87 Comments

1. Ben:

Kerry’s betrayal of Vietnam veterans is a much more important issue than the questions raised by the SBVT. I understand why the SBVT are upset and affirm their right to speak out, but I hope they don’t take the air out of the other issues. OTOH, all of this is about character and should give people reasons to ask serious questions about Kerry. IMHO, he has not addressed any of these concerns adequately.

Aug 23, 2004 - 7:04 pm 2. RogerA:

I have watched the second Swifty ad unfold–and what is absolutely fascinating to me is the MSM coverage: they refer to those on the second ad as “viet nam veterans.” True enough, but the fail to mention that the commentators on the ad are also Viet Nam POWs.

Our fearless host has continued to talk about the role of Blogs–and indeed, I believe this election will be remembered in history as the demise of the MSM and the role of the internet in providing facts and analysis so sorely lacking by the “jouralism class.” I have a doctorate in Public Policy and Administration, and I will tell you that in my experience, the blogosphere has been a remarkable experience in research and analysis. It surpasses most, if not all, of the crap I have read in academic journals, and everything I have read in the mainstream press. I have continued to learn and grow intellectually by reading the analysis and commentary by my fellow participants on this and many other blogs.

My thanks to all for their insightful comments–and with citizens like these, ultimately the Republic will be in safe hands irrespective of who wins the presidential election. And my special thanks to our host who employs so adroitly the socratic method of questioning that brings out such informed commentary. Thank you all.

Aug 23, 2004 - 7:24 pm 3. Terrye:

I loved that “I wish you luck, up to a point”. Dole is an interesting man.

What is happening here is that the press is trying real heard to pass these guys off as a bunch of mouthy malcontents and comes along Dole who actually tells Kerry these men have first amendment rights. They are regular people and there might be something to this. uhoh…

Aug 23, 2004 - 7:39 pm 4. Connecticut Yankee:

What I find interesting is that every time Kerry starts to feel the heat, he not only turns to others, he specifically turns to Republicans to bail him out (I’m referring to his asking Bush to call off the Swifties and his recent phone call to Dole). It’s as if Republicans are parent figures to alternately rebel against and then run to for help. The phone call to Dole reminded me of an observation that Howard Husock made in City Journal about a month ago, that Kerry’s attitude is essentially “adolescent.”

Husock says, “Kerry’s protest stance is no mere footnote to his biography; it has defined his political career, lies at the heart of his appeal, and constitutes a crucial flaw in his fitness to lead. It is a flaw that his generation (my own) has struggled with, often unsuccessfully: recognizing that it is long past time for us to outgrow the self-righteousness of protest and, instead, make the difficult decisions of adult leadership. Kerry’s career offers little assurance that he is ready for the heavy responsibility of the White House; it is a career, rather, conducted very much in the spirit of the Volvo owners’ bumper stickers that I often see here in his home town of Boston: middle-aged executives and parents of grown up children still urging others to ‘Question Authority.’….

Kerry’s wife, Teresa, expressed the protest mind-set in her convention speech too: ‘In America,’ she said, ‘the true patriots are those who dare to speak the truth to power.’

The assumptions here are quite remarkable–that it will be others, not the true patriots, who will be in charge, exercising power. This adolescent attitude has been the trap of Kerry’s generation–the feel-good politics that comes from telling off someone else as opposed to the risky politics of adulthood, such as going to war without definitive information but in the assured presence of terrible threat. For whatever reasons–cultural and personal–George W. Bush stands apart from this generational hubris. He has taken risks and stands to defend them. By all evidence, John Kerry remains stuck in the protest politics that launched his career.”

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon_07_30_04hh.html

Aug 23, 2004 - 7:40 pm 5. Birkel:

There are a couple of new developments in the Kerry exaggerating for political gain by ‘fudging’ the details. Please go over to Captain’s Quarter (captainsquarter.com) to get the straight skinny.

Here’s the lo-down.

Kerry arrived in San Diego two days ahead of his ship. This is important because it allows him to have the memory of Robert Kennedy’s assassination “seared–seared in my memory” (My emphasis added.) upon arriving in port. His account of the boat arriving on June 6, 1968 instead of the accurate June 8, 1968, is a silly exaggeration allowing him to connect to key political events (just like Nixon and Cambodia) a la Forrest Gump. Completely silly to ‘puff up’ an average to above average record with this sort of nonsense.

Also, he relates his ship traveling well South of any reasonable course from Hawaii to Vietnam to get another little nugget into his biography. That way he could describe, as if a sage wise man to small children, to his shipmates how the ship was near where the real JFK was sunk on PT109. Ridiculous but true… sigh…

I’m not sure any of this *really* matters except to point out that Kerry is petty. But it sure makes great copy.

Regards.

Aug 23, 2004 - 7:41 pm 6. Patrick S Lasswell:

The Oregonian’s political cartoonist, Ohman, had a drawing of a boat today labled “Swiftboats Veterans for the Truth” already sunk. I showed it to a friend who works at the Oregonian and told him that Ohman was going to eat that cartoon. My brother-in-law was present and of a contrary opinion. Since he was at a ABB fundraiser this weekend, I suspect that the Democratic party is warming up the brown books.

Nevertheless, I think that the ABB campaign is about to start hitting the door with their shoulders, since it appears that their battering ram is wormy and has no integrity. Looked great from a distance, though…

Aug 23, 2004 - 7:47 pm 7. steve chamberlain:

Well, I certainly don’t want to defend Kerry, but his pronunication is quite common in Europe and central Asia, where you will here versions ranging from “Zhan-zhus” to “Zhun-zhee”. It’s still an affectation, I bet.

