Not so swift

Not so swift

: I don’t give a hoot about the Swift thing but I will be curious to see today whether all the Swifties out there link to this.

  • PJF

    So, now you want to talk about it.
    Classic.

  • Mike

    that definitely doesn’t put Thurlow in a good spot. But funny how the Washington Post chose to investigate THurlow, but still haven’t printed a damn thing about Kerry’s ever-changing Christmas in Cambodia story.
    I know you don’t care about this Jeff, but the media’s resistance to talk about it seems like a story you would be all over.

  • http://rpv.blogspot.com Ripclawe

    This backfires on Kerry, the record makes Thurlow out to be like Rambo and he still insists that was not the case.

  • lupe

    I’m curious, if the Washington Post if filing Freedom of Information Acts on Thurlow, why haven’t the pressed Kerry to post on his website the Spot Reports for December 1968 and January 1969?

  • Brett

    Taking joy in a “gotcha” moment, Jeff?

  • Andy

    Five boats going up a river. Mine blows up under one. One boat scoots away. That leaves three boats sitting in water assisting the first boat. The second boat returns and picks up one person in the water (What boat did he fall from? Nobody remembers). Was there fire from the shore? The whole time?
    Kerry says there was fire when he returned to make the pick up. Three boats with 6 people each say there was none. WHO wrote up the report and recommendations?
    HOWCOME the investigation into “facts” was not applied to moveonup.org/Soros, ACT, MMoremoremore, etc?
    Guess it’s only important when its your ox being gored. No universal principals being upheld. No public necessity to know.

  • Kim

    I agree with you for the most part. I believe both Bush and Kerry served honorably. That’s something I won’t make lite of because to many of my family served through 3 different wars. Unfortunately Kerry’s story didn’t end there. He went on to embellish his story on the senate floor “seared” is a strong word. I think media bias has reared it’s ugly head for all to see. The MSM is not questioning Kerry for his testimony at all. It wouldn’t even take a filing under the freedom of information act to find the discrepancies in his testimony. Instead they go after another man who served honorably. Is the press actually going to demonize a Vietnam vet to save Kerry’s story? It’s disgusting no matter how you look at it.
    Both Kerry and Harkin have lied in the press after their service and the MSM is mum on it. I have to ask why?

  • Mike

    And Jeff, to answer the question you pose wondering if all the swifties will post to the article. So far Instapundit and Wizbang have posted entries and linked to the story. I expect others to follow suit.
    After reading the story again, I don’t think this does as much damage as you imply it will. All this does is show how the WaPo is more interested in protecting Kerry by keeping investigations into him off limits.

  • Matthew Cromer

    Jeff, your credibility is reaching Rainesian proportions.

  • steve

    “I will be curious to see today whether all the Swifties out there link to this.”
    Of course they will – it proves their point that big news media is actively pro-Kerry

  • flip

    Most of us are baffled about this fisking of WAR STORIES! Next, proof that the FISH he caught wasn’t really THAT big.
    Bicker on, boys.

  • http://youngcurmudgeon.typepad.com Eric Deamer
  • http://www.buzzmachine.com Jeff Jarvis

    Brett:
    I still don’t care about the Kerry military nonstory just as I don’t care about the Bush military nonstory. As the head of the VFW (I believe it was) said on NPR this morning: Kerry served and was discharged honorably. End of story. Bush served and was discharged honorably. End of story.
    What amuses me about this is that those who live by the gotcha die by the gotcha.

  • Mike

    Jeff, would you acknowledge the difference in the reporting of the two, as you call them, non-stories? Surely you agree the MSM attacked the Bush AWOL story with full force while they have barely touched (if at all) the Kerry Cambodia story.

  • http://tvh.rjwest.com HH

    And now we have the Media Matters brigade of bloggers living by this front page WaPo gotcha. No hope of course that the mainstream press will report on the front page how Kerry’s own diary contradicts his account of how he won the Purple Heart, and certainly no hope of those “living by the gotcha” today linking to that. Same with Tom Harkin lying about his Vietnam record, and of course same with Christmas in Cambodia. It cuts both ways. Far too many bloggers profess “no interest” in a story then gleefully link to any hit piece on the Swifties they can find, ignoring the complexity of the issues, the various charges, context, etc. With a story like this, it’s all or nothing. If there is truly “no interest” then you won’t run a story that “helps” either “side.”

  • http://tvh.rjwest.com HH

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/041874.php – Some of the “Swifties” have linked and successfully refuted said story.

  • http://tvh.rjwest.com HH

    And of course we have the Spinsanities, not the Swifties, “living by the gotcha” that Kerry and surrogates exaggerated Kerry’s bravery… Needless to say, no hope of those who linked gleefully to the WaPo today linking to that, nor did they at the time.
    http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2004_08_01_archive.html#109167970892274992

  • Brett

    What amuses me about this is that those who live by the gotcha die by the gotcha.
    Then why wasn’t that your point?
    Your emphasis was whether those discussing the Kerry-Vietnam story would link to a story that backs Kerry’s version. You insinuated that they might not have the integrity to hang it all out there, pro and con.
    Well said – that’s exactly the point. Except that you expect one standard for honesty among bloggers but don’t have that sanme expectation of Big Media.
    Glenn has it right: Big Media will highlight the discrediting of the Kerry critics, but spend little or no time highlighting/researching their assertions. And if they do, it’s talking points and back pages.
    If this is such a non-story, to be consistent, Big Media should show nothing of any angle to this “non-story.”
    You’re a Big Media guy in Big Media circles who’s trying to get Big Media to embrace the rest of us. We’re telling you – abundantly – that we’ll have nothing to do with Big Media until they show that they’ll embrace the whole story, regardless of their bias. Just as you’re expecting bloggers and readers/commenters of blogs to do.
    If they want their revenue back, then they need to stop being afraid of the whole story. Otherwise, your advice to them to converse with us is moot and they will ridicule you for trying to get them involved with us “amateurs” and “wannabes.”

