Full Version: McCain upset with anti-Kerry "Swift Boat" ads
QUOTE
danimal:
Actually, you've pretty well summed up Stateside politics for the past 10-15 years. Got any spiked maple syrup for me?
For a man with Animal in his name?QUOTE
Lksimcoe:
You know the kind of fight, where one kid says something, the other kid says something back, and the first kid then either goes Nyah, Nyah, or \"Mommy, he's being mean to me\".
No, that would be the P&R topics on this board. You know the kind of fight, where one kid says something, the other kid says something back, and the first kid then either goes Nyah, Nyah, or \"Mommy, he's being mean to me\".
Actually, you've pretty well summed up Stateside politics for the past 10-15 years. Got any spiked maple syrup for me?
ANYTIME
QUOTE
Are you serious with this crap? Isn't Novak a committed right-winger? Isn't Novak the same person who outed a CIA agent on behalf of the White House? Isn't Novak the same person who has repeatedly claimed that O'Brien etc. had no ties to the Republicans, even THOUGH IT'S DOCUMENTED THAT he was an operative that RICHARD NIXON recruited to counter Kerry in 1971. Hell, General Tommy Franks--yep, him--even said on O'Reilly's show the other night that Kerry's charges about the atrocities were \"undeniable.\" Yep. He said it. Search Lexis-Nexis if you're still in denial.Kerry's records have been completely made available. You cannot WRITE YOURSELF UP for a Purple Heart, certainly not in Vietnam. The charge is so ludicrous it's just pathetic.
But more on Novak and his \"lies,\" which you seem eager to lap up, though it's no suprise since you're so far to the right you actually are trying to justify the nonsensical Keyes candidacy and seriously compare it to Rodham Clinton's run for the Senate!
And by the way, if you are so non-partisan and not such a right-winger, are you ever going to speak out, on this forum, about the steady TIDE OF SLEAZE, LIES and MISSTATEMENTS by ANY of the people associated with W, including the Resident himself? Just pick one: Cheney; Wolfowitz; Rumsfeld; Rice; McClellan; etc. Just pick one and show us how non-partisan or neutral or moderate (or whatever other than a diehard right-winger) you really are.
QUOTE
Novak denied Swift Boat Vets' GOP ties; Matthews claimed group's unsubstantiated charge \"could hurt\" Kerry
On the August 7 edition of CNN's The Capital Gang (and in his August 9 syndicated column), CNN Crossfire host and regular panelist Robert Novak defended Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the group behind the soon-to-be-released book Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry, published by the conservative publishing house Regnery. \"They're not Republicans at all,\" Novak insisted -- despite the documented GOP and right-wing ties of the book's authors.
Novak's defense came in response to co-panelist Margaret Carlson, who noted that a recent ad sponsored by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is \"completely partisan.\"
From the August 7 edition of CNN's The Capital Gang:
NOVAK: There's a new book out called Unfit for Command about his [Kerry's] record. I've read it all. It's coming out it'll be published soon. It is a shocking presentation of Senator Kerry's record. I just couldn't believe some of the things in there -- very carefully documented.
Margaret, these are not partisan Republicans. They're not Republicans at all. They're Naval personnel. They're not interested in [President] George [W.] Bush. One of the authors of the book told me he would have voted for John Edwards if he were nominated. Not particular Bush fans, but they just are appalled by John Kerry.
Moments later, when co-panelist Albert R. Hunt (executive editor of The Wall Street Journal) interjected, \"I think this is some of the sleaziest lies I've ever seen in politics. John O'Neill, one of the principal authors, has been a Republican functionary for over 30 years...\" Novak protested, saying, \"That's not true! That's a lie!\" But Hunt continued, \"He's [O'Neill] a liar. He started with -- he started with Chuck Colson. He was a pawn of Chuck Colson.\"
Indeed, as Media Matters for America has documented, O'Neill's links to the GOP go back to his days as a \"protégé of Nixon-era dirty trickster Charles Colson.\" MMFA has also exposed the extreme commentary of O'Neill's co-author, Jerome R. Corsi, who is a frequent participant at the conservative online forum Free Republic.
Meanwhile, on the August 8 edition of the NBC Sunday-morning program The Chris Matthews Show, Matthews posited that one of the veterans in the Swift Boat Veterans' TV ad -- the doctor who claims \"Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart because I treated him for that injury\" -- \"could hurt\" Kerry. \"If the doctor said, 'I treated him, it was a scratch, he shouldn't have gotten a Purple Heart.' And then if he did get a Purple Heart, it just diminishes one of his medals,\" Matthews said.