Aug 23, 2004 - 7:54 pm 8. Terrye:

Steve:

Yes Kerry probably wanted to impress upon the listeners that he had been educated in France and Sitzerland.

Aug 23, 2004 - 8:07 pm 9. Terrye:

Patrick:

And there you have your typical dense ‘problem what problem?’ attitude that is so typical of the breed.

Just aks them why is it if these guys are already sunk does Kerry need to beg the president to come save him.

Aug 23, 2004 - 8:10 pm 10. Rick Ballard:

I wonder if Dole will be speaking at the American Legion convention this week. Maybe he could do the intro for Kerry.

Aug 23, 2004 - 8:10 pm 11. ambisinistral:

I’ve noticed today’s MSM has focused on Bush’s repeat of his position first stated after the first SBVT as — that all 527 ads should be halted. They are implying it is some sort of a major concession. Thus, Republican smear campaign confessed to, time to move on with no more mention of the war hero’s record.

I suppose they think this is going to detour all talk of Kerry’s Senate testimony about war crimes. Boy, are they in for a surprise.

The Kerry campaign still can’t figure out how to get out ahead of the SBVT story.

Aug 23, 2004 - 8:11 pm 12. Anchoress:

Bob Dole is a gentleman who never campaigned as anything else. I come late to this appreciation – as I came late to appreciate Reagan. Some of us former Democrats had to get kicked a lot before we came to our sense. Glad Dole has decided to speak up. He’s a good advocate.

Aug 23, 2004 - 9:15 pm 13. penwil:

Tomorrow’s Wall Street Journal has an editorial that cuts through all the noise and absolutely nails Kerry to the wall.

http://opinionjournal.com/

Aug 23, 2004 - 9:29 pm 14. Barry Dauphin:

Wow, Kerry is sure seeming dumb right about now. Bush criticizes the first swift boat ad after it’s off the air and wants the 527s to stop ads. The swift boat vets will continue to run the new ads because they want to. So the ads continue with Bush on the record saying he doesn’t like that sort of stuff. Thus, the SBVT will be operating independently of any campaign as the law requires them to do. Dole calls Kerry a poseur.

All Kerry/Edwards can do is whine. Kerry spilled more blood in the last week than he did for all his purple hearts. Then attention can turn to why Kerry won’t denounce the Moveon.org ads which will be coming out shortly and which have far more money behind them and the producer of said ads has called Bush a “gangsta.”

Next will be the wider publication that cerebral palsy rarely results from anything OB/GYN’s do (gee, what did Edwards do before he was in the Seante…hmmmm…I’ll have to think about that one). Then should come greater publicity about the revolving door between the democratic party and its various candidates and the Democrat friendly 527s. And it’s not even September.

Aug 23, 2004 - 9:39 pm 15. penwil:

Barnes & Noble actually had to issue a press release explaining that they aren’t trying to censor the book Unfit for Command, but rather that it is really honestly sold out. Seems they’ve been innundated with calls and complaints from irate customers who’re attributing the lack of the book’s availability to collusion between B&N and Kerry to keep it out of the public’s hands.

Heh.

I’m starting to understand how Kerry managed to get that rice in his butt.

Aug 23, 2004 - 9:49 pm 16. exguru:

Djen-jus Kahn may be correct. They ought to give you something for $40 grand at Yale. MacArthur used to say Vla – dee – oh – vaa – stock, which is also probably correct.

Aug 23, 2004 - 9:53 pm 17. richard mcenroe:

The difference is Dole (and, in my opinion, Bush) have character, while Kerry has nothing but a yawning pit of need…

Aug 23, 2004 - 10:15 pm 18. Swopa:

Uh-oh. Someone finally took a close look at the Cambodia lies.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2105529/

Thank god you fine, upstanding guardians of civil discourse can fall back on sneering at how Kerry pronounces “Genghis Khan.”

Just be sure to keep patting yourselves on the back about your high-mindedness as you do that.

Aug 23, 2004 - 10:27 pm 19. heather:

This occurred to me, upon reading Dole’s remark about Kerry…

One of the worst aspect of the Kerry Fiasco is that the Democratic Deep Thinkers have absolutely no idea – none – that putting up a fake ‘war hero’ who spent years accusing his fellows of war crimes would simply enrage anyone who has ever served in the American military.

It reveals awesome incomprehension and contempt for one of the most important institutions in the US government. Incredible. I would expect that not one of the Democrat Big Thinkers has a relative in any of the armed forces – not one. Further, I would bet that not one has actually met one of that “exotic” breed (aside from Kerry’s tiny ‘band of brothers.’)

Talk about Two Americas!

Heather

Aug 23, 2004 - 11:07 pm 20. devildog:

Just be sure to keep patting yourselves on the back about your high-mindedness as you do that.

Hold on Swopa, I’m only typing with one hand. Okay, done.

This Christmas in Cambodia nonsense has been so thoroughly discredited and subsequently denied by the Kerry campaign that your link is laughable. Not even Kerry’s “Band of Brothers” support his claims.

Aug 23, 2004 - 11:07 pm 21. bkw:

Ooooh two points for Swopa sneering at people sneering at a man’s maybe-affected-maybe-real accent!

From the article linked so triumphantly by Swopa:

The circumstances at least suggest that Kerry was indeed involved in a “black” mission, even if he had never explicitly made that claim. And why would he make such claims if he hadn’t been? It was neither a glamorous nor a particularly admirable mission?certainly nothing to boast of.

