56 Comments

1. BigFire:

Oh, the first order of business of the new advisor is to go full on personal attack. They’ve already made one of the Swiftee loss his job in Oregeon DA’s office on an old affair. It’ll get much much uglier than not.

Aug 31, 2004 - 3:21 pm 2. Barry Dauphin:

The Kerry campaign gets bigger and bigger as if bringing more people on will improve efficiency. Joe Lockhart was the Sandy Berger of Press Secretaries. He was never very impressive. Clinton apparently wanted to surround himself with basically dim bulbs so he could always shine brightest. I don’t think the Rebulicans are shaking in their boots over Kerry’s acquisition of Lockhart. It’s sort of like an NFL team picking up a punter off waivers.

I don’t think there’s such a thing as a lock at this point-much too early and too much can change. Maybe you are sensing that the Republicans feel confident, but hopefully they are not getting over confident. I respect your concern about social issues, but I don’t think that Presidents can do very much about them, except via their appointments to the judicial branch and blabber about them. And you won’t exactly have to share a cross country RV trip with Sean Hannity if Bush wins (unless you want to :>)). I’m in favor of legislatures making laws, even when I am unhappy with the outcome. At least I know that something resembling the popular will is at play.

Aug 31, 2004 - 3:34 pm 3. lindenen:

“They’ve already made one of the Swiftee loss his job in Oregeon DA’s office on an old affair. It’ll get much much uglier than not.”

What is this? I hadn’t heard about this. What happened?

Aug 31, 2004 - 3:52 pm 4. Lola:

Go over to the SWVTs forum for more details about that. It’s due to that Brown Book dossier they’ve assembled on the SWVT figures.

Aug 31, 2004 - 4:14 pm 5. ricpic:

How can Kerry possibly defend against the Swiftboat ad showing him testifying that the American forces were the equivalent of Ghengis Khan’s horde?

If any ad sinks him, this is the one.

Aug 31, 2004 - 4:18 pm 6. Tom Holsinger:

Kerry’s response to the Swifties was so late and so inept that it showed he has no chance just due to the professional incompetence of his campaign staff – technical reasons independent of his message and personal issues.

But a campaign doesn’t get so bad unless the candidate’s own administrative skills suck, so it doesn’t matter what Kerry does at this point. He’ll screw up the reorganization too, not to mention that there isn’t time for any reorganized campaign to shake down and get results given that the election is only two months away.

One point to consider is that the main effect the Swifties may have had is not their message, but simply to keep Kerry in the center of attention for several weeks. Note that his standing in the polls tends to go down when that happens, even during the week of the Democratic convention, while it stays even or goes up a bit when he isn’t the center of attention.

This GOP convention week might be an opportunity to verify this hypothesis. If Kerry’s stand-alone image goes up or stays the same (even if Bush gets a boost in head-to-head matchups), I’m right – the public likes Kerry less the more they hear of him, and like him more the less they hear of him. Though constant negative portrayals of Bush by the media and print journalism probably have some influence here.

Aug 31, 2004 - 4:28 pm 7. PBRMan:

I tend to share the confidence about Bush’s chances now. I think that those who have left Kerry of late will never return. I also think he is so pompous, ponderous and off-putting in debate that Bush’s straightforwardness, despite his being so inarticulate, will offer a contrast that will cause many more to desert Kerry permanently. If his defeat is brought about by the honorable men whose contempt he so deservedly earned long ago, that will make it all the sweeter. Ironically, had he not exaggerated his exploits in Vietnam, and had he come home with a few fewer decorations, and had he been modest about them and truthful in his journals, he would likely have become president.

Aug 31, 2004 - 4:39 pm 8. Samuel:

Is it that scary Roger? I mean I will be up there at the Convention tomorrow and Thursday, am I going to be that freaked out? I must agree with the poster that said you sound a bit like you were channeling MJT. Especially when this topic is amended to the last.

I sure hope it doesn’t take images of horror and terror to wake you up, because if so then you are becoming too routined like most Americans. At this rate by 2008 most will just quit worrying about it I guess. You make me worry Roger because if you can go weak then I fear I will be even a rarer breed come tomorrow.

I say this as a true Liberal Republican who knows the true enemy, and it sure isn’t Rick Santorum,

Samuel (JSF)

Aug 31, 2004 - 4:51 pm 9. Tom Grey:

If you are anti-Christian, you should be worried.

There is still an underdiscussed debate about the proper role of Christian morals in police enforced laws, and gov’t sponsored support handouts.

On the other hand, a Bush “ownership society”, if it really means less gov’t, should mean less gov’t deciding what is good or bad.

So, more home schooling, for instance. Including both by gays and against gays. For anti-Christians, the Supreme Court is a big reason to want a Dem, any Dem, in office. For pro-life folk, they want a Rep for exactly the same reasons.

The Swifties sink Kerry; will main stream media go down, too? Prolly. But less clearly.

What about the Moral Superiority War? Was the Left right that America staying in Vietnam was worse than leaving and letting evil commies commit genocide?

Moral superiority — who has it, why; how would an unbiased observer know?

Aug 31, 2004 - 5:10 pm 10. Rick Ballard:

Tom,

Agreed, but even stranger is the concept of Lockhart as a solution to anything. He is at best a mediocrity selected to fill in when McCurry finally got tired of throwing up every morning before the press gaggle.

The team best suited to prettying up the Poland China belongs to the junior senator from New York. She’s not running so I wonder what’s keeping her from lending her aces to Kerry? It’s rather amusing to watch a jockey change in a race to the glue factory.

Aug 31, 2004 - 5:12 pm 11. Rick Ballard:

I ws addressing Tom Holsinger.

Aug 31, 2004 - 5:13 pm 12. Tom Holsinger:

Rick,

I think the 527 committees might have something to do with this too. A lot of Democratic pros can make their money working for those those year and so don’t have to muscle their way into the presidential campaign to get a seat at the money spigot.