Matthews failed to acknowledge that, as both MMFA and Annenberg Political Fact Check have noted, while Dr. Louis Letson claims to have treated Kerry, Letson's name does not appear on the medical records as the \"person administering treatment\" for the injury that earned Kerry his first Purple Heart.
— K.B. & A.Z.
Posted to the web on Tuesday August 10, 2004 at 11:08 AM EST
Copyright © 2004 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.
QUOTE
Novak spread \"most liberal\" Kerry-Edwards distortion
On the July 28 edition of CNN's Crossfire, co-host Robert Novak fell in line with the Republican National Committee and other conservative pundits when he said the following to Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR): \"Your ticket is the most liberal member of the Senate, [Senator John] Kerry, and the fourth most liberal, [Senator John] Edwards. Do you check your principles at the door when you're supporting a ticket like that?\"
A July 26 op-ed in The New York Times cited an analysis of Kerry's lifetime record, revealing that, while Kerry falls in the liberal half of his party, he is still \"closer to the center of the Democratic Party than he is to the most liberal senators\"; Edwards's lifetime voting record, according to National Journal, places him squarely in the moderate wing of the Democratic Party. Media Matters for America has documented these facts on the numerous occasions this distortion has been put forward.
— N.C.
Posted to the web on Thursday July 29, 2004 at 1:07 PM EST
Copyright © 2004 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.
andOn the July 28 edition of CNN's Crossfire, co-host Robert Novak fell in line with the Republican National Committee and other conservative pundits when he said the following to Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR): \"Your ticket is the most liberal member of the Senate, [Senator John] Kerry, and the fourth most liberal, [Senator John] Edwards. Do you check your principles at the door when you're supporting a ticket like that?\"
A July 26 op-ed in The New York Times cited an analysis of Kerry's lifetime record, revealing that, while Kerry falls in the liberal half of his party, he is still \"closer to the center of the Democratic Party than he is to the most liberal senators\"; Edwards's lifetime voting record, according to National Journal, places him squarely in the moderate wing of the Democratic Party. Media Matters for America has documented these facts on the numerous occasions this distortion has been put forward.
— N.C.
Posted to the web on Thursday July 29, 2004 at 1:07 PM EST
Copyright © 2004 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.
QUOTE
Novak distorted Kerry's defense record, denied that Cheney cut defense
On CNN's The Capital Gang on May 1, co-host Robert Novak repeated distortions about Senator John Kerry's voting record on national defense, and he falsely claimed that Vice President Dick Cheney did not cut weapons programs as Secretary of Defense under President George H.W. Bush:
MARGARET CARLSON: And Dick Cheney killed as many weapons programs as John Kerry ever voted against.
NOVAK: Yes. Yes. It's -- yes, that's really stupid, Margaret. I mean -- the whole idea that...
(crosstalk)
MARK SHIELDS: If we're going to start saying \"stupid\"...
NOVAK: [During crosstalk, Novak apologized for saying \"stupid.\"] But I mean, the idea -- I mean, it's such Democratic propaganda that -- that Cheney killed weapons programs, when we had Kerry voting against ... all these.
Allegations regarding Kerry's votes on defense echo the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign ads and a February Republican National Committee research brief. Yet Novak, the campaign ads, and the RNC brief all misrepresented the facts on Kerry's record on military funding.
As the Annenberg Public Policy Center's Political Fact Check explained, \"Kerry's votes against overall Pentagon money bills in 1990, 1995 and 1996 . were not votes against specific weapons. And in fact, Kerry voted for Pentagon authorization bills in 16 of the 19 years he's been in the Senate.\"
Since each appropriations bill contains hundreds of line items to fund all aspects of the armed forces -- from weapons systems to soldiers' salaries to schools on military bases -- as Slate.com's Fred Kaplan explained in a February 25 military analysis, one could use this same logic to claim that Kerry had voted to abolish the entire U.S. armed forces.
Novak is also wrong about Cheney. In the early 1990s, then-Secretary Cheney did indeed request that Congress make substantial cuts in the defense budget. Kaplan's analysis quoted Cheney's January 31, 1992 testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee:
CHENEY: Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you've squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don't fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. . You've directed me to buy more M-1s, F-14s, and F-16s-all great systems . but we have enough of them.