  • http://leatherpenguin.com/MT TC-LeatherPenguin

    I’m with Brett. If they can wheel out the FOIA to get this guy’s records, why are they not doing the same for Kerry’s records?

  • Catherine

    I agree with Brett, et al about the fact that they do all of this research to discredit the swifties, yet do nothing of the sort for Kerry and as we see, most of his quotes are easily obtained in print or in the congressional records. They did the opposite with Bush who did NOT run on his service record like Kerry is.
    That media bias is part of the story Jeff. Being someone who has an eye on “big media,” you would think that would matter to you.

  • http://tvh.rjwest.com HH

    It’s simply stunning. The man running for the highest office in the land here is Kerry and their first thought is to demand the Swifties’ records, not his. He says he released all the records, which is false, and they swallow it.

  • http://tvh.rjwest.com HH

    It’s simply stunning. The man running for the highest office in the land here is Kerry and their first thought is to demand the Swifties’ records, not his. He says he released all the records, which is false, and they swallow it.

  • Michael

    To the Swifty supporters:
    “The Bush campaign has never and will never question John Kerry’s service in Vietnam. The president has referred to John Kerry’s service as noble service,” Bush spokesman Steven Schmidt said.
    http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/381249|top|08-19-2004::12:05|reuters.html
    The Swifty supporters are justifiably upset that Kerry volunteered, served and was decorated (Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat “V”, and 3 PHs) and GWB, and his spineless neocons (Cheney, Rove, Wolfowitz, Libby, Fieth, et al), ducked service to their country in a time of war. They look like cowards and deserters, who forced other real men who were less fortunate to serve in their place, which is despicable. Meanwhile, Kerry is a real is a war hero.
    Of course, that drives them nuts. I drives me nuts that a bunch of elitist cowards (i.e., chickenhawks) in the White House talk tough now, but when it was their turn to step up to the plate and protect the country, they were hiding behind the couch. They should hide their faces in shame.

  • http://tvh.rjwest.com HH

    Is there a snowball’s chance in Hollywood that the David Brock/George Soros contingent of the blogosphere will link to this?
    http://www.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3156
    The Kerry camp changes their story again. Move on, nothing to see here…

  • http://tvh.rjwest.com HH

    I’ll take “elitist cowards” over a pack of elitist liars… oh and a pretty boy running for Veep who is every bit the “coward” that Cheney is if you listen to ‘Nam liar Harkin.
    Of course there is something very disgusting about this “coward” business directed at a man who served and was honorably discharged from the National Guard… such as Clinton mentioning his draft dodging and Bush’s service in the same breath.
    And last I checked, record after record came out and somehow it didn’t matter to the likes of Kevin Drum. Now some records come out, whose account’s origin is unknown, while Kerry – the man running for president, remember? – still keeps his full military record under wraps and it’s game over, the Swifties lied. On the other hand, the search to prove that “Bush was AWOL/deserting!” goes on and feel free to call him a “coward” all you want.

  • Michael

    HH:
    “DAVID BROCK”????? Are you crazy? Brock is a major neocon, was an editor at The Weekly Standard (that’s the neocon bible) and is currently the NYT token neocon.
    You just mad at him because he came out a couple of months ago and said in retrospect that Iraq was a mistake (as did, among others, 25 year senior Republican Doug Bereuter of Nebraska yesterday). But, Brock still supports the coward Bush.
    You guys always turn on your own.

  • Michael

    HH:
    You speak of Bush’s military service as if he were a war hero (with the Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat “V” and Purple Hearts). He’s not (and doesn’t).
    If he were really a hero, which he is not, he would have volunteered for combat duty, like John Kerry did.
    But, he didn’t. He stayed safely stateside and worked the political campaigns of family friends. How brave, how patriotic.
    Fact is he a coward, then and now.

  • http://oliverwillis.com Oliver

    Shorter Henry Hanks: “WAAAAH! I got took again! WAAAH!” And Brooks is the right-wing nutjob in the NYT. Brock is the president of Media Matters for America.

  • old maltese

    Michael. That’s David Brooks, not David Brock.
    Good grief.

  • Smaack

    Wow – that’s some kind of deep investigative reporting. I though WaPo had forgotten how to do that sort of thing – how else to explain their failure to seek KERRY’S records though an FOI request.
    I mean, that CAN’T be cause WaPa is FOR Kerry, can it?

  • Bruce

    Would *love* to strap this Michael moron into an F-102A Delta Dagger moving at Mach 1.2 and let him explain how “cowardly” it is. Geez, what a drooler.

