Media finally investigating Bush Swift Boat smear of Kerry

Um. One was a rather entertaining piece that raised a lot of questions about where we are going in America these days.

The other is a book that makes out a candidate to be a complete fraud and liar by impunging his military duty during Vietnam.

Apples, Oranges....

Cycloptichorn

One could however argue that it is the book which is rather entertaining while the movie makes out a candidate to be a liar by impunging his service as president of our country. I guess it truly depends on whom you support in this election.

If you were against F9/11, then the book should also be a bit of a problem for you for the same reasons (a possible distortion of facts). If you swore by the movie, then you should have no problem with the book making claims based on shaky evidence.

The New Soldier
John Kerry's book, The New Soldier was published in 1971. It is out of print, not pulled, as Brand X claims.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/offer-listing/002073610X/ref=dp_pb_a//103-5849005-4964642?condition=all

The difference, X, is that F/911 raises questions not just about a particular candidate but in the direction our society is taking. True, a lot of the movie does focus on Bush, but a lot of it doesn't as well.

Unfit For Command has one purpose and one purpose only. To make a man who served in war overseas look like a liar and fraud. It doesn't raise questions about our policies or their effects.

Apples
and
Oranges
My Friend.

Cycloptichorn

I don't think that's their plan per se, Kerry slandered every one of the guys 30ish years ago when all the media cared about was what Kerry was saying, these other guys have been around trying to get their side out.

Now they have a chance to be heard and give their eye witness accounts of the other side of the story, no one should believe automatically that Kerry was completely truthful, especially since he has 180'd on a couple of his stories already.

Usually if the story keeps changing somethings wrong, like lies are the basis.

Now, these Swifties are releasing another ad today, does that sound like they are going to stop the publisher of their book or go away?

They have a right to tell their side now that the playing field isn't totally controlled by big media like it once was.

I still respectfully disagree Cy. M. Moore himself has stated that he hopes the movie results in the defeat of GWB. I won't comment on the contents of the movie since I have not seen it, so I will take your word that the movie is commenting on the direction our society is going. But I keep coming back to Mr. Moore's comment.

Seems to me both the movie and the book are designed to raise issues with one or the other candidate in order to damage their election chances. It should be up to us as a discerning public to judge whether or not the claims have validity. Just as I have my doubts about the claims in F9/11, I also have my doubts about some of the claims I hear are in the book (which, btw, I won't be buying or reading for much the same reason I did not go see the movie). But I have no problem with someone making the claims if they have enough evidence to at least substantiate their viewpoint.

Heck, if they are all total liars, then Kerry ought to sue for libel and be done with it. I sure would. And if their claims prove false, I hope he does at some point.

I don't think anyone SHOULD stop them or get them to go away. They are exercising their American rights of free speech and I commend them for doing so, as much as I disagree with their message.

That being said. Kerry talked 30 years ago about how he did a bunch of bad things in Vietnam, and how he saw a bunch of other people do bad things.

There are a lot of people who want to pretend like the U.S. didn't committ atrocities in Vietnam, despite the huge amount of evidence that such atrocities happened routinely.

It is no surprise to me that Kerry was not liked after the war by many of his fellow soldiers. After all, Kerry returned to America, denounced the war, and talked about how all the soldiers were doing things they shouldn't have. This undoubtedly pissed off a lot of soldiers who would much preffer to have their crimes covered up. (I'm not trying to attack said soldiers; rather, I believe they think Kerry was).

The small-minded often find great solace in solidarity. Better to not talk publicly about the bad things that happened. Well, Kerry didn't keep his mouth shut, and those who didn't want him to discuss what went on took it personally.

It's the same way a lot of people would react if today a soldier came out and talked about war crimes that are being committed in Iraq. Can you say, Pariah?

Cycloptichorn

At the same time Kerry is doing everything possible not to have to explain himself today, that to me is suspect.

If he thinks he was so justified and all he said was true he needs to start talking, I mean saying more than dissing Bush about the ads.

Also he needs to release the rest of the records if he is proud of them and they stand up to scrutiny.

I agree that they have a reason for hating Kerry, which is why, unlike some republicans, I am a bit slower to jump on the bandwagon based solely on their word. I would want something substantial before I would believe Kerry is "unfit to command".

But, their claims have already brought about some confusing and contradictory statements about Kerry's Cambodian episode, although that could be faulty memory on Kerry's part. What I would love to see would be for Kerry to release his med records (which I don't think he has fully done, although I could be wrong). That would put to rest the nature/severity issue of the wounds for which he won his purple hearts.

But, lacking any real, substantial evidence, I am not about to bash Kerry about his service. As someone else so finely put it, I wasn't there. So I don't know who is telling the truth. It is the same thing I would say when people talk about GWB's national guard issue. Give proof of his being AWOL if you want me to vote based on something from 30+ years ago.

I'm sure it's pretty hard to remember all the details of stuff that happened 30 years ago. I have a tough time remembering details of stuff that happened 3 years ago.

Damn the malted hops and bong resin which have melted my brain!

Cycloptichorn

Shoot, to be honest, I have trouble with 3 days ago. But I attribute it to early senility.

A chart of the smearers
This is a supplement to the New York Times article with a time line chart and the "family tree" of the connection between the Swift Boaters and the Bush administration:

http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/08/19/politics/campaign/20040820swift_graph.gif

But kerry said it was "seared" into his memory.

Kerry's lie in that case is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, his hijinks in nam look far more likely to align with the majority of witnessess as well.

Kerry is starting to stink like rotten fish.

forgot LOL

Kerry's campaign annouced it had 'filed a legal complaint against Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT) before the Federal Election Commission (FEC) for violating the law with inaccurate ads that are illegally coordinated with the Bush-Cheney presidential campaign'...

When the courts get through with the 527s, it will be a Democrat meltdown of Three-Mile-Island/Chernobyl proportions!
Someone in the Dem camp should have told Kerry to leave it alone.

now bushinc will begin a multi million dollar ad campaign to replace calling Kerry a pussy with calling him a whiner.......

In fact it's already started....

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&u=/ap/20040820/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_war_12&printer=1

Thinking about how Kerry lied about his nam actions didn't make me feel like laughing. How such a evil, twisted individual could get chosen as the lands best democrat baffles me.

Re: A chart of the smearers



The NY Times, Washington Post, and LA Times are part of the problem; they're an axis of disinformation.

Aw heck! I thought that he would be filing the request to get the records of his commendations released.