Oh yes, this article certainly does completely prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Kerry was in Cambodia on Christmas … nevermind that Kerry’s creaking campaign machine has since stated that he was not in Cambodia on Christmas after all, nor does the author of the article seem to know anything about how guarded the border was, how noisy the swift boats were, nor does he mention how none of Kerry’s shipmates will back up Kerry’s Cambodia claim.

Curious.

Why would he make such claims? Because he can claim that he is a war hero because of it. And if it is nothing about which to boast then why is John Kerry boasting about it?

Please find an article that can explain how Kerry could be in Cambodia on Christmas, under the orders of a man not yet officially in office, being shot at by a group that would not commence field operations for a number of years, ferrying a CIA man who doesn’t seem to need his hat just as he heads into the field, apparently while piloting a magic boat that is invisible so as to bypass the blockades at the border, silent enough to not cause such a ruckus as to be useless for clandestine operations, and also creates a field of amnesia so no one but our brave hero Lt.Kerry can remember the mission. It must also have some sort of flux capacator that can work into the future, such that so many decades later, Kerry’s spokespeople say Kerry wasn’t in Cambodia on Christmas either.

It is a twisted state of affairs that George W. Bush’s most avid surrogates are trying to make this election turn on the question of whether Lieut. John Kerry was or was not in Cambodia on Christmas Eve 1968.

Any article that opens with this thesis is missing the point completely. Not only is the author sliding into tinfoil hat land by calling the swifties Dubya’s “most avid surrogates”, but he’s also missing the point of what the swifties are doing.

If Kerry’s command sturcture’s mentality is anything like this guy’s, he will never be able to counter the Swifties, because he can’t understand what it is they’re trying to do. Kerry responds to the first charge (questioning the medals), when the second salvo hits (quoting Kerry’s words right back at him). It’s like playing chess with a five year old — the Kid Kerry can only see the move in front of him, and neither sees nor understands the sequence three moves down the line.

Aug 23, 2004 - 11:28 pm 22. Yehudit:

“he specifically turns to Republicans to bail him out (I’m referring to his asking Bush to call off the Swifties and his recent phone call to Dole).”

And he also asked McCain to be VP, before he asked Edwards.

Aug 23, 2004 - 11:32 pm 23. Syl:

That’s not news, Swopa. We’d already read about his ‘being near Cambodia’ earlier that day.

‘Near’ doesn’t cut the mustard.

“And why would he make such claims if he hadn’t been?” LOL

I love this in the beginning of the piece:

“Having pretty much failed at their efforts to disprove the official U.S. Navy account of Kerry’s valor in battle as skipper of a “Swift boat” patrolling the Mekong Delta,”

Cute. Since the ‘Navy account’ is not complete and much of it may very well have been written by Kerry himself in after action reports. Like, you know, the Bronze Star incident.

Aug 23, 2004 - 11:33 pm 24. wu-ping:

John Kerry, from my parents basement, I stab at thee!

Aug 23, 2004 - 11:53 pm 25. David Thomson:

Hey, we have got to stop talking so bad about John Kerry. He is a popular world leader. Think not? Well, look at this:

“The North Koreans made it very clear, politely, that they want Mr. Kerry to win the election,” said Kenneth Quinones, a former U.S. diplomat who was in Pyongyang this month for a Korean studies conference.î

ìIn the tirade Monday, Pyongyang’s diplomatic spokesman called Bush “an idiot, an ignorant, a tyrant and a man-killer.”

“Bush’s assumption of office turned a peaceful world into a pandemonium unprecedented in history, as it is plagued with a vicious circle of terrorism and war,” the statement continued. “The president’s aides and allies are a typical gang of political gangsters.”î

http://www.iht.com/articles/535387.html

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:05 am 26. devildog:

Uh-oh. Someone finally took a close look at the Cambodia lies.

Yes Swopa, and it’s here:

No Sh*t, there I was…

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:06 am 27. Fresh Air:

I haven’t yet figured out if it was part of O’Neill’s strategy or just one of those things, but the fact that the book is not in very many hands is a tremendous tactical advantage.

Most of these flacks (like Rood at the Chicago Tribune), have not read the book and do not grasp how many specifically substantiated charges are in there. These would-be defenders don’t even understand what they are defending Kerry from. So when one says the Swift Vets have been “discredited,” does one mean a couple of blowdarts have been aimed at them? Or does one mean O’Neill’s book has been taken apart with hammer and tongs?

So we will have two weeks of buzz from the release of two sample chapters. Hmmmm… How many chapters are in the book again? This thing could go all the way until November.

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:08 am 28. David Thomson:

ìThe difference is Dole (and, in my opinion, Bush) have character, while Kerry has nothing but a yawning pit of need…î

John Kerry is a psychologically unstable individual. He seems incapable of calmly and effectively responding to a crisis. Does anyone doubt that the liberal media would be questioning President Bushís mental health if he acted similarly?

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:17 am 29. devildog:

“The North Koreans made it very clear, politely, that they want Mr. Kerry to win the election,” said Kenneth Quinones, a former U.S. diplomat who was in Pyongyang this month for a Korean studies conference.?

Great post David. Kerry supporters should take comfort that The Dear Leader Kim Jong IL and The Supreme People’s Assembly share their view of Mr. Bush. A truly proud moment for the Democratic Party.

I wonder if they joined Cuba in showing Fahrenheit 9/11 on national TV or show MoveOn.Org commercials there…yeah, of course they do.