  • Michael

    old maltese:
    Brock, Brooks. Got it. My apologies to HH. I retract my statement. I should look closer before I leap. I’ll be more careful. Thank you.

  • shark

    Jeff, will you link to this:
    http://www.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3156
    Didn’t think so.
    Still, it’s sure nice to see the media remembering their investigative skills. Of course, they’ll forget them next time Kerry is challenged on something.
    9-1 ratio of Bush AWOL stories to Kerry-Swiftvet stories.
    But not to worry boys. Between the ad and the book, independents are being swayed (so says recent polling)
    heh heh

  • steel

    Bruce:
    Been there, done that. But, it’s better in combat.
    There was a shortage of pilots in Nam. Where was Bush when we needed him.

  • Michael

    Bruce:
    Even if you could prove I was a coward (as you imply), that still doesn’t mean Bush’s isn’t. Does it?

  • Michael

    shark:
    I got a feeling after today’s frontal attack by Kerry, that will change — if it was ever true.
    Besides, Bush conceded the point today on Kerry’s “noble” service (see above). The president wouldn’t lie, would he?
    You fanatics are getting hammer today (and yesterday).

  • Mike

    So Bush stays above the fray, how is that getting hammered. Bush can’t get into this argument, because the truth is that he didn’t serve in Vietnam at all. But Bush didn’t make it the central theme of his campaign.
    The only one getting hammered is Kerry. After a couple weeks of having his campaign aides looking like fish out of water trying to explain away this story, Kerry himself has to come out and mention it. And after reading Larry Thurlow’s response to the WaPo article, I don’t think the swiftvets are going to go away anytime soon. Kerry brought this on himself with his stupid salute and antics at the convention and having his “band of brothers” travel around the country with him. This is going to be a thorn in the side of Kerry.

  • brett (#2)

    Jeff, obviously you do give a hoot. You wouldn’t selectively link if you don’t. And I would think that you, who regularly and rightly hammers Big Media for its omissions, would want to comment on the fact that the first, and only, FOIA requests filed by the WP concern the military records of one of the Swift Vets, and not those of Kerry. 30+ mentions of the Bush AWOL story in the WP, 40+ in the NYT, and not a single story fairly depicting the Swift Vets’ allegations.
    This story (not the vets, but the media) is right in your wheelhouse.

  • Michael

    Mike:
    Bush said Kerry VN service was “noble.”
    Did Bush lie or not when he said that?
    Did he attempt to mislead the American public or not when he said that?
    Was he wrong about the facts or not when hwe said that?
    (I feel kile Sean Hannity)

  • Kim

    Michael the only fanatic I see here is you. Both men served. Both men received honorable discharges. End of story. I’m glad Bush said Kerri’s service was noble. Lying on the Senate floor is an entirely different matter. It has nothing to do with his service, which I maintain was honorable.
    “I came back to find Americans who were unwilling to welcome us home, who spat on veterans when they came home. I didn’t start that,” he said. “All I did was to tell the truth about some of the things that happened over there.”- Kerry
    As an anti-war leader, he asserted in testimony to Congress that U.S. soldiers had “raped, cut off ears, cut off heads … randomly shot at civilians … poisoned food stocks” and committed other atrocities he later acknowledged he did not witness.
    Oh, and Cambodia is seared in his mind.
    A fair question is what else did he lie about? Bush is right Kerry’s service was noble. What he said and did when he came back is quite another story.

  • http://www.transterrestrial.com Rand Simberg

    “I still don’t care about the Kerry military nonstory just as I don’t care about the Bush military nonstory.”
    Jeff, why do you never respond to the obvious (at least to many of us) point that Kerry has chosen to make his Vietnam service the cornerstone of his campaign, while Bush has never made a big deal of his National Guard service. That’s why Kerry’s service is a story, and Bush’s is a non-story, yet the press plays it exactly the opposite.
    Kerry can’t have it both ways. If he wants to make a big deal of his service (which was the focus of the convention), then he should expect to have that record examined and, if valid, validated or not.

  • Michael

    Kim:
    >”Both men served. Both men received honorable discharges.”
    You can’t win wars with one man service, you can with the others. Why don’t you just concede the point: Kerry is a war hero. Bush is a coward. End of story. Move on.

  • Michael

    Kim:
    >”..raped, cut off ears, cut off heads … randomly shot at civilians … poisoned food stocks”
    Are you saying that didn’t happen in VN?

  • rivlax

    This is the worst kind of journalism. Even a brand-new city editor should have thrown this back at the reporter. Classic example of using bad info to create a bad story. Thurlow for years has maintained there was no enemy fire and that his citation was worded by none other than John Kerry. And yet the WaPo uses those “military records” to prove that Kerry’s version is accurate. Just incredible. And you fell for it.