Aug 31, 2004 - 5:17 pm 13. Terrye:

Roger:

Don’t let all those regular human beings freak you out. I know you have been in California a long time but some of the attitudes you are surrounded with there are no doubt more common than you think.

They are not universal of course. Today I talked to a young woman who believes that Bush and the Republicans orchestrated 9/11 so that they could make money and take over the world and the rest of us are just dupes. So what is stranger the ABB crowd or the social conservatives?

Deomcrats come with differing ideologies and so do Republicans, you don’t have to buy the whole package. Few people do.

Aug 31, 2004 - 5:24 pm 14. Samuel:

Terrye

Amen.

Aug 31, 2004 - 5:54 pm 15. Solomon:

Roger, I share some of your discomfort over some parts of the Repub party – just as I’m disturbed by some of the Dem stuff. But think of it this way. For every guy like you, that’s one person on the “far right” the party doesn’t need to rely on. Read Michael Moore’s column today for a taste of just how many of us there are. I think that piece is one of the most (unintentionally) effective Republican recruiting tools I’ve seen in a long time.

Aug 31, 2004 - 6:13 pm 16. dougf:

Come on Roger. Just enjoy the convention as much as you can.

You have already made your choice for the election and it serves NO purpose to get ‘buyer’s remorse’ even before you have even actually bought anything.

Bush is not the devil in disguise on social issues and the ’social conservatives’are not all rabid lunatics.Society will survive the belief that gay marriage is not moral but it will not survive the belief that Islamofascism is just an alternative outlook. And Kerry would be a BAD candidate in ANY historical period.In this period he is a DISASTER.Angst is bad for the digestion and should be indulged only when nuance is REALLY a legitimate response.Summing up — If voting for GWB is inevitable,you might as well relax and try to enjoy it!!!

Aug 31, 2004 - 6:22 pm 17. Solomon:

I second dougf’s advice!

Aug 31, 2004 - 6:30 pm 18. jedrury:

Following up on Roger’s point.

Kaus raises two salient questions about the present state of Kerry’s campaign; his message being only Vietnam and his failure to mount a quicker reaction to the Swift Vets.

Roger is right: even the most sceptical can not deny the effect of the Swift Vets. They will lead any comment by denigrating the Swift Vets but their effect now and their continuing role is a real challenge to the War Hero.

Tonight, his address to the VFW is crucial. How will he play and how will the press play it ?

Aug 31, 2004 - 6:34 pm 19. Terrye:

Let’s keep this in perspective.

Today the swifties told the Kerry people they would stop running the ads if Kerry admitted the whole Cambodia thing was a lie, he fudged on his purple hearts and he embellished the bronze star incident and [if I remember correctly] he said he was sorry.

do any of us see that happening?

Now let us place that up against a party that has refused to endorse gay marriage. Well, has the other one?

A party that does not endorse universal healthcare. Well has the other party delivered on that in spite of years of promises?

A party that wishes to limit abortion. The law still states abortion is legal.

We all have to choose our battles and our priorities and right now I can not vote for Kerry. It is that simple.

Hopefully Roe v Wade will last four more years.

Aug 31, 2004 - 6:35 pm 20. J_Crater:

First, Joe “I’ve got a chip the size of Rhode Island on my shoulder” Lockhart will have to lose the attitude.

Second, they need a plan, which should contain a message that even doits can remember (as there will be a bunch of them repeating it). The “plan” should have a jingoistic theme like, “Merry with Kerry” or “You Get Moore with Kerry.” The “plan” should contain a set of legislative initiatives (look at Clinton State of Union addresses for ideas) that don’t cost anything, or at least not much, as rolling back the deficit should still be part of the “plan.” The “plan” should not contain any mention of Vietnam, boats, medals/ribbons or vets.

Third, they need to execute the plan. If this means sending Teresa or Michael Moore to ANWR for the remainder of the campaign, so be it.

Aug 31, 2004 - 7:06 pm 21. Sandy P:

As Ahnold would say, “Quit being a girly-man.”

—

The abortion debate is over, all that’s left is the extremes who have too much time, effort, money and power to lose.

Aug 31, 2004 - 7:15 pm 22. Manhattanite:

I think you are all placing too much credence in the swifties, mainly because I see them getting “outed” left and right for having holes and discrepancies in their own stories. Meanwhile, polls indicate Kerry has successfully planted the idea that Bush is (in some way) behind them- A lot of people (who are not veterans) are turned off by the idea that you can disparage military service so cavalierly. It’s one thing to argue about Kerry’s protesting the Vietnam War (a legitimate gripe), it’s quite another to impugn his (and that of a lot of those around him) service. There will definitely be a backlash of some kind, especially with Bush’s failure to specifically condemn the group as McCain has asked.

I don’t believe the dynamic of the swifties has yet fully played out. They have severely damaged their credibility by the nature of their opening salvo, and it will now lessen the impact of later criticism.

Aug 31, 2004 - 7:20 pm 23. Birkel:

Isn’t it just like the Dhimmicrats to think a larger oragnizational chart will produce better results? Ha, ha, ha… He, he, he

I mean, do they really think bureaucracy works? Oh, yeah, they do.

LOL at the moonbats who are slowly, surely, being exposed for the hatemongers they are… especially as the protesters (read: rioters) put police officers in the hospital.

They’ve hated the military. They’ve shown contempt for Republicans. Do you need proof? Check Michael ‘moonbat’ Moore’s article in the USAToday. Simply foolish in their cravenness.

But, Roger, let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Reagan was in a dead heat at this point in 1984 and things changed quickly. Let’s do the post mortem after the death of the beast.

Aug 31, 2004 - 7:36 pm 24. John A. Kalb:

Roger,

I wouldn’t call the Kerry folks dead yet, sadly.

After all, two months before the Iowa caucuses, they got a new campaign manager and press secretary, and everyone left them for dead.

Aug 31, 2004 - 7:37 pm 25. Sandy P:

–it’s quite another to impugn his (and that of a lot of those around him) service. –

AWWWW, W impuned Kerry’s service, yet Kerry impuned the armed forces and by extension, the country.