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:26 am 30. M. Simon:

I have an alternative explanation for Kerry’s post Vietnam record i.e. the honeymoon visit to Paris, Winter Soldier, Senate testimony, his record in the Senate.

He joined the other side.

Simple explanation. Fits the facts.

If Kerry is a traitor rather than a fellow traveller there will be evidence. Now just suppose that in the communist archives opened up post USSR that there is info on Kerry. Just suppose O’Neill has it.

O’Neill is playing it cool. So far he has just introduced he said/she said testimony. And that has been devastating. Unlike a court of law discovery is not required. So to the Kerry folks who live on wishes it looks like O’Neill didn’t prepare and Kerry still has a chance. When the media frenzy reaches a local maxima O’Neill is going to release the records.

Kerry dies. Media dies.

–==–

What is the War Hero Afraid of?

Form 180. Release ALL the records.

Video link

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:27 am 31. insatty:

The brilliant, educated MSM members can’t see their own hyprocrisy. They pour out righteous indignation about the SBVT’s puported “lies,” when they don’t know the truth and haven’t read the book. They then they cheer the Kerry Campaign’s blatant lie that Bush is “smearing” Kerry, when they know that Bush has no connection to the SBVTs. To the MSM, the Republicans always play dirty and the Dems display effective politics.

I’m sickened that the MSM just may propel a far-left, blame-America-first, military-hating liberal into the White House at the same time the islamofascists are taking aim at every Jew and every American on this planet.

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:32 am 32. David Thomson:

ìWhat is the War Hero Afraid of?

Form 180. Release ALL the records.î

It is not a cheap shot to take it for granted that John Kerry has something to hide. His campaign would almost certainly have released these records if they were helpful. No, Kerry is afraid of something. I also donít think he can win the election unless the records are released. The public will ceaselessly demand to see them.

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:36 am 33. M. Simon:

I have a little question for John Kerry.

Did the mean old Bush Man make you cry?

Go see mama. She will kiss it and make it better.

I have a song for John. A pretty song. A funny song.

Life’s Been Good – Joe Walsh ñ butchered by camle

I have five mansions, forget the price.

Ainít really mine tho ñ belong to my wife.

Iím the Senate, I sponsored a bill.

In twenty years, I work till Iím ill.

They say I’m libíral, but I have a good time.

(Everybody say oh, yeah…..OH,YEAH)

I’m just looking for clues cos Iím lost all the time.

Wife’s been good to me so far.

My SUV it can seat forty five.

Donít need no license, don’t have to drive.

I have a limo, ride in the back.

I lock the doors in case I’m attacked.

I make hit speeches, my fans they can’t wait.

They write me letters, tell me I’m great.

So I got me an office, Goreís picture on the wall.

Just leave a message, maybe I’ll call.

Lucky I’m sane after all I’ve been through.

(Everybody say I’m cool……He’s cool)

I can’t complain but sometimes I still do.

Wife’s been good to me so far

I went to VietNam, medals are here.

Left after four months ñ thatís my career.

It’s tough to handle this fortune and fame.

Everybody’s so different, I haven’t changed.

They say I’m libíral but I have a good time

(Everybody say shove it…..SHOVE IT)

I keep on going guess I’ll never know why.

Wife’s been good to me so far.

08/23/2004 5:14:53 AM PDT by camle

Song link

–==–

What is the War Hero Afraid of?

Form 180. Release ALL the records.

Video link

Aug 24, 2004 - 1:18 am 34. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

The Communist Vietnamese also prefer Kerry. I can’t get to the article right now (server down).

Aug 24, 2004 - 1:19 am 35. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

In my opinion, every election should be about character, among other things. For some character types, pre-election policies are meaningless, as they are simply words to be used to gain power.

Aug 24, 2004 - 1:21 am 36. j. marzan:

Kerry knows that he cannot run on his crappy Senate record, that’s why the “Vietnam issue” is vital to his campaign.

He never fails to keep bringing Vietnam up and he lets his surrogates slam those who did not serve there 30 years ago.

So Bush is a “deserter”, according to Terry McAuliffe and Wesley Clark, and Sen. Tom Harkin calls Dick Cheney is a “coward”. This is all Vietnam-related B.S., but that’s all the Dems can offer at this point.

But as a concerned individual, I’m more interested in Kerry’s Senate record and Pres. Bush’s record on national security and defense, Iraq, and the War on Terror.

I think this is more relevant than Kerry’s Vietnam experience or Bush’s National Guard stint.

Aug 24, 2004 - 2:07 am 37. ricpic:

I disagree with one assertion in this post: the assertion that Kerry’s callousness toward the POWs relates to “Class Privilege.”

Bad charachter is bad charachter. It is totally independent of where one is situated on the socio-economic scale.

Aug 24, 2004 - 5:01 am 38. Charlie (Colorado):

Uh-oh. Someone finally took a close look at the Cambodia lies.

Would it be Kerry? Would that have anything to do with why Kerry’s campaign no longer claims Kerry was in Cambodia at Christmas 1968?

Good Lord, man, get some self-respect.

Aug 24, 2004 - 6:48 am 39. Charlie (Colorado):

John Kerry is a psychologically unstable individual. He seems incapable of calmly and effectively responding to a crisis. Does anyone doubt that the liberal media would be questioning President Bushís mental health if he acted similarly?

This is, of course, a rhetorical question.

Hell, the big media have questioned Bush’s mental health and/or competence because he reacted calmly and competently in a crisis.

See, eg, the “seven minutes” story.