  • Blue sky

    Four months and a bandaid cut and Kerry’s a REAL WAR HERO? In an alternate universe maybe where criminals are saints worshipped by the dregs.
    Kerry falsified his own heroism into his records, returned to Vietnam to make a film of his fabricated heroism, then made his way back to America where he degraded and demoralized the real Vietnam Veteran heros who actually served and completed their full tour of duty.
    This story is all about Kerry and the Swift Vets and attempting to inject a third party who was, as so many have endlessly pointed out adnauseam was not even in Vietnam, is a senseless attempt of deflecting from the real issue.
    How gallant Kerry must feel to be the Michael Moore of Vietnam. The alternate universe’s candidate.
    Soon, we are going to hear Kerry’s story that the someone gave him tanning pills in order to blend in with his communist commrade so that no one would ever question his Christmas in Cambodia lie he had seared in his memory yet, all of the sudden, after thirty years, he alters his seared memory into being NEAR Cambodia.
    Unless Kerry realeased all his military records and journals then he can only be recognized as a pathological liar.
    Michael: All of the sudden Bush’s words appear to have some true for you? How convenient.

  • Kim

    Michael
    “Kerry is a war hero. Bush is a coward”.
    That’s your opinion not fact. I’ll repeat, both men served both men received honorable discharges. Show me where the facts are to support your opinion.
    “Are you saying that didn’t happen in VN”?
    Are you saying Kerry witnessed it? Because he isn’t.
    Stick to the facts.

  • http://libertyandreason.blogspot.com JMD

    Thurlow has apparently responded that he filed no such after-action report.
    “I submitted no paperwork for a medal nor did I file an after action report describing the incident. To my knowledge, John Kerry was the only officer who filed a report describing his version of the incidents that occurred on the river that day.” (from the Swiftvets website).
    In short, he’s asserting that this is a fabricated document. (He’s not asserting that it has been altered or amended, but that he never submitted one at all.)
    Quite possibly Thurlow is full of crap. However, if he’s not, shouldn’t this prompt a full investigation of the incident and the falsification of military reports?
    By taking this stand, hasn’t Thurlow turned the Washington Post coup into an even worse situation for the Kerry campaign? I’m assuming they don’t want a nit-picky investigation of the events of that day going on for the next few months.
    Looks like WaPo is working for Karl Rove again.

  • http://www.infidelapparel.com ronnie schreiber

    Been there, done that. But, it’s better in combat.
    There was a shortage of pilots in Nam. Where was Bush when we needed him.
    Actually, at the time that GWB enlisted in the TANG, F-102 pilots in that particular unit were regularly being rotated to Vietnam, since that plane was used for missions during the war. In fact, Bush and a fellow pilot tried to get assigned to that program, but they were turned down because their training wasn’t finished. By the time Bush’s training was complete in 1972, not only were F-102s being phased out of the Vietnam theatre, but the US was reducing its manpower in country and in general we had a surplus of pilots. Combat billets were going to the most experienced pilots, not ANG guys.
    Kerry specifically requested swift boat duty because he wanted to avoid combat. At the time he put in for the swift boats, they were doing relatively safe coastal patrol. Kerry knew it and cited the lack of action as a reason for wanting that billet. It was only after he joined the unit that it was assigned more hazardous duty. It’s my belief that he went to the swift boats because wanted a “combat” posting for his resume that would help in his anticipated political career.

  • shark

    Yeah Michael, that sure was some “hammering”
    Kerry is whining about SwiftVets. All someone has to do is point out MoveOn, the Media Fund etc etc and Kerry has fallen into the trap again.
    PS- Kerry didn’t give a refutation of the charges. Just another smear. People tend to notice these things. Especially in the swing states.
    Hehe. This is great…live by Vietnam, die by Vietnam.

  • Michael

    Kim:
    >””Are you saying that didn’t happen in VN”?
    Are you saying Kerry witnessed it? Because he isn’t.”
    I have little knowledge about the facts of this controvesy. I just know about the controvesy itself. So I’m not saying John Kerry “witnessed anything.”
    But, can you simply answer the question: Are you saying that the thing cited in your post did not happen in VN? Yes or No.

  • Michael

    shark:
    McCain calls it “dishonest and dishonorable.” Bush calls Kerry’s service “noble.” Who am I to believe? These honorable Republicans or you neofascist chickenhawk fanatics?

  • Kim

    Michael,
    “As an anti-war leader, he asserted in testimony to Congress that U.S. soldiers had “raped, cut off ears, cut off heads … randomly shot at civilians … poisoned food stocks” and committed other atrocities he later acknowledged he did not witness”.
    As I ascertained Kerry did not witness these atrocities and yet he testified to that he had. In other words he lied. That is the only issue at hand. I have family that served in Vietnam. What division did/do you serve in?
    You are silent on Cambodia. Why?

  • http://www.mpturner.net/ Scaramonga

    Well, well, well. Finally Jeff finds a ‘reason’ to mention the elephant in the room. The swifties are hurting Kerry big-time and the lefties know it. Just look at their panicked behavior. Most nuanced of all are people like Jeff who profess “I don’t care about it – it is unimportant.” The very first charge out of the blocks from the swifties – the Christmas in Cambodia lies had to sting like Hell. Looks important to me. Many I know are now saying, “If he lied about that, what else did he lie about?” That’s got to hurt.
    Making Kerry actually mention them while he’s trying to campaign shows how much they are damaging him. If you want to know if something is hurting a candidate, look at what they do in response. If you get a big-time reaction, the charge, accusation, or whatever is hurting them – and I don’t mean personally. Their pollsters are advising them daily and they can see the numbers falling and they know why.
    I predicted when I first heard of the SVFT that Kerry was gonna get pounded by them and now it is happening. Kerry could dispense with this whole issue by providing proof that the Swifties are not telling the truth. But all he has managed to do is call them names, blame Bush, attack their integrities (huh. Kerry attacking vets again?), and threatening lawsuits for radio and TV stations that dare to sell time to the Swifties. None of it has worked. The Swifties are hurting them and good. It is about time this fraud from Boston is exposed.