Aug 31, 2004 - 7:43 pm 26. Mike:

Manhattanite:

I think Kerry might just have lost enough votes among veterans, the current military and their immediate families as a result of the Swiftees campaign to decide this election. Why? Because these votes aren’t coming back, there simply isn’t any way for Kerry to get them back.

I agree with you that many non-veteran voters may be turned off by the Swiftees campaign, but not the vets and the serving military, and I’m sure they’re filling their friends and families in on why. That’s why the polls among vets showed such a dramatic swing away from Kerry, in such a short period of time. I’d love to see a poll right now involving current service personnel.

The reason for this should be obvious; Unlike non-military-savvy voters, the vets have the background to see through Kerry’s misrepresentation of his service record. They don’t buy his explanations, and I suspect the pathetic defence lawyer tactics employed by the MSM on Kerry’s behalf have only confirmed for the vets and the current service members that Kerry is being dishonest.

Who do you think a vet who has seen combat is going to believe, when Kerry says he won the Bronze Star for pulling a man from the water under heavy fire, in a canal 75 meters wide, yet the best his MSM backers can come up with is 3 bullet holes in one of the five boats? No gunshot wounds to anyone, etc, with 4 of the 5 boats (Kerry’s was scooting miles down the river) dead in the water. Do you think the vets don’t smell a rat when they read Kerry’s account that his boat was allegedly heavily damaged (supposedly from the mine), yet it was his boat, not the other undamaged boats, that towed the heavily damaged 3 boat back to base?

Sadly for Kerry, the Purple Hearts threads that are now out there are even more damaging among vets than the valour medals controversy. How do you boast on the campaign trail that you ” left no man behind,” when you left YOUR ENTIRE UNIT BEHIND 8 MONTHS EARLY?”

In an election this close thus far, Kerry has permanently lost a constituency that is large enough to doom his chances

Aug 31, 2004 - 8:10 pm 27. thedragonflies:

Kerry is wounded by the vets because:

1. The charges are believable, believed, and true – probably most if not all of them;

2. His response to the charges are dishonorable and revealing – attacking TV stations with lawyers, threatening the book publisher, attacking the vets, demanding thay Bush call them off, going to the FEC to ban the ads. Everything except stand up and answer the charges.

Bush’s secret weapon in this election is Kerry. I think fate is helping Bush, and the U.S.

Aug 31, 2004 - 8:13 pm 28. Terrye:

Manhattanite:

The swifties and their discrepencies?? Just yesterday another vet came forward and called Kerry a liar. This new man is not even one of the swifties. So far Kerry has been caught lying about Cambodia, his first purple heart and the fact that all the men who served on his boat support him. They don’t.

He could end a lot of it by releasing his records like Bush and won’t. That makes people wonder. Tommy Franks has said he will never forgive him for his Senate testimony. A lot of other people won’t either. He betrayed men in uniform when they were still in country. He did not go through the chain of cammand, instead he made a spectacle of himself and in the process shamed these men and tens of thousands who died there.

I hear Dems say the Republicans are behind this. I doubt that but after their quasi endorsement of F911, just what right do they have to bitch? They helped take this election to this level, they wanted a dog fight. So they have no one but themselves to blame for picking such a sorry ass candidate.

Aug 31, 2004 - 8:53 pm 29. Fresh Air:

I’ll see your Joe Lockhart and I’ll raise you a Karen Hughes and a Peggy Noonan!

Aug 31, 2004 - 10:57 pm 30. Sandy P:

Manhattanite, get thee over to The Gridley’s site and poke around.

At least 1 of Cabana Boy’s merry band of brothers has posted his thoughts of his time spent w/Kerry on the ship.

Aug 31, 2004 - 11:30 pm 31. playrink:

Jennifer Vermer’s Red Army account at frontpagemag.com – deep background for personnel shake-up buffs?

Sep 1, 2004 - 2:30 am 32. Samuel:

Manhattanite

I once again quote the late Lawton Chiles who cynically and blatantly demogogued Social Security and made false claims about Jeb Bush to Jeb’s eventual undoing. “If you can’t run with the big dogs, then stay on the porch.” Kerry should have stayed on the porch.

But I will also note that the Swift Boat Vets are not lying. O’Niel is a Democrat, voted for Gore and supported Edwards. A little advice from this ex-Democrat, quit attacking the messenger, take responsibility for you own actions and quit being such a damn hypocrite.

In 1992 Vietnam was off the table with Clinton declared Democrats and their lap dog MSM companions, yet now it is fair game. Who put it there and made it fair game? The Democrats! Yes, when Kerry thought he would benefit from it he taunted… “Bring it On!” Well unfortunately he and the Democrats collective heads where too far stuck up their posteriors to notice the grave danger of such intemperate speech.

These same people spent months making issue of this Presidents legitimate National Guard service, and Bush just kept dignified about it and released his records to boot! Will John Kerry release his? I think not because so much about John Kerry is a fraud and I know this personally. Sure there is some truth to what he claims, but Kerry is like a cartoon character, he hides behind skinny little trees of exaggerated truths all while the fat gluttonous realities of all his lies are exposed for the world to see. Pretending the world doesn’t see these and wishing them away will not fix it. Blaming Bush and “Dirty Politics” and attacking the messengers only deepens the fantasies and fables the Democrats hold onto. You delay the day of critical realization and understanding of your condition that is so needed to rehabilitate your party. Do it soon before you lose more like me.

You see Manhattanite, I am a Liberal yet I am Republican. I am left of center on the political test, well left of Tony Blair, but I hate liars and people like Michael Moore. I don’t like to hang out with a Party that glorifies such ugliness. People can make fun of the GOP, and the Democrat loving MSM can try to stack the deck all they want. Who was the last pro-Life speaker openly invited to give a prime time speech at a Democratic Convention?. The late great Governor Casey was a great liberal on all issues but Abortion and was locked out by the Democrats. At least the Republicans allowed their Pro-choice people show their faces even if they are a minority. As a life long Democrat I know how opened minded like much else Democrats claim to be, but these are all lies, for in truth they are closed minded, politically correct, carry double standards concerning free speech, seek to shut down debate, and so lack virtue in their discipline that this results in carrying prejudice and double standards they just don’t want to own up to. They have become what they claimed to hate. These things can turn any reasonably intelligent chap into a blind fool if he drinks that Kool-Aid long enough.