Cheney's request came three days after the State of the Union address, in which the president announced:
GEORGE H.W. BUSH: After completing 20 planes for which we have begun procurement, we will shut down further production of the B-2 bomber. We will cancel the small ICBM program. We will cease production of new warheads for our sea-based ballistic missiles. We will stop all new production of the Peacekeeper [MX] missile. And we will not purchase any more advanced cruise missiles.
Contrary to Novak's claim, Cheney is on the record requesting specific weapons-systems cuts, while the charge against Kerry is based primarily on votes against appropriations bills -- votes that cannot credibly be called weapons-programs cuts.
— G.W.
Posted to the web on Sunday May 2, 2004 at 10:05 PM EST
Copyright © 2004 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.
On CNN's The Capital Gang on May 1, co-host Robert Novak repeated distortions about Senator John Kerry's voting record on national defense, and he falsely claimed that Vice President Dick Cheney did not cut weapons programs as Secretary of Defense under President George H.W. Bush:
MARGARET CARLSON: And Dick Cheney killed as many weapons programs as John Kerry ever voted against.
NOVAK: Yes. Yes. It's -- yes, that's really stupid, Margaret. I mean -- the whole idea that...
(crosstalk)
MARK SHIELDS: If we're going to start saying \"stupid\"...
NOVAK: [During crosstalk, Novak apologized for saying \"stupid.\"] But I mean, the idea -- I mean, it's such Democratic propaganda that -- that Cheney killed weapons programs, when we had Kerry voting against ... all these.
Allegations regarding Kerry's votes on defense echo the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign ads and a February Republican National Committee research brief. Yet Novak, the campaign ads, and the RNC brief all misrepresented the facts on Kerry's record on military funding.
As the Annenberg Public Policy Center's Political Fact Check explained, \"Kerry's votes against overall Pentagon money bills in 1990, 1995 and 1996 . were not votes against specific weapons. And in fact, Kerry voted for Pentagon authorization bills in 16 of the 19 years he's been in the Senate.\"
Since each appropriations bill contains hundreds of line items to fund all aspects of the armed forces -- from weapons systems to soldiers' salaries to schools on military bases -- as Slate.com's Fred Kaplan explained in a February 25 military analysis, one could use this same logic to claim that Kerry had voted to abolish the entire U.S. armed forces.
Novak is also wrong about Cheney. In the early 1990s, then-Secretary Cheney did indeed request that Congress make substantial cuts in the defense budget. Kaplan's analysis quoted Cheney's January 31, 1992 testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee:
CHENEY: Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you've squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don't fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. . You've directed me to buy more M-1s, F-14s, and F-16s-all great systems . but we have enough of them.
Cheney's request came three days after the State of the Union address, in which the president announced:
GEORGE H.W. BUSH: After completing 20 planes for which we have begun procurement, we will shut down further production of the B-2 bomber. We will cancel the small ICBM program. We will cease production of new warheads for our sea-based ballistic missiles. We will stop all new production of the Peacekeeper [MX] missile. And we will not purchase any more advanced cruise missiles.
Contrary to Novak's claim, Cheney is on the record requesting specific weapons-systems cuts, while the charge against Kerry is based primarily on votes against appropriations bills -- votes that cannot credibly be called weapons-programs cuts.
— G.W.
Posted to the web on Sunday May 2, 2004 at 10:05 PM EST
Copyright © 2004 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.
QUOTE
Denver Fan
It also pissed me off that the Armed Forces Radio Network carries Limbaugh.
Also, Dr. [sic] Laura and James Dobson of Focus on the Family. It also offers commentary from Jim Hightower.It also pissed me off that the Armed Forces Radio Network carries Limbaugh.
AFN Voice Channel Radio Master Schedule
QUOTE
danimal
Interestingly, those with the most hawkish reputation (deserved or otherwise) are Air Force officers, from whose ranks most of the Vietnam POWs (including McCain) came.
Biography of John McCainInterestingly, those with the most hawkish reputation (deserved or otherwise) are Air Force officers, from whose ranks most of the Vietnam POWs (including McCain) came.