  • http://www.buzzmachine.com Jeff Jarvis

    You’re not getting it.
    AS A VOTER, I don’t care about the Swifties. I don’t think it’s a story.
    AS A VOTER, I don’t care about the Bush military hookie. I don’t think it’s a story.
    Not relevant to my decision AS A VOTER. Waste of time. Waste of breath. Worse, it makes me think ill of those who try to convince me and other VOTERS — not media people, VOTERS — to vote for their man and against the other by slinging bile. Turns me off AS A VOTER. I hate the politics of gotchaism. No way to run a campaign. No way to run a nation. No way to improve the democracy and the country and the world. Cheap shit politics. I’m sick of cheap shit politics.
    Only I can say what matters to me AS A VOTER and this doesn’t. You can screech all you want and all you do is turn me off more and more.
    And I know I am not alone.

  • Michael

    Kim:
    I silent on Cambodia because (you may not undersatnd this) I lack sufficent information to form an opinion, therefore say little about it. I told you, I know more about the controversy itself than I do about the underlying facts.
    I take it fromn your response that you will neither confirm nor deny that “raped, cut off ears, cut off heads … randomly shot at civilians … poisoned food stocks” actually happened or not?

  • brett (#2)

    OK, as a voter, it’s not important. But, frankly, most people don’t come here for advice on how to vote. We come here for media criticism. So how does the Swiftvets saga strike you AS A MEDIA CRITIC?

  • http://www.elflife.com/ carsonfire

    JJ, as a voter, I’m not particularly interested in Michael Moore, either… and to be fair, I know that you have let him have a fair share of criticism. Yet the fact remains that Moore and other stars get to hammer away from the left for months on end, and yet somehow we now get to watch a show starring the media, where they are suddenly angered and aghast that a group of old vets are allowed to buy air time and express their opinion. We watch in amazement as they are told to shut up by the Democratic candidate, flanked on every side by Moore, Ted Rall, Aaron McGruder, Al Franken, et al. Again, after months and months of Moore (and probably months and months to come, as the DVD is set to release right before the election. Talk about political ads!).
    I’m with you up to a point… I’m really not that concerned about the claims and counter-claims between Kerry and the Swifties — but the institutional bias by entrenched liberal media and the breathtaking double standards of the Democrats on display here is nothing short of stunning, and that is indeed turning out to be the real story, here.

  • http://tvh.rjwest.com HH

    Again, Oliver can’t deal with facts on these issues, and neither can Brock and neither can Carville and neither can Chris Matthews and on and on. It’s all ad hominem attacks, trying to turn the word “Texas Republican” into a codeword from “Scaife,” all the while most of these people are with Soros.
    A full front page article dealing with ALL of the charges, Cambodia, the Purple Heart, the Bronze Star, you name it, would show a mainstream press concerned with objectivity and facts. Cherry-picking issue by issue, putting some on the front and burying others based on how the story is painted to make Kerry look good is called BIAS, period. And try as they might the Brock/Soros contingent can’t find anything remotely like that, but they’re damn good at hurling insults, like “Republican” and “Freeper.” Next, try “Dittohead.”

  • Matthew Cromer

    This is Kerry’s old *PALS* letting the rest of us know what kind of dirtbag he really is. I think it’s quite relevant that he makes up lies about his past to make political points, as recently as a couple years ago.

  • http://opinionpaper.blogspot.com Brett

    Jeff,
    Do you realize that there are two elections happening at this time?
    In one, we’re electing a president. That’s on November 2.
    In the other, which is ongoing, we’re searching for trusted media sources.
    I’ve posted more on my site (link below).

  • Mike G. in San Diego

    You’re not getting it.
    AS A VOTER, I don’t care about the Swifties. I don’t think it’s a story.
    AS A VOTER, I don’t care about the Bush military hookie. I don’t think it’s a story.
    Not relevant to my decision AS A VOTER. Waste of time. Waste of breath. Worse, it makes me think ill of those who try to convince me and other VOTERS — not media people, VOTERS — to vote for their man and against the other by slinging bile. Turns me off AS A VOTER. I hate the politics of gotchaism. No way to run a campaign. No way to run a nation. No way to improve the democracy and the country and the world. Cheap shit politics. I’m sick of cheap shit politics.
    Only I can say what matters to me AS A VOTER and this doesn’t. You can screech all you want and all you do is turn me off more and more.
    And I know I am not alone.

