note that the reason we are not British has a hell of a lot more to do with George Washington than it does the French who helped the colonists for one reason: the British were their mortal enemies. In fact they never forgave the US for making peace after the War of 1812 and just to press the point help run blockades to aid the Confederates in the Civil War.

In spite of that we sent men to die in the tens of thousands in that country in not one but two self inflected European bloodbaths and so I would say we are even.

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:09 pm 219. Terrye:

Hollywood:

PS

After WW2 the French said that the US had to choose between France and the Viet Namese. They said that if we did not choose wisely they would side with the Soviets in the Cold War.

The first men to fight in the war in Viet Nam were actually British and the French were right behind them. The French had over a century of involvement in the region which might explain why Khmer Rouge sounds kinda French.

The US got involved because the French did what the do best, they dumped it on us. What amazes me is how the French can slaughter countless Viet Namese for God knows how long and still give lectures in morality to the rest of us.

Why does it not surprise me that someone who calls himself or herself hollywood would love the French?

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:20 pm 220. Sandy P:

Also, Holly, please note written in The Constitution, “Article. VI.

Clause 1: All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation….”

The Welshers (sp) haven’t reimbursed us for the Marshall Plan yet.

AND – we saved their w(h)ine industry in the 1860s(?), theirs was diseased, our vines were hardy.

TX, OR and OK or MO?

Can’t remember which 3 states the cuttings came from.

We were pawns and they were late. The Brits helped save the Union, ironically, by keeping frogistan at bay, IIRC, but history isn’t my strong point. But my dad has an interest in The Civil War.

Aug 22, 2004 - 8:43 pm 221. ed:

Hmmm.

1. “Jane Fonda has said that going to North Vietnam was the worst thing she has ever done in her life.”

To my knowledge nobody in my extended family has watched a movie of hers since then.

I have any number of liberal friends. But they know from experience that I won’t remain at a party if Hanoi Jane is around in any way, shape or form. Regardless of how rude it might be.

Some things you can never forgive. Not even after she dies.

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:21 pm 222. ed:

Hmmm.

“If they hadn’t been engaged for 170 days at Dien Bien Phu, we might never have gotten involved in Vietnam.”

This constitutes evidence of a complete lack of any historical knowledge of warfare, Vietnam and the French military.

I’d educate you but you’ll have to pay me tuition first. I’m tired of educating liberals. It’s time you went out and learned on your own.

Aug 22, 2004 - 9:29 pm 223. richard mcenroe:

Ed ó Nah, the worst thing she did was come back.

Aug 22, 2004 - 10:06 pm 224. DennisThePeasant:

Hollywood-

France, the French and French-ness isn’t the issue, is it? Of course it isn’t.

That you would choose to comment on sarcasm while avoiding serious questions put to you directly [8/22 9:06AM] explains quite clearly why I consider you to be a little shit…and why you know you’re being talked to when the term is invoked.

Aug 23, 2004 - 3:55 am 225. DennisThePeasant:

Meanwhile, the French have routinely graced us with some of the best literature, art, fashion, philosophy and food in our lifetimes.

Yeah, yeah, yeah…

Have you ever sat in a car full of French folk for 4 hours on a hot August day? I have. What we not routinely graced with that day was consequences of an acceptable level of personal hygiene.

The French may, to a man, be able to deconstruct a Genet novel, but it would be better all around if they knew how to use a bottle of Ban roll-on.

Aug 23, 2004 - 4:09 am 226. jerry:

Hollywood:

You’re so yesterday: The French have not been real players in western culture for a long time.

The lost music and Philosophy to the Germans in the beginning of the 19th century. They lost literature to the Russians in the late 19th Century. They also lost science to the Germans, English and Americans in the 19th century. The lost international language to English by the after Napoleon. They are left with fashion and food. The only notable French cultural products of the 20th century are Radical syndicalism (fascism) and its grandson deconstructionism. The nihilism of Sartre and company are derivative of the Russians and Nietzsche.

Aug 23, 2004 - 6:56 am 227. jerry:

an addemdum to Holly:

Here is another contribution of French culture that he is so high on:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14752

Aug 23, 2004 - 7:44 am 228. hollywood:

Let’s see: whom would I prefer, the French or members of the Texas Republican Party? Sample excerpts from their platform (no joke):

The Republican Party of Texas affirms that the United States of America is a Christian nation, and the public acknowledgement of God is undeniable in our history. Our nation was founded on fundamental Judeo-Christian principles based on the Holy Bible. The Party affirms freedom of religion, and rejects efforts of courts and secular activists who seek to remove and deny such a rich heritage from our public lives.