QUOTE
The son and grandson of prominent Navy admirals, John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936. After graduating from the United States Naval Academy in 1958, McCain began a twenty-two year career as a naval aviator. In 1967, he was shot down over Vietnam and held as a prisoner-of-war in Hanoi for five and a half years (1967-1973), much of it in solitary confinement. He retired from the Navy as a Captain in 1981. McCain's naval honors include the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
QUOTE
fantomas
Actually the GOP has run ads comparing the Democrats to Hitler and Osama bin Laden, etc. This is nothing new. ... They've morphed Tom Daschle (who served this country) and Max Cleland (a war hero) into Osama bin Laden, while the pathetic, lousy chickenhawk scumbags DeLay, Lott, Chambliss, Psychocheney, etc., were too cowardly to enlist or serve their country. SCUMBAGS
Time to run this again.Actually the GOP has run ads comparing the Democrats to Hitler and Osama bin Laden, etc. This is nothing new. ... They've morphed Tom Daschle (who served this country) and Max Cleland (a war hero) into Osama bin Laden, while the pathetic, lousy chickenhawk scumbags DeLay, Lott, Chambliss, Psychocheney, etc., were too cowardly to enlist or serve their country. SCUMBAGS
Who Served?
More on the raving anti-Semitic, misogynistic co-author, Jerome Corsi, of this vile, mendacious attack on Kerry's service record. MIB, is this crap really "credible" to you? This is a man you'd listen to? Yikes!
MMFA investigates: Who is Jerome Corsi, co-author of Swift Boat Vets attack book?
While much has been written about the identity and history of John E. O'Neill -- one of the authors of the forthcoming Regnery book Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry (whose links in the GOP go back to his days as \"protégé of Nixon-era dirty trickster Charles Colson\") -- little has been said about his co-author, Jerome R. Corsi, PhD.
• Corsi on Islam: \"a worthless, dangerous Satanic religion\"
• Corsi on Catholicism: \"Boy buggering in both Islam and Catholicism is okay with the Pope as long as it isn't reported by the liberal press\"
• Corsi on Muslims: \"RAGHEADS are Boy-Bumpers as clearly as they are Women-Haters -- it all goes together\"
• Corsi on \"John F*ing Commie Kerry\": \"After he married TerRAHsa, didn't John Kerry begin practicing Judiasm? He also has paternal grandparents that were Jewish. What religion is John Kerry?\"
• Corsi on Senator \"FAT HOG\" Clinton: \"Anybody ask why HELLary couldn't keep BJ Bill satisfied? Not lesbo or anything, is she?\"
Unfit for Command has received wide media coverage recently, in part because of hype on The Drudge Report and the website Human Events Online, which is offering a sample chapter via e-mail, and in part as a result of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's new attack ad on Kerry's service in Vietnam. The book has skyrocketed to the top of the Amazon.com \"Top Sellers\" list, as of August 6.
Corsi received his PhD in political science from Harvard University in 1972; his dissertation was titled Prior Restraint, Prior Punishment, and Political Dissent; a Moral and Legal Evaluation. Previously, he co-authored a report on the 1967 riots in Cleveland, titled \"Shoot-out in Cleveland: Black Militants and the Police,\" published in 1968 by the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence.
In addition to Unfit for Command, Corsi has written books on a variety of subjects, and is currently the vice president of development and senior editor of U.S. Financial Marketing Group. Recently, he has been contributing articles to the website wintersoldier.com on the subject of Senator John Kerry's record as an anti-war activist following his service in the Vietnam War.
In this series of articles, Corsi has accused Kerry of \"violating the legal provision against negotiating with foreign powers (18 U.S.C. 953) and the constitutional prohibition against giving support to our nation's enemies during wartime (Article III, Section 3)\"; asserted that Kerry's actions as an anti-war activist amounted to treason; and claimed that \"Kerry and the VVAW consistently coordinated their efforts with Communists.\" Corsi asserted that, in 1971, Kerry's anti-war activism amounted to a proclamation by him that \"Communists were right in maintaining that American values were corrupt and that the only solution was for America to capitulate so Communism could continue to spread.\" As Media Matters for America has noted, Kerry was quoted expressing exactly the opposite sentiment in a December 12, 1971, Boston Globe article: \"I don't like Communists,\" Kerry said. \"In fact, I hate them. I hate all totalitarians. I'm totally dedicated to representative, pluralistic, free democracy.\"
On August 6, Salon.com's Joe Conason documented links between Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the conservative online forum www.FreeRepublic.com. Conason noted that the designer of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth website is Robert A. Hahn, a director of the Free Republic Network, a conservative activist organization affiliated with FreeRepublic.com. Scott Swett, who is listed as the webmaster of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth website, swiftvets.com, also appeared on FOX News Channel host Sean Hannity's August 5 radio show to discuss the group. Swett posts frequently to FreeRepublic.com, using the pseudonym \"Interesting Times,\" and is also a director of the Free Republic Network. The wintersoldier.com website to which Swett has contributed articles is a project of the Free Republic Network.