    But as a voter, I do care, because the truth matters.
    John Kerry seems to have lied on numerous occasions, once on the floor of the Senate, about being ordered on missions into Cambodia, which supposedly informed his sense of moral authority in his public policy positions — ostentiously condemning the Viet Nam war and the later efforts to arm the Nicaraguan Contras.
    Would you be so indifferent to determining the the truth of the matter if John Kerry instead had claimed to have witnessed the massacre of thousands in Jenin, and thereby wanted America’s foreign policy to punish Israel? Or if he had claimed to have a list of 205 card-carrying communists in the State Department, and thus advocated abridging a few civil liberties here and there to flush out traitors? Or if he claimed first-hand knowledge of 4000 Jews who were warned by Mossad agents not to report to their jobs one bright September morning?
    Jeff, I don’t understand. If basing public policy on truth instead of bombast doesn’t matter to you, what does?

  • Mike G. in San Diego

    “ostentatiously” …
    Preview is my friend …

  • Matthew Cromer

    Mike G, I checked out your blog. Great stuff, so far!

  • Mike G.

    Mike G, I checked out your blog. Great stuff, so far!
    Sorry, can’t claim credit for it — that’s a different Mike G. I’ve seen several Mike Gs posting here and on similar blogs; I thought the San Diego would differentiate me. Guess not …

  • Ptolemy

    “I hate the politics of gotchaism. No way to run a campaign. No way to run a nation. No way to improve the democracy and the country and the world. Cheap shit politics. I’m sick of cheap shit politics.”
    Jeff, Terry McAwful called his President a traitor and going AWOL without definite proof to back it up. He then walked away completely unmolested by the press. It’s a little late to complain about the tone of the campaign. Its done. This is it till November.

  • h0mi

    They look like cowards and deserters

    Who looks like a deserter?

  • Reid

    Mr. Kerry: RELEASE YOUR MEDICAL RECORDS!

  • Kim

    Michael,
    You started off calling Bush a coward and asked me to concede the point. I asked for facts to support your opinion. You haven’t given me any as of yet.
    “Are you saying that didn’t happen in VN”? Is this your way of changing the subject? Kerry testified he witnessed atrocities under oath and later said he didn’t witness the atrocities he testified about.
    You say you lack sufficient information to form an opinion on Cambodia. OK.
    “I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia,” Kerry said “I remember what it was like to be shot at by the Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians and have the president of the United States telling the American people that I was not there, the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared — seared — in me.” Problem is Kerry was not in Cambodia on Christmas of 1968. Kerry now says it is a “mistaken recollection”.
    So, Michael, why is Bush a coward?

  • http://N/A Moonrunner57

    Everyone who was of draft age during the Vietnam Era knows why and how Shrubya was in the ANG at that time. I don’t know what John Kerry’s motivation was to stick his ass on the line in Vietnam and get bullets fired at it. But he did!
    One thing that seems to be overlooked here is that Kerry went through an intense investigation of his military service at the time when he was testifying to congress as a young veteran about his war experiences.
    Kerry has weathered this storm before and he will do it again. If Kerry only had one Purple Heart and a Silver Star, it is far above and beyond anything that can be said about Bush’s military service.
    It is time for the USA to have a president who knows and cares about how horrible it is to be at war.
    And another thing. Why is it at this time of “great concern” for homeland security that we are sending the very troops who are meant to guard the nation (National Guard) to Iraq. We are depleting homeland security and no one seems to notice or give a shit. If we are going to be attacked here in the homeland as we are constantly being told, I want some troops here to defend us. Think about that the next time there is an Orange Alert. Or would you rather rely on your neighbors to defend you, your kids and your country?
    BTW has anyone noticed that we have a Department of DEFENSE and not a Department of Pre-emptive Offense? Wonder why? Does anyone know that the Department of State exists to prevent wars and misunderstanding which might lead to war? It’s not a Department of Explaining Why We Are At War.

  • Reid

    Bush flew deadly hazardous F-102s in the ANG. Not only did members of his unit serve in Vietnam under the “Palace Alert” program but, Bush and another pilot named Fred Bradley volunteered for duty, only to be turned down because of too few flying hours. Read all about it here.
    Excerpt:

    …we have established that the F-102 was serving in combat in Vietnam at the time Bush enlisted to become an F-102 pilot. In fact, Air National Guard pilots from the 147th FIG were routinely rotated to Vietnam for combat duty under a volunteer program called “Palace Alert” from 1968 to 1970. Palace Alert was an Air Force program that sent qualified F-102 pilots from the ANG to bases in Europe or southeast Asia for three to six months of frontline duty. This program was instituted because the Air Force lacked sufficient pilots of its own for duty in Vietnam but was unable to activate ANG units since Presidents Johnson and Nixon had decided not to do so for political reasons. Thanks to Palace Alert, the Air Force was able to transfer much-needed National Guard pilots to Vietnam on a voluntary basis while not activating their squadrons.
    Fred Bradley, a friend of Bush’s who was also serving in the Texas ANG, reported that he and Bush inquired about participating in the Palace Alert program. However, the two were told by a superior, MAJ Maurice Udell, that they were not yet qualified since they were still in training and did not have the 500 hours of flight experience required. Furthermore, ANG veteran COL William Campenni, who was a fellow pilot in the 111th FIS at the time, told the Washington Times that Palace Alert was winding down and not accepting new applicants.

    You better believe we’d know all this if it had been John Kerry or Tom Harkin doing it.

  • Reid

    As a matter of fact, Moonie, it was the War Department until 1947. DoD is just the PC moniker.
    And, if our military is short staffed, thank Clinton & crew who decimated its ranks over the course of the last decade.