When the Democrats learn to have ideas, lose the rancor and not just attack messengers I’ll reconsider. Kerry has a record, he can’t run on it, because he is a fraud, so is your spin. I’m sick of living fantasies, I am sick of the anger, and I am sick of the spin and I am sick of a Party that makes reality what they want it to be rather than deal with what it actually is, because of this I left and I am glad. -JSF

Sep 1, 2004 - 3:39 am 33. Emory:

A Kerry campaign spokesman said yesterday that Kerry will not appolige for his Senate remarks about war crimes “because they were true”. It will be interesting to see what kind of reception he gets from the vets today.

Sep 1, 2004 - 5:25 am 34. Manhattanite:

To all the swiftvet true believers:

You obviously are coming from a prejudiced point of view which is just looking for a reason to not like Kerry. This is the same attitude of a lot of veterans who have had a “bug up” ever since ‘71.

This clouded viewpoint prevents you from seeing just how much of a turn-off these guys are. It seems like more vets have come forward to denounce them and support Kerry than vice versa.

9/11 and Iraq have changed everything with regard to military service from 10 years ago.

These guys are turning off a lot of independents with their unbelievable claims. And Bush has put himself in danger by refusing to denounce them.

His lawyer resigning last week was NOT a good indicator that Bush is clean here.

Sep 1, 2004 - 5:32 am 35. Ray:

John (Hari)Kerry is demonstrating the fine art of Seppuku. Previous proponents, believing that suicide is the most sincere form of self criticism, did so willingly, unlike Kerry’s example of accidently falling on a thousand swords.

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory will be history’s pronouncement, but to give credit where credit is due, we must also give mainstream media it’s recognition. Without such stalward defenders of mundane journalism like the New York Times and other liberal, yellow journalism publishers, Kerry could not have survived the primary process.

Sep 1, 2004 - 6:00 am 36. jerry:

Manhattanite:

Your name reflects your attitude well. Kerry has already admitted he lied about Cambodia. His contemporary diary entries support the argument that the first wound was self-inflicted during a careless use of a weapon. He has recently come close to admitting this. Furthermore, the first PH was in fact the last awarded. If the wound was self-inflicted then his first Purple Heart is fraudulent and he left Vietnam under false pretenses. The mostly likely reason for the late approval of the first PH was that his CO had decided to get rid of him without damaging his future prospects. This is common practice in the military, particularly with officers who have a short commitment. Therefore, QED, the SBVT story line is most likely true. Kerry was an incompetent PBR commander. who never should have been assigned to the riverine force. If he had stayed on the Gridley he might have made a good junior officer.

Finally, you sound a lot like Pauline Cael, who as a fellow Manhattanite, said she didn’t understand how Nixon got elected because she didn’t know anybody who voted for him. I suspect the “independents” that you talk to never would have voted for Bush anyway. Manhattan has to be the most provincal location in the United States. There is a lot of country west of the Hudson and most of the people there are a lot more sophisticated and cosmopolitan then you Islanders.

Sep 1, 2004 - 6:05 am 37. kimsch:

In addition to Lockhart, did anyone notice who Kerry chose as his Senior Advisor for National Security Affairs? Dr. Susan Rice. Now Kerry has his own Dr. Rice in National Security.

Manhattanite:

*His lawyer resigning last week was NOT a good indicator that Bush is clean here.*

Quite the contrary. What the lawyer was doing was perfectly legal. Kerry’s lawyers are also being perfectly legal working for both Kerry/DNC and various 527 groups. What Bush’s lawyer did was raise the bar. He resigned in order to avoid any distractions. Kerry’s bunch ought to do the same.

Sep 1, 2004 - 6:19 am 38. TmjUtah:

“Bug up”….”turn off”.

You’ve just spent twelve or thirteen months of your life, possibly as a conscript, fighting in America’s first lost foreign war. Your dad or uncles came home from their war wreathed in victory and looking ahead to a world made better by their sacrifice. You come home to face being spat on, accusations of being a murder, and labelled as a psychopath/drug addict/ticking time bomb for the rest of your life. And for the rest of your life, you will always wonder why that had to be.

Or maybe you spent seven years of your life imprisoned and tortured, being beaten and abused on a daily basis but resisting the efforts of the enemy to use you as a propaganda tool for their purposes…only to be assaulted by transcripts and recordings of statements made by John Kerry, in his dulcet Bastahn tones, delivering to the enemy for free what they couldn’t beat out of you.

Now one of the key players responsible for what happened to your life has been exposed as a fraud…and you can return to duty one more time and fight to avenge the slander and abuse you and your compatriots have taken all these years.

Maybe all those times you stepped through the wire carrying seventy pounds of ammo, mines, and socks, or off the skid of the chopper into fire or heard the goons with their bamboo canes coming down the hall of the Hilton might not have been a waste. Maybe its time to fight one more time, and this time win.

Kerry’s story has more holes than a Noam Chomsky justification of Pol Pot’s vision…and is even more offensive because he’s used his premeditated, dishonest betrayal of his fellow servicemen as justification for his entire public life.

If Kerry had any credentials to base a presidential campaign on, he wouldn’t have had to craft his four months in Vietnam as a selling point. He has no one to blame but himself, and his party is in exactly the same boat for deciding that beating Bush was more important than finding a candidate actually fit for the presidency.

Sep 1, 2004 - 6:38 am 39. jedrury:

Rule #1 in legal evidence:

Evaluate of the credibility of witness testimony

a.) witness demeanor and credibility.

b.) corroboration of witness testimony by documents and/or other witnesses.

c.) lack of motive to lie.

d.) consistency or lack thereof of witness testimony

e.) admission against interest of testifying witness.

f.) response or failure of response of accused.