Corsi is also a frequent participant in FreeRepublic.com's online forums, posting under the pseudonym \"jrlc\" since 2001. (Click here to read a full set of Corsi's posts; click here to read the post in which \"jrlc\" admits to being Jerome Corsi.)
On FreeRepublic.com, Corsi has, among other things, said that \"ragheads\" are \"boy buggers\"; referred to \"John F*ing Kerry\"; called Senator Hillary Clinton a \"Fat Hog\"; referred to her daughter as \"Chubby Chelsie\" Clinton; referred to Janet Reno as \"Janet Rhino\"; called Katie Couric \"Little Katie Communist\"; suggested Kerry was \"practicing Judaism\"; and expressed the wish that a small plane that had crashed into a building in Los Angeles had instead crashed into the set of NBC'S The West Wing, thereby killing actor Martin Sheen.
Following are some examples. [Spelling and punctuation are Corsi's own.]
On Catholics and the Pope
CORSI: Maybe while he's there he can tell the UN what he's going to do about the sexual crimes committed by \"priests\" in his \"Church\" during his tenure. Or, maybe that's the connection -- boy buggering in both Islam and Catholicism is okay with the Pope as long as it isn't reported by the liberal press. (03/03/2003)
CORSI: So this is what the last days of the Catholic Church are going to look like. Buggering boys undermines the moral base and the laywers rip the gold off the Vatican altars. We may get one more Pope, when this senile one dies, but that's probably about it. (12/16/2002)
On Islam and Arabs
CORSI: Let's see exactly why it isn't the case that Islam is a worthless, dangerous Satanic religion? Where's the proof to the contrary? (04/24/2004)
CORSI: Islam is like a virus -- it affects the mind -- maybe even better as an analogy -- it is a cancer that destroys the body it infects... No doctor would hesitate to eliminate cancer cells from the body. (11/26/02)
CORSI: Islam is a peaceful religion as long as the women are beaten, the boys buggered, and the infidels killed. (11/22/2002)
CORSI: How's this as an analogy -- the Koran is simply the \"software\" for producing deviant cancer cell political behavior and violence in human beings. (02/15/2002)
CORSI: Think the liberal press will ever let out that these 2 were lovers -- typical Islamic boy-buggering -- older man, younger man -- black Muslims? I doubt it. Not a pretty picture, but one certain to be hidden by PC media. (11/08/2002)
CORSI: Isn't the Democratic Party the official SODOMIZER PROTECTION ASSOCIATION of AMERICA -- oh, I forgot, it was just an accident that Clintoon's first act in office was to promote \"gays in the military.\" RAGHEADS are Boy-Bumpers as clearly as they are Women-Haters -- it all goes together. (11/18/2001)
On Senator John Kerry
CORSI: First let's undermine the US in Vietnam. Then we can go for gay marriage. When you get to be Pres. JFK-lite, there will be no end to how much of America we can destroy. (05/17/2004)
CORSI: Just don't let anybody put a tablet with the Ten Commandments in front of the school where that girl wants to wear a Muslim scarf -- OH, No --- then the RATS would complain. Anti-Christian, Anti-American -- just like their Presidential Candidate -- Jean Francois Kerrie. (03/31/2004)
CORSI: After he married TerRAHsa, didn't John Kerry begin practicing Judiasm? He also has paternal gradparents that were Jewish. What religion is John Kerry? (03/04/2004)
CORSI: Kerry has a long history of Communist supporters. (03/12/2004)
CORSI: Kerry offers a clear choice. Anti-American hatred. (02/08/2004)
CORSI: John F*ing Commie Kerry and Commie Ted [Kennedy] discuss their plan to hand America over to our nation's enemies. (02/04/2004)
On former President Bill Clinton
CORSI: When is this guy going to admit he's simply an anti-American communist? Won't he and his leftist wife simply go away???? Enough already. (02/24/2002)
CORSI: Hey, Bill, didn't you steal enough when you had the chance? (02/15/2002)
CORSI: Clinton doesn't get it. Afganistan, and other Moslim countries, are not poor because they lack money. The culture itself is anti-modern. But then, maybe Slick did get it and he just wants to create another bork barrel from which he and his wife can draw slop. (02/15/2002)