  • http://N/A Moonrunner72

    Oh Yeah? It wasn’t “one nation under God” until 1953. I’m willing to accept God. Why aren’t you willing to accept that peace is better than (pre-emptive) war? You know, life versus death. It’s basic. But if you want the country to return to 1947, God help us all.

  • Ptolemy

    We could have taken Saddam with Bush 1 but the world didn’t except that so he didn’t push it. We could have made the sanctions truly work against Saddam instead of personally adding to his fortune while his people starved. Instead, we played it the way the world wanted it and ended up with a much larger conflict that would not have been necessary. We’ve tried being nice and we got 9/11. We are not being so nice now and will see if it works to our advantage. Being nice in this world is just being a doormat to bigot socialists and islamic homicides moonrunner.

  • Mike

    This NYTimes piece is just another example of the horribly partisan main stream media. It is short on follow-up but long-winded with conjecture. It makes you think that the reporters are part of the Kerry election campaign.
    Jeff, you can say all you want about these Vietnam era stories not effecting your vote, although I would say it does effect many others vote. But the media’s partisan coverage of Kerry has to be talked about. Their spin of this story is crafted to make Kerry look good and the swiftvets to look like they are part of a vast right wing conspiracy (gee, where have we heard that before?). I would say the MSM is trying to sway the votes of their readers and that is digusting.

  • Michael

    Kim:
    I don’t know what Kerry’s conduct in VM has to do with Bush being a coward.
    I said Bush is a coward because when our country was at war against the great Red Threat and needed fighters in VN, George Bush did not volunteer for combat duty in VN. Instead, he chose to work on family friends

  • Reid

    “George Bush did not volunteer for combat duty in VN”
    Yes, he did. See my post above citing Fred Bradley.

  • Michael

    Reid:
    I saw it. It’s BS — nobody believes it, because it didn’t happen. You can bet that if it were true, Rove and the Bush political machine would trumpet it from the highest mountain. They haven’t. Why? Cause it didn’t happen, that’s why.
    Are you telling me that if George Bush, with his connections, wanted to get into a combat roll in VN, he couldn’t have done it? I seriously doubt that. He could have called his Dad. Or, he could have joined the Marines or Army, or Navy (and commanded a Swift boat). He could have trained on other aircraft.
    Apparently, GWB had no passion for going to war in VN to support his country when it was fighting the spread of communism and the annihilation of our country and way of life. He let other people fight for our freedom instead.
    Not brave, not patriotic, not heroic.

  • h0mi

    So supporting a war and not joining the military makes you a coward?
    I guess next, if you oppose crime but don’t become a police officer, you’re a coward too.

  • h0mi

    It is time for the USA to have a president who knows and cares about how horrible it is to be at war.

    Yeah, nevermind that this president voted against the Iraq war that you’d possibly agree was justified and voted for the Iraq war you feel is unjustified.
    You did vote for (or support) Dole and Bush in the 96/92 elections respectively, right?

  • http://tvh.rjwest.com HH

    “I said Bush is a coward because when our country was at war against the great Red Threat and needed fighters in VN, George Bush did not volunteer for combat duty in VN.”
    And neither did John Edwards… so will you now call on Kerry to dump him?

  • Ptolemy

    Michael, why don’t you go to Iraq and talk to the insurgents/terrorists killing our soldiers and many more Iraqi citizens? Why not put your money where your mouth is? Why should the anti-war crowd sit on their asses and bitch while demanding the other side to risk life and limb? Become a human shield. You supported Afghanistan I believe. Did you sign up to fight that war? How was it? Show us the true conviction of your beliefs. Make a willing sacrifice.

  • Michael

    HH:
    No, anymore than I’m calling Bush to resign because of his non-combat action. But, Bush could be a stand up guy and resign on the ground of misleading our country into an unnecessary and illegal war. That would be appreciated — and brave.

  • Kim

    “I don’t know what Kerry’s conduct in VM has to do with Bush being a coward”.
    “Kerry is a war hero. Bush is a coward. End of story. Move on”. Your being ridiculous.
    “I said Bush is a coward because….” Aside from Reid’s reference -
    “Maurice Udell, one of Bush’s flight instructors at Ellington Air Force Base in Texas, remembers Bush as a standout student. “I’d rank him in the top 5 percent,” says Udell, now 73 and retired. He rejects the notion that Bush got preferential treatment or that there was anything improper about his time in Alabama or in going to Harvard before his six-year guard commitment had ended.
    “I was really a tough instructor but I was fair with him,” Udell said, remembering Bush for his excellent memory and standout sense of humor. “I’d give him hell about something and he’d pop a joke and get you laughing and just break up the whole situation.”
    Udell says Bush asked about a program under which National Guard pilots were assigned to Vietnam, but Udell told him he wasn’t eligible because he was certified on the F-102, which the military was phasing out”.
    You now have two examples of Bush asking to be assigned to Vietnam yet you maintain Bush was a coward and can’t back up your opinion. You are on dangerous ground. In calling Bush a coward you are also calling every man who served in the National Guard the trained before and after him on the F-102 a coward. Some of those men died in training Michael.
    I wasn’t quite old enough to serve in Vietnam and I’m much to old to serve in Iraq. Does that make me a coward? Did John Edwards serve? Will you call him a coward?
    The issue at hand is not whether atrocities happened in Vietnam. The issue is Kerry testified he had witnessed said atrocities and later said he did not. You have no explanation for this and don’t want to deal with it instead you want to spin it off on a tangent.
    Your right, you lack sufficient information to maintain your opinion.