There can be no doubt in my perversely trained legal mind that the SwiftVets win in a credibility contest with the War Hero.

SwiftsVets 22, War Hero 0 !

Ooops, sorry, I got conflicted with the last night’s Yankee score

Sep 1, 2004 - 7:12 am 40. Samuel:

Manhattanite

To all the swiftvet true believers. . . You obviously are coming from a prejudiced point of view which is just looking for a reason to not like Kerry.

Prejudiced? I voted for AL Gore and every other Democrat back to and including Jimmy Carter. Now that may make me a lot of things but prejudiced is not one of them. You are shallow and in one sentence made my point. You addressed no specific point, and made a personal statement about people disparaging Kerry just trying to tar them in the process. Look I live in Washington and personally know John Kerry OK? Take that or leave it. You speak not just with prejudice but blindness. Have you weighed all the facts. With that can you rebut them piece by piece? No. . . because it can’t be done. Kerry unlike Bush will not release his records because he can’t, he has too much to expose. Kerry lives in an exaggerated world of twisted stories that no longer resemble truth, in short the man has issues. As far as. . .

This is the same attitude of a lot of veterans who have had a “bug up” ever since ‘71. This clouded viewpoint prevents you from seeing just how much of a turn-off these guys are. It seems like more vets have come forward to denounce them and support Kerry than vice versa.

Turn off for whom? Prejudice is about narrowness off focus and dismissal of people for reasons that are base and defy logic. Your words fit such description. I spent many years working with Democrats, reading polls and doing campaigning what you are saying never won any campaign, it is just head in the sand trash. I was reading polls in 1988 when Dukakis fell down from 18 points. I heard the same shit. Willie Horton. Bush Sr. was going to pay but guess what? It was Al Gore that introduced Willie Horton. Democrats like to throw mud then blame others. John Zogby’s polled of independents and only 14% liked Kerry, yet 67% like George Bush. Even if people don’t like the Swifties as you claim, they like Kerry a hell of a lot less and their tarnish rubs on Kerry not Bush as his near 70% likeability remains. Boy I guess the wrong person is just paying the price. To bad the truth you claim as universal is in you own head in your own little Manhattan world. Kerry is a disloyal opportunist and people are just starting to see it, well everyone but you of course.

George Bush is a lot of things, phony and head in the sand are just not some of them. He is everything Kerry’s isn’t. Don’t assume you attraction to Kerry and repulsion of Bush to others, that kind of projecting is debilitating in dealing with political realities and unfortunately your analysis is dead wrong. Your wishful thinking will buy you no political points and certainly bring no virtue. I would certainly like to have you back the next statement up with fact. . .

9/11 and Iraq have changed everything with regard to military service from 10 years ago. These guys are turning off a lot independents with their unbelievable claims. And Bush has put himself in danger by refusing to denounce them.

His lawyer resigning last week was NOT a good indicator that Bush is clean here.

Your exaggerated unsubstantiated statement above with the rest sure puts you in good company with John Kerry, that’s for sure. Only Republicans have the class to resign, Democrats just keep hiding behind lies. What you see as a sign of corruption of course is not, it is principles being implemented by a party with more principles. Of course it is only necessary for them to pay the price of appearing corrupt because in your world the two known politicos that work for Kerry and MoveOn is OK. But of course to you some Veterans with legitimate beefs are lower on the rung then a Michael Moore and his lying propaganda machine. Smears are truth when they effect those you don’t like but when truth hits home it is dirty pool.

Like Kerry at the convention, YOU SAID NOTHING! And like Kerry you have no plans and ideas. And like Kerry you live by double standards and privileged rules where only you are allowed to hit hard. Tag your it! Keep naysaying. Have fun. I am through with you as you aren’t looking for anything but trouble. I’ve been a Democrat and thought differently. I still am liberal, I’m just an honest one. Have you ever been anything other then what you have displayed in this thread? If not then you are the one that needs to look in the mirror.

Sep 1, 2004 - 7:26 am 41. Mike:

Manhattanite:

If you’re going to make use of generalizations, please try to use those generalizations that are in fact true.

“It seems like more vets have come forward to denounce them and support Kerry than vice versa.”

Since the SBVT campaign began, Bush picked up 19 points in a poll of support for the candidiates among vets. 19 points! That’s an incredible surge. Your claim that more vets have come forward to support Kerry is patently false.

By the way, I take it you have no difficulty with Kerry himself, publicly and personally participating in attacks on Bush’s National Guard service in February and April of this year. Yet you complain that Bush took too long to denounce attacks on Kerry’s service record, even though Bush has never attacked Kerry’s record, instead he has consistently praised it.

Sep 1, 2004 - 8:10 am 42. secarr:

Amusing synopsis of how and why the swiftvets sank Kerry:

‘Twas the Night Before Christmas (1968)

‘Twas the night before Christmas, and all through Sa Dec,

not a creature was stirring, although Brinkley didn’t check;

John’s swift boat was berthed by the dock with great care,

Far from Cambodia–he was not there;

John Kerry was nestled, though not yet in bed,

while visions of Purple Hearts danced in his head;

Kerry had his pen, composing Citations,

For himself, of course, complete fabrications;

Many years later, there arose such a clatter,

We all started wondering, what was the matter?

Then spoke the veterans, who did not forget,

John Kerry’s a liar, on that you can bet!

The light of the truth shown on decades of lies,

Was ignored by the media because of their ties;

To the leftist crusade, no more, no less,

Although they proclaimed their impartialness.

Then came the blogosphere, researching and quoting,

To embarrass the press, who were too busy doting;

On Kerry, of course, who else would they love?

The leftist war hero, the militant dove.

John Kerry’s responses, weeks later they came,

And he blustered and whined and called the vets names;

He claimed a conspiracy, nothing else but a smear,

But answers to questions, he wouldn’t get near!