Aug 24, 2004 - 6:53 am 40. Charlie (Colorado):

If Kerry is a traitor rather than a fellow traveller there will be evidence. Now just suppose that in the communist archives opened up post USSR that there is info on Kerry. Just suppose O’Neill has it.

Sadly, the real world hardly ever produces the really dramatic second story point in such a neat and tidy way.

Interesting idea, though.

Aug 24, 2004 - 6:57 am 41. devildog:

Uh-oh. Someone finally took a close look at the Cambodia lies.

Swopa,

Here’s another close look at the Cambodian lies from the WaPo…

Link

If — as seems almost surely the case — Kerry himself has lied about what he did in Vietnam, and has done so not merely to spice his biography but to influence national policy, then he is surely not the kind of man we want as our president.

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:11 am 42. hollywood:

Interesting that you bring up Dole and that he’s injecting himself in this. What’s his senate record? That was a big problem for him when he ran for Prez. Nothing to talk about. As I think NPR mentioned yesterday, part of being in the senate involves just keeping the other side at bay and doesn’t result in lots of concrete stuff to talk about. It was a problem for Dole. It’s a problem for Kerry. Now as for Bush’s singular accomplishments as gov of Texas…..

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:15 am 43. devildog:

Ouch! Captain Ed had this a week ago!

Kerry’s campaign now says is possible first Purple Heart was awarded for unintentional self-inflicted wound…

–Kerry received Purple Heart for wounds suffered on 12/2/68…

–In Kerry’s own journal written 9 days later, he writes he and his crew, quote, ‘hadn’t been shot at yet’… Developing…

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:35 am 44. richard mcenroe:

Wu Ping ó You live in your parents’ basement? Or are you channeling Pat Oliphant again?

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:48 am 45. richard mcenroe:

Hollywood ó Absolutely. Fair is fair. We should treat Kerry’s war record exactly the way the Democrats treated Bob Dole’s when he ran for President.

Ex. Act. Ly.

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:50 am 46. Fresh Air:

Hollyw00d–

For crying out loud! What was Dole’s Senate record? He was the MAJORITY LEADER! Do you have any idea what that means? It means he was the chief liason to the House, the White House and his caucus. It means he pushed bills through and killed them on the floor. It means he was in charge of committee assignments, etc. It means he had a vast number of responsiblities to the institution, his party and to the country.

You can’t even compare a back-bencher like Kerry with Dole in the Senate. That one fails the laugh test. It’s also another example of your favorite form of rebuttal: ad hominem. You sure you’re a lawyer?

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:52 am 47. penwil:

Fresh Air,

–Hollyw00d–

For crying out loud! What was Dole’s Senate record? He was the MAJORITY LEADER!–

That has got to be the best smackdown I’ve ever seen on any blog anywhere. Talk about your Doh! moment.

Hollywood’s face must have burned hotter than a furnace when he saw that. We might be not be seeing him around here for awhile.

Aug 24, 2004 - 8:18 am 48. Roberts:

Hollywood’s silly comment about Bob Dole’s record nearly split my sides with laughter.

However, Swopa’s pathetic attempt to latch onto Fred Kaplan was even more hilarious. Kaplan doesn’t “look into” the Cambodia lie of Kerry, he tries to whitewash it by deliberately ignoring that no crew members backs up Kerry’s claim, ignoring that the Kerry campaign ( certainly Kerry himself hasn’t the guts to answer questions ) is backing off the claim and ignoring the fact that Kaplan’s pathetic “near” undercuts the entire meaning of the original lies.

Aug 24, 2004 - 8:32 am 49. hollywood:

Right, uh-huh. Now what were those significant pieces of legislation Dole initiated? Passed? supported? More like wasting time on Bork the dork.

Aug 24, 2004 - 9:01 am 50. Stan:

Re: Hollywood’s Dole Kerry comparison…

I’ve read a number of Hollywood’s comments in here and seriously doubt his/her capability in logical and or persuasive debate. The underlying facts just aren’t there but he/she feels constrained to say something whether it has any basis or not.

On a more general basis so does Swopa – I mean kerry’s campaign already climbed down from the Christmas in Cambodia – yet they are throwing up tenuous arguments anyway. How can you have policy discussions (and we need to! – the Republicans aren’t right on every issue) with people that are willing to proffer any argument to oppose, not to find the best answer or the “truth” but just to oppose.

Stan

Aug 24, 2004 - 9:11 am 51. Charlie (Colorado):

Uh-oh. Someone finally took a close look at the Cambodia lies.

Yeah. The Washington Post.

Maybe you could change your name and hope to live it down.

Aug 24, 2004 - 9:25 am 52. Charlie (Colorado):

Now as for Bush’s singular accomplishments as gov of Texas…..

Hollywood, either explain how Bush was so useless as a Governor that he got re-elected in a landslide, or drop this one down the same memory hole you use for the other inconvenient facts you ignore.

Aug 24, 2004 - 9:27 am 53. hollywood:

Here’s a more balanced view. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-swiftpress24aug24,1,2693113.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials

Bush (thru the Swiftees) has attacked Kerry’s strength–his military record vis a vis Bush’s. He did the same thing against Ann Richards, attacking her inclusiveness (pretty unique in a conservative hardass state like Texas) by running/supporting ads claiming she was too close to lesbians.

All part of the same old creative smear play continually run by Rove.

Aug 24, 2004 - 9:28 am 54. Fresh Air:

Hollywood–

I don’t have the time to track down all the Senate bills right now (though if you insist, I will). But consider for a minute that the Majority Leader can append his name to any piece of legislation he wishes. Frequently, in fact, this is done to demonstrate his imprimatur on the proposed legislation.