CORSI: Clinton was more interested in gays in the military than going after OBL. Clinton had Janet Rhino pushing the FBI to deport a child to Castro's nondemocratic Cuba, not searching out OBL sleepers in the USA. Clinton was too busy getting BJs in the Oval Office to do more than Wag the Dog after the Cole was hit. (05/16/2002)
On Senator Hillary Clinton
CORSI: HELL-ary loves the Arabs so much (kiss, kiss Mrs. Arab*RAT) -- wonder how she would look in a Burkha? (05/21/2002)
CORSI: Mullah Ali'Gore-ah is very proud of his new Bin Laden beard and he hopes others in the Democratic Party will follow his lead. Hell-ary is disappointed she cannot grow a beard, but her press secretary reminds us she can still enroll in flight school. (01/07/02)
CORSI: Let the FAT HOG run!!! [regarding a possible presidential bid] (08/30/2003)
CORSI: Hellary should resign and go away. What ever happened to the people she ran over with her car at Westchester Airport? Can't anybody sue this b*tch? (11/17/2002)
CORSI: Anybody ask why HELLary couldn't keep BJ Bill satisfied? Not lesbo or anything, is she? (06/08/2003)
On Chelsea Clinton
CORSI: According to Talk Magazine, Chubby Chelsea had a very great adventure on 9/11 in NYC and Hell-ary had the details wrong -- oh, it was terrible. (12/07/2001)
CORSI: Did the Journalist see Chubbie Chelsea among the wives. Little Katie Communist [Katie Couric] on the NBC Today show interviewed Hillary this morning and mom is worried sick about Chelsea. She was last seen in Kandahar at a Starbucks. But now, as Little Katie Communist sighed, \"Who Knows?\" Even British disinformation planted reports such as this grocery crap will be useful. Anyone with information about Chubbie Chelsea's whereabouts should post it now. Mom wants to know her daughter is out of harms way. Mom also wants to be at the center of the story. (11/29/2001)
CORSI: But the real question is: WHERE IS CHUBBIE CHELSEA? Is she in Kabul in danger, looking for a Starbucks? Waldo wants to know. Please, Little Katie Communist, HELP US FIND CHELSEA. THE SITUATION MAY BE URGENT. (11/29/2001)
CORSI: HILLARY SAYS CHELSEA IS MISSING AND JANET RHINO DOESN'T KNOW WHERE SHE IS? (11/28/2001)
On former Vice President Al Gore
CORSI: Gore isn't available for television. He is growing his regulation length Bin Laden beard. Mullah Ali'Gore-ah, as he now wishes to be called, is focused on his new career as a pilot. \"Want to fly like bird,\" he says after his stint as a professor at Columbia. \"No need to learn take-off or landing, just soar like bird and look at buildings.\" As to Florida, Mulllah Gore-ah says, \"No big buildings,\" dismissing the importance of the state to his future plans.\" (12/15/2001)
On the Media
CORSI: Time to FREEP Chris Matthews of MSNBC. MSNBC is beginning to stand for \"More Sh*t, Nothing But Communism.\" (05/16/2002)
CORSI: I didn't realize Little Katie Communist of the NBC Today Show knew how to hack a website. Finally something impressive from the little wimp. [responding to news that USA Today's website had been hacked and that the hackers were mocking President George W. Bush's Christianity] (07/12/2002)
CORSI: COMMUNISM -- it's simple NBC = NOTHING BUT COMMUNISM. (04/19/2004)
CORSI: Susan Estrogen -- even the voice grates. But then with supporters like her and Ted Kennedy, who needs enemies. Let Susan BLAH BLAH screatch -- only Chrissy Matthews whines better. (04/13/2004)
Assorted
CORSI: Perfect Liberal -- lesbian, self-absorbed, hates America, anxious to impose her values on everybody else. [on Martina Navratilova] (06/26/2002)
CORSI: And now we get Pooh-LEFTY pushed on us by the RATS as Minority Leader in the House -- here come the SanFrancisco liberals -- hope the RATS go back to focusing the debate on gay marriages and other pro-choice topics close to Pelosi's heart. (11/18/2002)
CORSI: Too bad the plane didn't crash into the TV set of the NBC show \"THE LEFT WING\" -- especially when Martin Sheen was \"acting.\" (06/07/2003)
— D.B.B.