As dry leaves that before the wild hurricane fly,

When they meet with an obstacle, mount to the sky;

So Kerry’s campaign flew out of control,

With no one to blame, he dug his own hole.

And then in a twinkling, the voters, they knew,

John could not be trusted, his word was not true;

He betrayed his comrades, he betrayed the nation,

Which goes far beyond his medal inflation.

He swapped stories fast, while the media spun,

But despite Kerry’s tap dance, we knew he was done;

Yet we heard him exclaim, ere he fell out of sight,

How dare you question what I did that night!

Sep 1, 2004 - 9:04 am 43. dn67:

“These same people spent months making issue of this Presidents legitimate National Guard service, and Bush just kept dignified about it and released his records to boot! Will John Kerry release his?”

Neither Kerry nor Bush has released the entirety of their records. Most of Kerry’s are on his website, most of Bush’s were, in one form or another, disseminated. Neither had provided full public access, to my knowledge.

When are the SVVT for truth’s defenders going to face facts? O’Neil’s political contributions over the last ten years are exclusively Republican (i.e., he lies about his political ties), most of them have either contradicted themselves or lied about their first-hand knowledge (i.e., that they had some). Most of the recent veterans to come forward that actually *have* proven knowledge of relevant events have supported Kerry. This is the flipside of Moore’s insane insinuations against Bush, and we all need to recognize both for what they are.

I’d like to hear more about what, precisely, people here think would be substantively better about Bush’s strategy against terrorism than one in a Kerry administration. Given the number of people here (liberal Republicans, moderate Democrats) who are willing to hold their nose on domestic policy — massive expansion in the size of the federal government, terrible fiscal policy, the risk that Bush will get to appoint an anti-abortion majority on the Supreme Court if O’Connor or one of the left-of-center judges leaves, the stacking of the lower courts with right-wing judges, a strong pro-polluter tilt on environmental and resource policy, and so forth — I’d imagine that the comparative advantage of Bush’s policies would have to be perceived as pretty large.

Sep 1, 2004 - 11:13 am 44. jerry:

dn67:

First to repeat what I have said to the Manhattan guy: (a) Kerry had admitted to lying about Christmas in Cambodia and (b) His contemporaneous diaries indicate that his first purple heart (3rd in sequence) was for a self inflicted wound. His CO probably saw this as a win-win solution to getting rid of a problem. (c) He slandered his comrades in his false testimony in 1971. (d) Kerry has continued to benefit from his work for the Communist. They rewarded the family business with contracts in 2001. The only proven liar here is Kerry. Everything else is interpretation.

Second, why do you harp on O’Neil is a Republican. And your point is. Do you expect Ted Kennedy to fund this effort? I take O’Neil at his word on which he voted for and supported in past elections. Zel Miller is a Democrat and his speaking at the RNC tonight or do you believe that he is really a Republican despite the fact that he placed the Big He’s name in nomination.

Sep 1, 2004 - 11:47 am 45. jedrury:

War Hero to the VFW convention

“I would have built a strong, broad coalition of our allies around the world. And, if there’s one thing I learned from my service, I would never have gone to war without a plan to win the peace.”

Describe what coalition of nations, he’d have formed, and, “from my service,” as a Lieutenant jg, what perpective did he have beyond the bow

of his Swift Boat in the four months of his service? In two sentences, he defies credibility.

What planet is this fabulist on ?

Sep 1, 2004 - 11:49 am 46. Knucklehead:

dn67,

If you can tell us Kerry’s position regarding terrorism and state sponsors and enablers of it, please tell us what it is (also please date and time stamp it) then perhaps we could compare and contrast it with the current administrations actions to this point and postion moving forward.

Sep 1, 2004 - 11:53 am 47. Sandy P:

–massive expansion in the size of the federal government, terrible fiscal policy, the risk that Bush will get to appoint an anti-abortion majority on the Supreme Court if O’Connor or one of the left-of-center judges leaves, the stacking of the lower courts with right-wing judges, a strong pro-polluter tilt on environmental and resource policy, and so forth — I’d imagine that the comparative advantage of Bush’s policies would have to be perceived as pretty large.–

Go, Baby, GO!

You really haven’t been paying attention to the country on abortion, have you?

A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll reported that 60 percent of those polled believe abortion should either be illegal or legal only in a few circumstances. A CNN poll found that 75 percent of those surveyed support a 24-hour waiting period, 85 percent support informed consent, and 73 percent support parental consent. In addition, 52 percent of Americans believe abortion is homicide, and 72 percent think abortion is morally wrong.

Increasingly, Americans are describing themselves as “pro-life” rather than as “pro-choice.” In 1999, 43 percent identified themselves as pro-life, with 46 percent calling themselves pro-choice. An April 2004 Fox News/Opinion Dynamic poll found that 47 percent described themselves as pro-life, while the percentage of those calling themselves pro-choice dropped to 44 percent. A Zogby poll also released in April 2004 found that by a 49 to 45 percent margin, more Americans identified themselves as “pro-life” than “pro-choice.”

A poll conducted April 15-17, 2004, by Zogby International showed that a majority of Americans, including African-Americans and students, are pro-life. The poll found that a total of 56 percent agreed with one of the following pro-life views: abortion should never be legal (18 percent), legal only when the life of the mother is in danger (15 percent) or legal only when the life of the mother is in danger or in cases of rape or incest (23 percent).

—-

Middle America has been very consistent for 30 years – we don’t like it, don’t want to pay for it, but see the need in extreme cases. Medical tech has finally put the picture in front of the younger generations.

One reason there’s screaming on both sides is that they lose money, access and POWER. When you have your mortgage, kid’s education and your retirement all based on this issue, you’re going to fight to keep it in front of everyone.

It’s over. Especially with the morning after pill. With all the pregnancy protection options out there women actually have control over their bodies from a method they choose. And it is all about choice, isn’t it?