If you really insist on going down this path, I’ll indulge you. There were hundreds, if not thousands, of bills passed during his tenure as majority leader. Without checking I can tell you a lot of them bore his name as a sponsor or co-sponsor. The same would be true for Bill Frist and Tom Daschle today.

I’m not really sure I understand your point, since practically every piece of Republican and bipartisan legislation would have required his (at least) tacit approval.

By the way, I worked for his campaign in 1988. Even then nobody claimed he was a lightweight, as you seem to be doing.

Aug 24, 2004 - 9:35 am 55. bkw:

I remember a scene from some hollywood movie where at the end, the Bad Guy, all his plots and plans completely disrupted, tries to escape on foot. He’s being chased down by the Good Guy, riding in a tank (but doesn’t look remotely like Michael Dukakis).

The Bad Guy trips, or falls, or comes up against a convenient dead end, as the tank continues inexorably on. Just before Mr. Bad Guy gets smeared into organic paste, he scrabbles at the ground and throws rocks, pebbles and weeds at the tank.

Needless to say, the tank wins.

Aug 24, 2004 - 9:55 am 56. Stan:

Hollywood,

This is unbelievable, you continue to assert that Kerry as a junior Senator is equivalent to Dole as a Majority Leader?

Even Kerry’s campaign recognizes his Senate resume’ is DEFICIENT – they tried to float the idea he was the Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee but, oops, that was Bob Kerrey.

BTW, Dole had the integrity to resign his seat to run for Pres. Kerry hasn’t and has hardly voted for the last year. In fact that is his defense for the “Most Liberal Senator” rating: he only voted on a few pieces of legislation and those votes don’t reflect how he WOULD have voted if he had voted the rest of the time… (How can you defend this guy? Nothing is straightforward.)

Of course, no complaint from Mass. for his “no show” performance… they can’t discern a difference between him being there and voting or not. How do you define an effective Senator? One thing he couldn’t be: Majority or Minority LEADER. You have to show-up and, you know, LEAD.

Help me out again, how is Kerry qualified to be a world LEADER? And now we are back to four months in Viet Nam 35 years ago… so sad…

Stan

Aug 24, 2004 - 10:14 am 57. Sandy P:

–As I think NPR mentioned yesterday, part of being in the senate involves just keeping the other side at bay and doesn’t result in lots of concrete stuff to talk about.–

Now there’s an unbiased source…

Aug 24, 2004 - 10:34 am 58. hollywood:

Here’s a good take on Dole’s recent actionhttp://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-swift24aug24,1,7926686.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorialss.

Aug 24, 2004 - 11:38 am 59. hollywood:

Here’s a good take on Dole’s recent actions. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-swift24aug24,1,7926686.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials

Aug 24, 2004 - 11:38 am 60. Roberts:

Hollywood writes: “Bush (thru the Swiftees) has attacked Kerry’s strength–his military record vis a vis Bush’s.”

This isn’t the first time you’ve accused President Bush of illegal acts without the slightest shred of evidence.

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:06 pm 61. hollywood:

Roberts,

I didn’t say what Bush did was illegal. It’s just dirty and apparently effective. Here are some shreds.

http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Swift_Boat_Veterans_for_Truth

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:43 pm 62. hollywood:

More shreds, Roberts. Source: NYT.

“The president spoke on a day when Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, in another indication of its web of ties to the Republican Party, acknowledged that a woman who helped set it up and works for it is an officer of the Majority Leader’s Fund, a political action committee affiliated with the former House majority leader Dick Armey of Texas.

“The name of the woman, Susan Arceneaux, is given as the contact person on the post office box that Swift Boat Veterans for Truth lists as its address. She is treasurer of the Majority Leader’s Fund. Records show that like Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the group receives significant financing from Bob Perry, a Texan who has long supported Mr. Bush, and his company, as well as Sam and Charles Wyly, prominent Texas Republican donors. Sam Wyly, under the name “Republicans for Clean Air,” took out advertisements in 2000 criticizing the environmental record of Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona.

“Mr. Perry has donated $200,000 to the Swift boat group, records show, and Merrie Spaeth, a Republican strategist who has been advising the Swift boat group, was a spokeswoman for Sam Wyly’s advertising campaign in 2000.”

Aug 24, 2004 - 12:57 pm 63. Bostonian:

Why, oh, why, couldn’t the Democrats have chosen some other guy?!!!

A man who publicly called our entire military a bunch of war criminals is unelectable.

Aug 24, 2004 - 1:05 pm 64. Roberts:

Hollywood, in fact you do know that coordination between the Bush campaign and 527’s would be illegal. And you know that your statement “Bush (thru the Swiftees) has attacked …” is a clear accusation of illegality.

A common donor does not establish that President Bush is directing these attacks.

Pathetic work on your part actually.

Aug 24, 2004 - 1:35 pm 65. Charlie (Colorado):

A common donor does not establish that President Bush is directing these attacks.

And if it did, it would equally establish that Kerry was directing MoveOn.org, which has therefore been violating the law for months.

Aug 24, 2004 - 1:51 pm 66. Fresh Air:

Geez, Hollywood:

Guilt by association, ignoring a common cause and an ad hominem in one thread. You’re a couple of fallacies below your usual standard. You must be feeling a little run-down today.

Try a little tu quoque in your espresso. If that doesn’t work, there’s always appeal to authority.