Posted to the web on Friday August 6, 2004 at 6:08 PM EST
Copyright © 2004 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.
QUOTE
MMFA investigates: Who is Jerome Corsi, co-author of Swift Boat Vets attack book?
While much has been written about the identity and history of John E. O'Neill -- one of the authors of the forthcoming Regnery book Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry (whose links in the GOP go back to his days as \"protégé of Nixon-era dirty trickster Charles Colson\") -- little has been said about his co-author, Jerome R. Corsi, PhD.
• Corsi on Islam: \"a worthless, dangerous Satanic religion\"
• Corsi on Catholicism: \"Boy buggering in both Islam and Catholicism is okay with the Pope as long as it isn't reported by the liberal press\"
• Corsi on Muslims: \"RAGHEADS are Boy-Bumpers as clearly as they are Women-Haters -- it all goes together\"
• Corsi on \"John F*ing Commie Kerry\": \"After he married TerRAHsa, didn't John Kerry begin practicing Judiasm? He also has paternal grandparents that were Jewish. What religion is John Kerry?\"
• Corsi on Senator \"FAT HOG\" Clinton: \"Anybody ask why HELLary couldn't keep BJ Bill satisfied? Not lesbo or anything, is she?\"
Unfit for Command has received wide media coverage recently, in part because of hype on The Drudge Report and the website Human Events Online, which is offering a sample chapter via e-mail, and in part as a result of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's new attack ad on Kerry's service in Vietnam. The book has skyrocketed to the top of the Amazon.com \"Top Sellers\" list, as of August 6.
Corsi received his PhD in political science from Harvard University in 1972; his dissertation was titled Prior Restraint, Prior Punishment, and Political Dissent; a Moral and Legal Evaluation. Previously, he co-authored a report on the 1967 riots in Cleveland, titled \"Shoot-out in Cleveland: Black Militants and the Police,\" published in 1968 by the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence.
In addition to Unfit for Command, Corsi has written books on a variety of subjects, and is currently the vice president of development and senior editor of U.S. Financial Marketing Group. Recently, he has been contributing articles to the website wintersoldier.com on the subject of Senator John Kerry's record as an anti-war activist following his service in the Vietnam War.
In this series of articles, Corsi has accused Kerry of \"violating the legal provision against negotiating with foreign powers (18 U.S.C. 953) and the constitutional prohibition against giving support to our nation's enemies during wartime (Article III, Section 3)\"; asserted that Kerry's actions as an anti-war activist amounted to treason; and claimed that \"Kerry and the VVAW consistently coordinated their efforts with Communists.\" Corsi asserted that, in 1971, Kerry's anti-war activism amounted to a proclamation by him that \"Communists were right in maintaining that American values were corrupt and that the only solution was for America to capitulate so Communism could continue to spread.\" As Media Matters for America has noted, Kerry was quoted expressing exactly the opposite sentiment in a December 12, 1971, Boston Globe article: \"I don't like Communists,\" Kerry said. \"In fact, I hate them. I hate all totalitarians. I'm totally dedicated to representative, pluralistic, free democracy.\"
On August 6, Salon.com's Joe Conason documented links between Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the conservative online forum www.FreeRepublic.com. Conason noted that the designer of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth website is Robert A. Hahn, a director of the Free Republic Network, a conservative activist organization affiliated with FreeRepublic.com. Scott Swett, who is listed as the webmaster of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth website, swiftvets.com, also appeared on FOX News Channel host Sean Hannity's August 5 radio show to discuss the group. Swett posts frequently to FreeRepublic.com, using the pseudonym \"Interesting Times,\" and is also a director of the Free Republic Network. The wintersoldier.com website to which Swett has contributed articles is a project of the Free Republic Network.
Corsi is also a frequent participant in FreeRepublic.com's online forums, posting under the pseudonym \"jrlc\" since 2001. (Click here to read a full set of Corsi's posts; click here to read the post in which \"jrlc\" admits to being Jerome Corsi.)