Early Childhood Development -The Party believes that parents are best suited to train their children in their early development years (ages 0 through 5) and opposes mandatory pre-school and Kindergarten. The Party urges Congress to repeal government-sponsored programs that deal with early childhood development, and phase them out as soon as possible.

Classroom Discipline – We urge the Texas Legislature, Governor, Commissioner of Education and State Board of Education to remind administrators and school boards that corporal punishment is effective and legal in Texas.

Party believes theories of life origins and environmental theories should be taught only as theories not fact; that social studies and other curriculum should not be based on any one theory.

We call on the Legislature to end all state funding of higher educations grants and scholarships.

The Party believes it is in the best interest of the citizens of the United States that we immediately rescind our membership in, as well as all financial and military contributions to, the United Nations.

We believe that human life is sacred, created in the image of God. Life begins at the moment of fertilization and ends at the point of natural death. All innocent human life must be protected.

We oppose the Endangered Species Act.

The Party calls for restoration of the plaques honoring the Confederate Widow’s Pension Fund contribution that were illegally removed from the Texas Supreme Court and other state buildings.

The Party calls upon the Texas Legislature and the United States Congress to repeal any and all laws that infringe upon the right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution; and to reject the establishment of any mechanism to process, license, record, register or monitor the ownership of guns.

Our Party pledges to exert its influence to restore the original intent of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and dispel the myth of the separation of Church and State.

We also deplore forced sensitivity training and urge the repeal of laws and mandates requiring such training. We believe the Hate Crimes Law is unnecessary, and that it unconstitutionally creates a special class of victims. We urge that it be repealed immediately.

We oppose the recognition of and granting of benefits to people who represent themselves as domestic partners without being legally married.

No fault divorce laws have caused untold hardships on American families, by reducing their standard of living, and by harming the emotional and physical well-being of children. It has contributed to an increase in government assistance of all kinds. We call upon the Texas Legislature to rescind no-fault divorce laws.

Homosexuality – The Party believes that the practice of sodomy tears at the fabric of society, contributes to the breakdown of the family unit, and leads to the spread of dangerous, communicable diseases. Homosexual behavior is contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have been ordained by God, recognized by our country’s founders, and shared by the majority of Texans. Homosexuality must not be presented as an acceptable “alternative” lifestyle in our public education and policy, nor should “family” be redefined to include homosexual “couples.” We are opposed to any granting of special legal entitlements, recognition, or privileges including, but not limited to, marriage between persons of the same sex, custody of children by homosexuals, homosexual partner insurance or retirement benefits. We oppose any criminal or civil penalties against those who oppose homosexuality out of faith, conviction, or belief in traditional values.

The Party supports legislation prohibiting experimentation with human fetal tissue and prohibiting the use of human fetal tissue or organs for experimentation or commercial sale. Until such time that fetal tissue harvesting is illegal, any product containing fetal tissue shall be so labeled.

Stem Cell Research – We commend the President for banning the government funding of human embryo stem cell harvesting and call upon the US Congress to pass legislation supporting the President. The Party opposes any legislation that would allow for the destruction of human embryos for medical research.

The Party believes that commercial surrogacy is a legal and ethical free-fall and the rental of a woman’s womb makes child bearing a mere commodity to the highest bidder.

Behavior has personal and social consequences. We call upon the United States Public Health Service and all states to declare HIV a “dangerous, yet preventable, infectious, communicable disease.”

The Party supports amendment of the Americans with Disabilities Act to exclude from its definition those persons with infectious diseases, substance addiction, learning disabilities, behavior disorders, homosexual practices and mental stress, thereby reducing abuse of the Act.

[What was that comment about France and the nineteenth century? Welcome to Texas!]

Aug 23, 2004 - 8:38 am 229. penwil:

“They are left with fashion and food.”

Not even that.

The latest trends in cuisine have been coming out of California for the last ten years. The NYT even did a article on that about six years ago.

And the latest real fashion trends–as opposed to those they show on the runway that nobody ever buys–are coming right off the American street. The hip hop boys and girls.