Aug 24, 2004 - 2:22 pm 67. hollywood:

Roberts, et al.,

Another brick on the load…. “a volunteer to Bush’s re-election campaign appeared in the ad. Retired Air Force Col. Ken Cordier resigned as a member of the Bush campaign’s veterans’ steering committee after it was learned that he appeared in the commercial.”

Source: NYT

So, thus far, we’ve got Arceneaux, Perry, Wyly, Spaeth, O’Neill and now Cordier. The web constricts round the Smear Boat Veterans and their associates.

Aug 24, 2004 - 2:36 pm 68. Terrye:

Hollywood:

If those kind of connections are all that is required there are a lot of prominant Demcorats out there breaking the law.

But then again they are democrats and the same rules that apply to the rest of us don’t apply to them. By the same token the same rights they demand are not given to others who don’t share their opinion.

What is next? Are the swifties to be hauled off to a gulag in the Dakotas for questioning the word of King John?

Aug 24, 2004 - 2:40 pm 69. Roberts:

Hollywood, your evidentiary standards are laughable.

Aug 24, 2004 - 2:50 pm 70. Roberts:

Slings and Arrows has been having fun here and here showing far more evidence of Kerry “coordinating” with 527’s than Hollywood’s pathetic examples.

The hypocrisy – the Kerry campaigns only product.

Aug 24, 2004 - 2:58 pm 71. bkw:

Don’t y’all get it?

Republicans have operatives.

Democrats have supporters.

Aug 24, 2004 - 3:09 pm 72. hollywood:

Roberts,

I completely agree that some 527 people have ties to the Kerry campaign. I couldn’t deny that in good conscience or even as a matter of practicality. The difference that you and others here fail to notice is that the Smear Boat Veterans ads are filled with untruths, half truths, distortions, contradictions and innuendo. That, as Roger might say, is a distinction with a difference. http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231

Aug 24, 2004 - 3:15 pm 73. TmjUtah:

Hmmm.

Swopa. Hollywood. Kerry Campaign. MSM. SBVFT.

The envelope please….

Tipping point. I think the real show is what happens when MSM attempts to double clutch and save what credibility it has left.

Oh, and stop by Captain’s Quarters. He may well end up with the first Blog Pulitzer someday.

Aug 24, 2004 - 4:07 pm 74. Terrye:

hollywood:

If that is the case then let Kerry sue them. O’Neil has said he will be more than happy to meet Kerry in court and prove his case. I would think that if Kerry is so sure of his case he would welcome this oppurtunity to strut his stuff and talk about what a big war hero he is. He could even sign form 180 and release the records for all the world to see. In the words of M. Simon, what is the war hero afraid of?

And so far the Kerry people have continued to call Bush a liar. a deserter. etc, without any real evidence to back it up. We have been listening to that bullshit for years. There have been ads, movies, books and by no stretch of the imagination have these allegations been based on fact. Same old double standard.

And the second ad is mostly based on Kerry’s own words. Now I realize that the only pow they want to talk about is McCain because they think it will help them but there are a lot of other pow’s who hate Kerry and have every right to express their feelings.

Aug 24, 2004 - 6:56 pm 75. Terrye:

and btw Hollywood the Democrats have spent 62 million on ads through 527s, the swift boat guys have spent a million. a lousy million.

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:10 pm 76. Syl:

Flash:

McQ over at QandO has figured out the bullet holes in the boat mentioned in the NYTimes Swiftie smear story.

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:30 pm 77. hollywood:

Terrye,

I believe you’re close to right about the money (of course, Bush has raised so much more that the Demos don’t have much choice do they?). See, it’s easier to get $$$ when you’re serving corporate America.

Meanwhile…

“If that is the case then let Kerry sue them.”

It would be foolhardy for either Bush or Kerry to sue. As public figures, they’d have to show reckless disregard for the truth or intentional misconduct. They could be right but could never meet the burden of proof.

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:34 pm 78. richard mcenroe:

Hollywood ó Dole was instrumental in blocking Hillary’s wretched National Health program. Kudos to him,

BKW ó Back in the early days of the last round of the intifada, BBC got some footage of a terr firing at an Israeli tank. From the front. Israeli tank replied with one round from the 105 main gun. Big Boom. Absent terr.

Aug 24, 2004 - 7:47 pm 79. Charlie (Colorado):

I believe you’re close to right about the money (of course, Bush has raised so much more that the Demos don’t have much choice do they?). See, it’s easier to get $$$ when you’re serving corporate America.

Hollywood, do you and the concept of “fact” have so much as a nodding acquaintance with one another?

Turns out that, according to OpenSecrets.org as of 31 July, Kerry had $304,028,394 in contributions.

Bush had $243,656,202.

“Do the math”, right? $304,028,394 > $243,656,202.

Doesn’t it ever worry you that when you link someone else’s story about Kerry (like Kaplan’s), you get ones that have been refuted by Kerry’s campaign itself, and that when you assert something on your own that 30 seconds of googling proves you’re wholly wrong?

Aug 24, 2004 - 9:31 pm 80. vegetius:

If anybody is interested you can go to Lucianne’s site where someone has dug up and put on line,

Kerry’s magnum opus “New Soldier”. This is the book he wrote and want’s everyone to forget. He also refuses to let the publisher reprint it.

Aug 25, 2004 - 6:42 am 81. vegetius:

Here’s the link to the book Kerry Kurtz wants everyone to forget…..oh the horror!!!

http://johnkerrythenewsoldier.blogspot.com/

Aug 25, 2004 - 6:44 am 82. Knucklehead:

Hollywood,

Do you ever actually go out and make any attempt to do even a cursory fact check on the stuff that comes out of your keyboard? Even just once in a while, or once in a Blue Moon?