Sep 1, 2004 - 12:38 pm 48. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

Manhattanite

You obviously are coming from a prejudiced point of view which is just looking for a reason to not like Kerry. This is the same attitude of a lot of veterans who have had a “bug up” ever since ‘71.

This clouded viewpoint prevents you from seeing just how much of a turn-off these guys are. It seems like more vets have come forward to denounce them and support Kerry than vice versa.

Being called war criminals and damaged by what we “had to do” does not leave a good feeling about the person who said it. I was not aware of that until I heard his “testimony” on the Hugh Hewitt show.

As to vets coming forward to denounce swiftvets, I sute haven’t encountered them. Quite the opposite – Vietnam Vets almost universally despise John Kerry, and many didn’t know what he had done until the Swifties told them. There is no forgiveness of some of his behavior.

Meanwhile many pundits are writing about how the Swifties have seriously damaged Kerry’s campaign. There are other groups ( Vietnam Vets for the Truth ) who also have action planned.

The Swifties called a press conference on May 5 to let the country know about Kerry’s behavior and their opinion. The MSM pretty much ignored them. That was a mistake – the Swifties went public as early as they could in order to give the Democrats a chance to change candidates. AP,NBC,ABC and CNN completely ignored this – a historic event where the entire command chain of a veteran stating his is unfit to command.

Now the press is doing damage control (the press, of course, is very strongly anti-Bush). Trying to only report on discrepancies that favor Kerry, but they’re having to work awfully hard at it.

I know some of the Swiftees. They are angry, determined, smart and now apparently well funded. They are also truthful. It was their little unit – everyone knew everyone else in one that small.

Meanwhile $65 million has been spent by the pro-Kerry 527s, but you don’t hear much about that from the MSM. In comparison, Swiftees have spent under a million,

Kerry has a little problem: running as a war hero with the record of a communist sympathizer (I’m being polite), who attacked our entire country and especially Vietnam Vets (and soldiers still in Vietnam). Furthermore, Kerry bailed out of his unit after 4 months, using a completely bogus purple heart award to do so. In the military, he is a shirker.

How would American voters feel if they read current Vietnamese propaganda which tells how well our POWs were treated, which quotes Kerry by name to prove we tend to do atrocities.

Think they would like it? All they have to do is go to The Vietnam News Service.

dn67

O’Neill is not lying. You have to look at local contributions to find the Democrat contributions. The guy owns a big law firm, he’s obviously going to contribute where he thinks it will do the most good.

He told me, as he has told others, that if Edwards had been the nominee, he would probably have voted for him. The organization came to be when the Admiral read Kerry’s “Tour of Duty” and found it full of falsehoods. From there is was phone calls and they had SBVT.

As to these “contradictions” and not having personal experiences, you are believing the Kerry spin too much. 60 people in SBVT have signed affidavits. If you understand anything about the situation, you know that this was a very small unit, that when not on patrol everyone was together – the enlisted from all boats bunked together, same for the officers – all in the support base. So they all knew each other. They had “personal experience.”

Also, the boats went out on patrol in groups. They stayed within yards of each other, to provide mutual fire support. Don’t believe the Kerry spin (picked up eagerly by the press) that because they were not on the same boat, they didn’t know what happened with each other in a combat situation.

I was in the Navy (air) just before this time. In fact, I was at Cam Rahn 2 months before Kerry – it was an R&R place, not a combat situation (although there were bunkers and minefields and aircraft departing and returning on combat missions and outgoing artillery). When the VC actually dared to get near Cam Rahn in Tet ‘68, people went up on the top of the bunker to get a better view and take pictures of the incoming rockets and the fireworks where they hit. That’s how unserious a combat location it was. Our unit was like the swifties in the sense that we had a bunch of small vessels (P-3 aircraft) and we bunked together. Believe me, everyone knew everyone else, although since our missions were single plane, we couldn’t observe other crews in action the way the Swifties could.

The folks who spoke from Kerry’s crew at the convention had a total between them of 8 days on his boat. But in the field, there were officers, CO’s of other boats, who were operating with him almost his whole short tour. Furthermore, if one takes membership in his crew as a credential, Steve Gardner spent at least two months on Kerry’s crew as a gunner. Gardner is an SBVT member, and has more experience “with Kerry” than any other person. Listen to how the press acts as if such a person doesn’t exist.

If you are going to call a bunch of combat veterans liars, it is appropriate to do your homework. Come to our Sept 12 rally. We’ll have some swifties, including O’Neill, there… they can straighten you out.

You talk about people coming forward. The latest to come forward, a retired admiral, was on the boat with Kerry where he got his first purple heart, and provides additional evidence that the purple heart was invalid (it was granted 3 months later by an officer in Saigon who had no knowledge of the situation, after the doc and Kerry’s CO refused to grant it because it wasn’t justified – no enemy fire in the situation ). The Admiral is not a member of SBVT but was upset about all the BS.

Kerry’s “seared into my memory” Cambodian adventure, with it’s secret hat, has been utterly discredited.

Finally, it is not surprising that some discrepancies turned up. I expected it. Apparently on guys signed an affidavit to what he had heard instead of what he had witnessed.

Sep 1, 2004 - 12:40 pm 49. Roberts:

Amusingly John, notice how people like dn67 focus on the illusion that there are “discrepancies” among the Swift Boat Vets for Truth but completely ignore the “discrepancies” between John Kerry and … John Kerry. Its Kerry who has told multiple and contradictory stories of the same incident and Kerry who has told stories about Cambodia that even his campaign will no longer defend.

If dn67 were truly interested in “discrepancies”, he’d have long ago concluded that John Kerry is the liar.

Sep 1, 2004 - 1:06 pm 50. Manhattanite:

On O’Neil:

It says in the NYTimes article last week that he once called Bush “an empty suit” who wasn’t fit to be CiC, and so his motivations stem more from hating Kerry than anything else.

On Kerry being a traitor:

Is Abu Ghraib whistle blower Steven Darby a traitor?

Did My Lai really happen?