Aug 23, 2004 - 8:40 am 230. jerry:

Hollywood:

When I started to read your lame and really ignorant response I thought a Texan was proudly stating the difference between France and America. I will not address you point by point, but anybody who things acquiring a heroin addiction or a fatal STD is disabled is pretty stupid, don’t you think.

But more seriously, your reponse is typical of a lame brain left who thinks they are smarter then we dumb conservative former Navy submariners holders of advanced engineering degrees. Do you have any knowledge of national contributions to literature, Philosophy, science and political thought in the last 200 years? France is way down on the list in positives. Their major contribution to western Civ in the last 200 years is fascism and anti-Semitism. Anything else they just got from someone else.

Aug 23, 2004 - 9:02 am 231. hollywood:

“Could any moral person, even after 30+ years, proudly proclaim himself “Reporting for duty” when, by his own sworn testimony, “reporting for duty” meant the systematic and deliberate murder, rape and pillage of noncombatants in violation of international law?”

OK, Dennis, didn’t want to ignore you. Aren’t we talking about 2 different contexts, 2 different wars (well, one was never declared), but 2 instances of a guy trying to do what he thinks is right? So, you disagree with him on both occasions. That’s your right. Vote for Bush. Interesting that you bring up Kerry’s take on violations of international law in Viet Nam but fail to consider the activities at Abu Gharib. If you’re proud of that, vote for Bush.

Aug 23, 2004 - 9:04 am 232. hollywood:

“Do you have any knowledge of national contributions to literature, Philosophy, science and political thought in the last 200 years?”

jerry,

I don’t know much about art, food, wine, philosophy, architecture, etc., but I know what I like. [hint: it ain't Bush.]

Aug 23, 2004 - 9:08 am 233. DennisThePeasant:

Hollywood-

I asked you to answer a perfectly straightforward question…there is no context to it. Besides, you only work in a single context: pure unadulterated bullshit.

Once again, you try desperately to dance around giving an honest answer that could be seen as damaging to John Kerry. Do you really think you are good enough to get away with that kind of chickenshit around here?

I gave you your chance you earn some respect and you simply couldn’t muster the integrity. Bottom line, you keep whoring it up and don’t worry, you’ll get the respect you’ve earned.

Aug 23, 2004 - 11:17 am 234. hollywood:

DtP,

“Have you ever sat in a car full of French folk for 4 hours on a hot August day? I have. What we not routinely graced with that day was consequences of an acceptable level of personal hygiene.”

Dennis, do you find ethnocentrism and xenophobia to be useful as analytic tools?

Keep in mind that as far as odors are concerned, Parfum is a French word–if not invention.

Aug 23, 2004 - 11:20 am 235. jerry:

hollywood:

Abu Gharib becomes a violation of so-called international law only if those accused of crimes are not prosecuted under national law. Since the article 32 hearings have taken place it is clear that the governing authorities did not sanction the activities and promptly brought the perps to justice there is no violation of any treaty.

I guess you are proud of Kerry’s support for Communists in SE who killed 3 million people and for Danny Ortega who stole a democratic revolution and tried to set up another murderous communist dictatorship. I can see why you the French. They so proud that they helped the Nazis kill Jews and by do so proving themselves more loyal then Mussolini’s Fascist. A hardy Heil Hitler to you.

Aug 23, 2004 - 11:57 am 236. hollywood:

jerry, DtP, and everyone else who hates the French,

Have you ever actually known any French people? Have you been to France and talked to the people–not their leaders? They’re decent folk. Generally, they like us. We can learn things from them. They can learn from us. They love Disneyland and our national parks. It’s not the French people any more than it’s the citizens of the USA. It’s the leaders. Remember, they gave us the Statue of Liberty.

Aug 23, 2004 - 12:21 pm 237. DennisThePeasant:

Still dodging.

Pathetic.

Aug 23, 2004 - 12:48 pm 238. Erik:

Hollywood,

I’ve been to France. I’ve talked to French people. I know French people. I’ve worked with French people. I know people that live in France now, and work there.

You are wrong. Period.

The French is extremely nationalistic and selfcentered to their own importance. All forreigner that I know that lives there, including those that likes the country and has chosen to live there, agrees with that.

The company I know best there is owned by americans, but tells people in France that they are Swedish owned, so as to not loose business. The boss told us that if you say you are an american company, you wont get a foot in the door. This was a multinational software company.

Oh, and this was long before Bush was even an issue, it’s been like that for as long as they can remember.