…(of course, Bush has raised so much more that the Demos don’t have much choice do they?). See, it’s easier to get $$$ when you’re serving corporate America.

The links to OpenSecrets.org and PublicIntegrity have been provided here many times. Search here or google. Charlie gave you the totals as of July 31.

Look it all up for yourself. The fatcat millionaires give overwhelmingly to Dems and Dem orgs. Unions, which represent roughly 12% of working Americans give HUGE $$ almost exclusively to Dems and Dem Orgs.

Businesses? Well, for some reason (gee, can’t imagine why but you might wanna go follow some of what Soros and Buffett and Lewis are putting their money into) insurance and investment houses and trial/tort law firms give overwhelmingly to Dems and Dem orgs. And they give big bucks.

If you track down what the broader range of corps give and to whom, you will find that large businesses tend to use their money to influence people already in office and incumbents running for re-election. They are amazingly self-interested and not particularly partisan. If the Dems have control of legislation and regulation, that’s who their money goes to. And the same for Republicans. Businesses (outside of small, local, Chamber of Commerce kinda stuff) don’t have any great tendency to favor one party over the other. Its not in their interests to do so, so they don’t.

Republicans are getting more of their money, and more far more than Dems, from individuals – the Little Man and Woman. You Dems are the party of the fatcats.

So some research, willya. It really does make discussion more fun and interesting if you aren’t splatting out memes that haven’t been true for decades.

Aug 25, 2004 - 6:54 am 83. hollywood:

“”Do the math”, right? $304,028,394 > $243,656,202.”

Charlie,

Thanks for the link. There seems to be some kinda flaw in the math. If you check the pull downs, they indicate Bush has spent $208 million and has cash on hand of $111 million. Total: $318 million. I suppose there’s some sort of explanation for this but it’s not immediately clear. When you add Kerry’s figures, they come to $304 million. So, $318 million > $304 million.

Aug 25, 2004 - 8:29 am 84. Charlie (Colorado):

Hollywood, when you “do the math” and it doesn’t add up, that doesn’t mean you can then make up your own interpretation.

In this case, following the link that says HELP! WHY DON’T THE NUMBERS ADD UP? might have been good:

Summary numbers – specifically “Total Raised and Spent” and “PAC/Individual Split” – are based on summary reports filed by the candidates with the Federal Election Commission. All other numbers in these profiles (”Quality of Disclosure,” “Geography” and “Special Interests”) are derived from detailed FEC reports that itemize all contributions of $200 or more.

In addition, figures listed under the “PAC Contribution Breakdown” often will not add up to match the total PAC Contributions listed under “Source of Funds” because they derive from two different sources. The figures in the “Source of Funds” pie chart are reported by the candidate receiving the money, whereas figures in the “PAC Contribution Breakdown” pie chart are reported by the PACs giving the money. The Federal Election Commission does not reconcile differences between these two reporting sources.

There is also a time lag in posting the information. While summary numbers are reported almost immediately by the FEC — and listed quickly on OpenSecrets — processing and analyzing the detailed records takes much longer. For that reason, summary numbers are usually higher (and more current) than the numbers based on detailed records.

Sometimes you’re just embarrassing.

(PS. You might also wonder why the source 22+ percent of Kerry’s contributions aren’t properly disclosed, but only about 5 percent of Bush’s aren’t. Now, there will always be some error on this as the FEC defines it, but we’re talking about one dollar in four as compared to one dollar in twenty.)

Aug 25, 2004 - 11:44 am 85. hollywood:

So, basically, Charlie, it seems like the margin of error in these figures is high enough that the figures can’t be taken as accurate enough to show a statistically significant difference between the two candidates’ fund raising.

As to why there’s a difference between the Kerry source disclosures and the Bush receipts, I suspect it’s because Kerry gets lots of small contribs obtained by volunteers going door to door and neglecting to do the paperwork (even tho they’ve been told to) to get the sourcing info correct. OTOH, I suspect Bush gets more contribs that are sourced properly by folks that are more used to doing these things by the book.

Aug 25, 2004 - 2:03 pm 86. Charlie (Colorado):

So, basically, Charlie, it seems like the margin of error in these figures is high enough that the figures can’t be taken as accurate enough to show a statistically significant difference between the two candidates’ fund raising.

No, Hollywood, you didn’t read it carefully. It says that the summary numbers are both prompt and accurate to their date, but that the other numbers are derived numbers that have to be constructed by analysis, which both takes more time and introduces errors.

Since the summary numbers are accounting numbers, they must be assumed accurate to the dollar; at least my protestations that my checking account balanced to within epsilon never cut much slack with the bank.

In any case, sixty-odd million dollars is a helluva margin of error.

As to your other point, you might have a look at this which shows that Bush in fact has 131,854 contributors of less than $200, while Kerry had only 120,091. If, in fact, contributions from small contributors were the ones that didn’t get properly sourced, you’d expect Bush to have a similar number of improperly sourced contributions … not 23 percent versus 6 percent.

Aug 26, 2004 - 7:18 am 87. Charlie (Colorado):

I’m sorry, I know I shouldn’t come back to this, but looking back at it I suddenly realized: Hollywood was seriously trying to propose that the accounting of the campaign funds was so bad that a 60+ million dollar difference — something between 20 and 25 percent — was the margin of error.

I can’t decide whether to be mad, because Hollywood thinks I’m a fucking moron — or just sympathetic because he’s a fucking moron.

Jesus.

Aug 26, 2004 - 7:25 am

Write a Comment

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