Kerry’s testimony never singled out an individual. It simply stated, based on accounts collected by the VVAW, that the war, as being fought, was dishonorable, that the goals of the war were questionable.

Let’s deal with provbable facts.

All I see is a bunch of combat veterans calling another bunch of combat veterans liars. Their motivations do not seem objective or constructive to people like me, or John McCain.

Sep 1, 2004 - 1:49 pm 51. thibaud:

cherchez La Hillary. Kerry’s meltdown will clear the party’s decks for her in 2008. This also allows her to avoid having to slog through the Iraq mess during the next four years.

As to Kerry’s slide, he could in fact turn it around very quickly if he came forth and said, very clearly and simply,

– I apologize to all the veterans whom I offended with my youthful, intemperate, and inaccurate remarks thirty-three years ago;

– I renounce my characterization of my comrades’ behavior as war crimes. They served honorably and it was wrong to say otherwise.

– I invite the President to focus on the challenges facing the nation today, above all, Iraq’s transition and the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea. I look forward to that debate. In order to advance it, I pledge I will not use our experiences during the Vietnam War to divide and distract our nation during this campaign, and I invite the President to do the same.

Isn’t this obviously the way to defuse the Swift controversy? What on earth are Kerry and his people thinking? Are they so self-absorbed, so preoccupied with their pals in the MSM that they can’t see what’s going on in the country? If so, then John O’Neill has done this country a tremendous service.

Sep 1, 2004 - 2:13 pm 52. Knucklehead:

Manhattanite,

It says in the NYTimes article last week that he once called Bush “an empty suit” who wasn’t fit to be CiC, and so his motivations stem more from hating Kerry than anything else.

Making the assumption that something printed in the NYT is accurate (that seems a stretch), please unravel for us how one goes about taking a negative comment about one candidate and using that as some evidence of the man’s motivations for speaking out against the other candidate? Clearly his feelings toward Kerry are far stronger than his feelings toward Bush. He’s actively trying to prevent Kerry from being elected.

But his feelings, even if they can be accurately described as hatred do not necessarily shed any particular light on the veracity of his charges. Get past the emotion and deal with the specifics.

Kerry’s testimony never singled out an individual.

Of course not. If he had singled out an individual, or even numerous people, he would have been making charges he would have had to produce evidence for. Since he had no evidence but still wished to make the charges he used the rhetorical device of extending his charges to “the system”, “the command structure”, the “troops”.

It simply stated, based on accounts collected by the VVAW, that the war, as being fought, was dishonorable, that the goals of the war were questionable.

I saw that John Moore responded to you at length above. Unless John has stepped out of character his response provided you with links that would, if you took the trouble to follow them, lead you to information that debunks a huge portion of the VVAW “evidence” and demonstrates that little, if any, of Kerry’s testimony allegedly collected from Vietnam Veterans has ever been verified.

The painful fact of the matter, Manhattanite, for anyone who wishes to support John Kerry is that John Kerry willfully, and with forethought and malice, constructed a lie accusing the US Military of systemic propogation of war crimes and painted all US troops who fought in Vietnam as war criminals. And that’s only the half of it. There is some serious question about whether or not the man aided and abetted the enemy, took payments and/or propaganda material from the enemy, participated or was present at meetings where the assasinations of US Senators were discussed and, as you put it, never named a single individual.

Kerry is not the whistle blower, he’s the criminal.

You picked the wrong horse, Bubba. Bummer.

Sep 1, 2004 - 2:20 pm 53. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

Knucklehead… sadly I don’t have references to prove that not every American was a baby killer. Somehow that just doesn’t seem like something we need to prove.

John Kerry betrayed every Vietnam Veteran. He climbed on our reputations to reach political power. In the process, he wasn’t picky about who he worked with. He met with the enemy at least twice (he was still a sworn officer, btw). He produce the enemy’s propaganda line over and over again. He threw in items the enemy wanted (we used weapons against Vietnamese that we would never use against Europeans) which were utter bunk.

The North Vietnamese had a strategy. After the press misreported Tet ‘68 badly, rather than their planned surrender, they decided that if they could break our will they could win. Thus they devoted lots of resources (with Soviet help) to improving and directing the anti-war movement. Kerry was happy to go along, having been briefed by them. He was a great catch – lots of medals (never your mind if they were all valid), and a willingness to trash America and trash our troops and veterans with lies.

I know some apologists are saying that he didn’t attack any individual, so somehow it must be okay. That’s crap. I know plenty of individuals who felt trapped, and they are madder than hell that this poseur should step forth and try for the highest office in the land, after what he did.

As for the whistleblower nonsense, forget it. Kerry wasn’t a whistleblower, he was a liar. He saw such a microscopic piece of the war for such a short period of time that he wasn’t qualified to comment on it.

I first found out about John Kerry when his disgusting Senate speech was played on Hugh Hewitt. Until then, I didn’t know anything about him other than he was a low-achieving Senator from New England. The more I found, the more disgusted I got. The man doesn’t deserve to hold public office. He doesn’t deserve to be an American citizen. We should boot his rice-filled butt back to France.

Sep 1, 2004 - 3:25 pm 54. PeterUK:

John Kerry seems to have disappearsed from the campaign is he morphing into Major Major Major Major–”Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three”

Heller via the Brothers Judd

Sep 1, 2004 - 4:39 pm 55. Knucklehead:

Sorry, John Moore. I had assumed it was you who provided the link to Winter Soldier. Poking around there will put one onto some of the material about Kerry and the investigation including the books that debunk much of the VVAW lies. Here’s another article which, no doubt, Manhattanite will reject out of hand since it is commentary at GOPUSA. And here is the Stolen Valor site. That is sufficient for starters.

Sep 1, 2004 - 5:21 pm 56. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

Knucklehead

I do often emit links to Winter Soldier. You can even find two articles on there by me. It is the best history of Kerry’s anti-war behavior. You can also get to the Swifties from there.

Sep 1, 2004 - 8:16 pm

Write a Comment

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