The EU has its origins in a French attempt to promote French interests. (This goes way back to the Coal and Steel union)

One of the main problems with EU today is the subsidies to the farmers, pushed by the French. They wont give an inch on that.

French people generally looks down on anyone and anything that is not French. They are probably the most nationalistic people in Europe that way.

They generally refuses to speak english, even if they can, and seem to be of the opinion that everyone should speak French.

As for their forreign policy. They helped Iraq with Osirak, they have military in several contries unilaterally, and decides who rules them, they tested their nuclear bombs far away in the Pacific, and when Greenpeace wanted to protest against it, they blew up their boat. They do as they please, and wont ask anyones permission. Never have, never will. They have the Forreign Legion as a way to be able to use military force and not having to be concerend with amounting deathcounts. Most of the dead they had in Vietnam was Legionairs, and most of them was in fact Germans.

Everyone I know that has any experience with France, including all the French people I know, agrees on the above. A lot of those people still choose to live there, but they are not in denial about France. You are.

Aug 23, 2004 - 2:19 pm 239. hollywood:

Well, Dennis,

The way I see it, you’re the one who’s dodging. I asked questions, and you failed to answer. Instead, you resorted to your usual name calling. Sticks and stones, Dennis.

But I’m gonna give you one more shot.

“Could any moral person, even after 30+ years, proudly proclaim himself “Reporting for duty” when, by his own sworn testimony, “reporting for duty” meant the systematic and deliberate murder, rape and pillage of noncombatants in violation of international law?”

In the context of the convention, reporting for duty meant Kerry was reporting as the candidate of the Democratic Party, ready to take on the job as CIC/POTUS. In the instance you cite (in typical loaded fashion), it meant being a part of a behavioral sink that was out of control. Two entirely different things. Try to keep up.

Aug 23, 2004 - 2:35 pm 240. hollywood:

Erik,

All nations pretty much by definition are nationalistic. I’m sorry you and your friends have had unpleasant experiences in France. That’s too bad. You’ve missed out. Maybe some other time for you, maybe not. Good luck.

Aug 23, 2004 - 2:38 pm 241. Erik:

Hollywood,

You fail to see my point, but I didn’t expect anything else.

You obviously cant see the difference between different kinds of nationalism. That tells me you have no experience of Europe what so ever.

I dont know anyone that has had what we would call unpleasant experiences in France. A lot of the people I know lives there, and has no plans of leaving, even though they could. A lot of them are in fact French. They like it there, and they choose to live there.

But they are not in denial about France.

You are.

It seems obvious that you dont have a clue, and I seriously doubt you have ever been there, except in Hollywood movies.

In fact, now I wonder if you’ve ever been in Europe at all.

Aug 23, 2004 - 2:56 pm 242. hollywood:

I have to admit I don’t have a real clue as to what you’re getting at, Erik. I haven’t been to France since 2000. Prior to that I had been to Europe (and generally France) about 15 times. My wife’s worked in Austria and traveled extensively in France. She even had a French roomate for a summer in the US. I am aware that France and the French have their flaws but they also have many redeeming qualities (apparently your friends agree as well since they aren’t leaving). It’s not for nothing that our daughter is named Paris. [No, not that Paris.]

Aug 23, 2004 - 3:41 pm 243. DennisThePeasant:

I’m sorry, but your attempts to disguise intellectual dishonesty via willful obtuseness have failed yet again.

And, you should note that the “instance I cite” is John Kerry’s own ‘Winter Soldier’ testimony accusing the U.S. government and military of large scale systematic and deliberate crimes against humanity and admissions of personal participation of crimes against humanity.

Obviously, you haven’t read John Kerry’s ‘Winter Soldier’ testimony. Just as obviously, the fact that John Kerry has admitted to participating in war crimes doesn’t mean a thing to you. Nor does the fact that the allegations of systematic and deliberate criminal behavior on the part of U.S. forces made by Kerry have been shown in its entirety to be either completely unsubstantiated or based on the perjured testimony of people impersonating veterans.

You just don’t care.

John Kerry could have murdered 10,000 noncombatants and sold half the U.S. Navy to the Viet Cong and you wouldn’t give a hoot. The bottom line is quite simply that the most important thing in the world to you is proving G. Bush was wrong and you were right, and the only way that can happen is elect someone who will make sure Iraq is lost and the WOT falters. It doesn’t matter that it’s Kerry, really, any scumbag will do…just as long as you’re assured and convinced that when he says he’ll fight for freedom in Iraq and will fight Islamofascism without quarter, he’s lying through his teeth.