  • Reid

    Yep, Kim, Michael is way off base.
    Incidentally, the nickname of the F-102 Delta Dagger was “Widowmaker”. Some coward.

  • Michael

    ptolemy:
    >”the insurgents/terrorists killing our soldiers”
    There’s one very quick and easy way to stop the “the insurgents/terrorists killing our soldiers”: We can just leave right now. No more dead Americans.

  • Ptolemy

    That won’t happen Michael and wasn’t worth your time writing it. Far more Iraqis are being murdered these days. Do you care so little for their attempts to make a better nation now? Why aren’t you as furious with the terrorists in Iraq killing innocents as you are with Americans being idiots and rednecks? Have you ever stopped and actually thought about those murderers? Why the indifference. The US leaving isn’t an option but you have no interest in suggesting another process? If not, why do you even think about Iraq at all? You’ve called us stupid on every thread. Aren’t you bored with it?

  • Michael

    ptolemy:
    You lamented our soldiers being killed. I gave you the solution to save our soldiers. You don’t like it, so I guess dead U.S. soldiers are not what’s bothering you. You must have another agenda.
    As for innocent Iraqis, we killed more innocent civilians (30,000+) in Iraq than (what you call) the “terrorists.” Those “terrorists” BTW are not terrorists at all, they’re Iraqis fighting the throw off American occupation.
    Saddam is gone, there are no WMDs, why don’t we leave and end all the killing?

  • Sortelli

    Those “terrorists” BTW are not terrorists at all, they’re Iraqis fighting the throw off American occupation.
    Yeah, that’s why they keep blowing up Iraqi civillains! Clever devils!

  • Kim

    Widowmaker sounds like the perfect nickname for the F-102.
    I can see Michael is only interested in vitriolic comments that when replied to with facts are countered with more vitriol. It’s a shame because it’s about to get much worse for Kerry. Instead of attacking his military record, which I don’t condone, the Swiftvets will go after what he said and did after he came back. Kerry managed to reach back to one of the most divisive events in our country and run his campaign on it. So much for unifying America.

  • Michael

    Sortelli:
    Why is it when Iraqis kill Iraqis, they’re terrorist. When the U.S. kills Iraqis, well…we’re heroes and the Iraqis are collateral damage?
    What would have to happen in your mind for those Iraqis like al Sadr to not be terrorists but the Iraqi occupation resistance in your mind?
    Didn’t the French kill Vichy Frenchman during WWII?

  • Michael

    Kim:
    VN is not longer divisive. Everybody agrees that is was a war based on lies that should have never been fought.

  • Sortelli

    What would have to happen in your mind for those Iraqis like al Sadr to not be terrorists but the Iraqi occupation resistance in your mind?
    Didn’t the French kill Vichy Frenchman during WWII?
    Ha ha ha! You never cease to amaze.

  • Ptolemy

    As I’ve said before. Michael knows the real enemy and it is never the terrorists.

  • Reid

    ‘As for innocent Iraqis, we killed more innocent civilians (30,000+) in Iraq than (what you call) the “terrorists.” ‘
    Say what?!! It’s amazing how these phantom deaths inflate over time. They started at 3000 immediately after the cessation of hostilities. All right, Michael, give us a good laugh. Who’s your source for this ridiculous number?
    ‘VN is not longer divisive. Everybody agrees that is was a war based on lies that should have never been fought.’
    Not a chance, Michael. It’s just been buried because we have other present day concerns. I guarantee you, though that, were the issue front and center again, you’d have the same split you had back then.
    The war was fought incompetently by a Democratic President (LBJ). Had he prosecuted the war as it should have been from the get-go, before war weariness had demoralized the populace and drained support, it would have been won and over within a few years, millions of SE Asians who were killed by the communists in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia would still be alive, the Cold War would probably have ended earlier and, we never would have had the severe divisions that have wracked our society for the last 30+ years.

  • h0mi

    There’s one very quick and easy way to stop the “the insurgents/terrorists killing our soldiers”: We can just leave right now. No more dead Americans.

    You forgot to add “in Iraq” to “No more dead Americans.”
    And that assumes that no soldiers or pilots would’ve been killed over the continued enforcement over past 2 years of the “no fly zone”.
    But I wonder what would’ve happened in Saudi Arabia, with the terror attacks there & our soldiers still there.

  • TexasJew

    Jeff if you weren’t already in the tank for Kerry, you WOULD give a shit.

  • Michael

    h0me:
    How many American pilots were killed in the no fly zones from 1991 to 2002?
    How many U.S. soldiers were killed by Iraq in SA during the same period?

  • Michael

    Reid:
    Since General Tommy Franks said

  • Michael

    Sortelli:
    It’s telling that you laugh, but don’t answer the questions. All style, no substance.

  • Michael

    ptolemy:
    Not everyone in the world is “an enimy.” But you’re right and they are, should we kill them all?