Of course John Kerry’s lies don’t bother you. You’re an dishonest, dissembling, amoral shit, he’s an dishonest, dissembling, amoral shit. You could be a band of brothers, the two of you. After all, Kerry claimed he was a war criminal, you claimed you were a female lawyer. Now Kerry’s a war hero, and you have a wife and kids. Right?

Aug 23, 2004 - 8:14 pm 244. Charlie (Colorado):

The Republican Party of Texas affirms that the United States of America is a Christian nation, and the public acknowledgement of God is undeniable in our history…..

And this would be on topic how?

Interesting that you bring up Kerry’s take on violations of international law in Viet Nam but fail to consider the activities at Abu Gharib.

You’re right, Hollywood. Letting dogs bark at prisoners and pointing at their peepees is certainly comparable to cutting off ears, shocking their genitals, or keeping them in cages too small to stand, sit, or lie down for years at a time.

I’m sorry, son, but the shrill desperation is getting a little too obvious here. Take another break and catch your breath before your head explodes.

Aug 23, 2004 - 9:20 pm 245. Charlie (Colorado):

jerry,

I don’t know much about art, food, wine, philosophy, architecture, etc., but I know what I like. [hint: it ain't Bush.]

I’m sorry, I was going to leave you alone out of pity, but this is just too much.

Are you seriously suggesting that your ignorance of art, food, wine, philosophy, architecture, &c is somehow a qualification for arguing against Bush?

Jesus Christ, man, try to put up a fight. Did you get your law degree from Montgomery Wards?

Aug 23, 2004 - 9:24 pm 246. hollywood:

“Of course John Kerry’s lies don’t bother you. You’re an dishonest, dissembling, amoral shit, he’s an dishonest, dissembling, amoral shit. You could be a band of brothers, the two of you. After all, Kerry claimed he was a war criminal, you claimed you were a female lawyer. Now Kerry’s a war hero, and you have a wife and kids. Right?”

DtP, you’re projecting… again.

You’re the one that claims all this stuff, not me. I am and have always been a guy, a lawyer with a wife and a child.

Unfortunately, DtP, if we omitted all the invective, all the name calling, all the disinformation from your posts, we’d be left with…zip, zilch, nada, bupkis, nothing. How sad for you.

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:10 am 247. hollywood:

Charlie,

“Are you seriously suggesting that your ignorance of art, food, wine, philosophy, architecture, &c is somehow a qualification for arguing against Bush?”

I was being ironic. Guess you missed it. Cheers.

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:12 am 248. jerry:

Hollywood:

Been gone for two days so here is my belated response to your francophilism.

You can tell the character of a nation by how it treats certain groups. Let us look at France’s record of its relationship with Jews. The origins of modern anti-Semitism are in France. The Count De Gobineau first put forth the anti-Semitic theories adopted by the Nazis. If you were to tell a European that the Holocaust would happen on the Continent they would have assumed that France would be the perpetrator. Nobody would have picked the Germans.

During WWII, despite the Gaulist mythology, France collaborated. If you looked at what happened to French Jews here is what you find. Obviously Jews living in German occupied France were deported. Jews living in Vichy France were deported. Jews living in Italian occupied France were saved by the Italian Army. As the commander of the Italian occupation forces said that to cooperate in such an activity would dishonor the Italian Army. French [and other Jews] who could make it to the Spanish border where saved by an underground railway that operated under the authority of General Franco. So there you have it. Your heroic French helped murder French Jews. Hitler’s allies, the Italians, from top to bottom did their best to protect Jews. Franco, a fascist sympathizer, helped Jews escape from your friends the French.

How about today? French Jews are attacked in the streets. Jewish institutions are burned to the ground. How do the French react? The same way they did in WWII. The same way the did in the 19th Century. Fine friends these French no?

I do not expect a rebuttal because you never give one. That is because, like most Kerry supporters, you are a pretentious ignoramus.

Aug 25, 2004 - 11:53 am 249. hollywood:

jerry,

Because there’s a Le Pen in France does not make all the French anti-Semites anymore than the presence of the KKK, people who deny the holocaust, etc., in the US makes all Americans anti-Semites. Just once, try some nuance. Thanks for the history lesson.

Aug 25, 2004 - 2:12 pm

Write a Comment

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