On FreeRepublic.com, Corsi has, among other things, said that \"ragheads\" are \"boy buggers\"; referred to \"John F*ing Kerry\"; called Senator Hillary Clinton a \"Fat Hog\"; referred to her daughter as \"Chubby Chelsie\" Clinton; referred to Janet Reno as \"Janet Rhino\"; called Katie Couric \"Little Katie Communist\"; suggested Kerry was \"practicing Judaism\"; and expressed the wish that a small plane that had crashed into a building in Los Angeles had instead crashed into the set of NBC'S The West Wing, thereby killing actor Martin Sheen.
Following are some examples. [Spelling and punctuation are Corsi's own.]
On Catholics and the Pope
CORSI: Maybe while he's there he can tell the UN what he's going to do about the sexual crimes committed by \"priests\" in his \"Church\" during his tenure. Or, maybe that's the connection -- boy buggering in both Islam and Catholicism is okay with the Pope as long as it isn't reported by the liberal press. (03/03/2003)
CORSI: So this is what the last days of the Catholic Church are going to look like. Buggering boys undermines the moral base and the laywers rip the gold off the Vatican altars. We may get one more Pope, when this senile one dies, but that's probably about it. (12/16/2002)
On Islam and Arabs
CORSI: Let's see exactly why it isn't the case that Islam is a worthless, dangerous Satanic religion? Where's the proof to the contrary? (04/24/2004)
CORSI: Islam is like a virus -- it affects the mind -- maybe even better as an analogy -- it is a cancer that destroys the body it infects... No doctor would hesitate to eliminate cancer cells from the body. (11/26/02)
CORSI: Islam is a peaceful religion as long as the women are beaten, the boys buggered, and the infidels killed. (11/22/2002)
CORSI: How's this as an analogy -- the Koran is simply the \"software\" for producing deviant cancer cell political behavior and violence in human beings. (02/15/2002)
CORSI: Think the liberal press will ever let out that these 2 were lovers -- typical Islamic boy-buggering -- older man, younger man -- black Muslims? I doubt it. Not a pretty picture, but one certain to be hidden by PC media. (11/08/2002)
CORSI: Isn't the Democratic Party the official SODOMIZER PROTECTION ASSOCIATION of AMERICA -- oh, I forgot, it was just an accident that Clintoon's first act in office was to promote \"gays in the military.\" RAGHEADS are Boy-Bumpers as clearly as they are Women-Haters -- it all goes together. (11/18/2001)
On Senator John Kerry
CORSI: First let's undermine the US in Vietnam. Then we can go for gay marriage. When you get to be Pres. JFK-lite, there will be no end to how much of America we can destroy. (05/17/2004)
CORSI: Just don't let anybody put a tablet with the Ten Commandments in front of the school where that girl wants to wear a Muslim scarf -- OH, No --- then the RATS would complain. Anti-Christian, Anti-American -- just like their Presidential Candidate -- Jean Francois Kerrie. (03/31/2004)
CORSI: After he married TerRAHsa, didn't John Kerry begin practicing Judiasm? He also has paternal gradparents that were Jewish. What religion is John Kerry? (03/04/2004)
CORSI: Kerry has a long history of Communist supporters. (03/12/2004)
CORSI: Kerry offers a clear choice. Anti-American hatred. (02/08/2004)
CORSI: John F*ing Commie Kerry and Commie Ted [Kennedy] discuss their plan to hand America over to our nation's enemies. (02/04/2004)
On former President Bill Clinton
CORSI: When is this guy going to admit he's simply an anti-American communist? Won't he and his leftist wife simply go away???? Enough already. (02/24/2002)
CORSI: Hey, Bill, didn't you steal enough when you had the chance? (02/15/2002)
CORSI: Clinton doesn't get it. Afganistan, and other Moslim countries, are not poor because they lack money. The culture itself is anti-modern. But then, maybe Slick did get it and he just wants to create another bork barrel from which he and his wife can draw slop. (02/15/2002)
CORSI: Clinton was more interested in gays in the military than going after OBL. Clinton had Janet Rhino pushing the FBI to deport a child to Castro's nondemocratic Cuba, not searching out OBL sleepers in the USA. Clinton was too busy getting BJs in the Oval Office to do more than Wag the Dog after the Cole was hit. (05/16/2002)
On Senator Hillary Clinton
CORSI: HELL-ary loves the Arabs so much (kiss, kiss Mrs. Arab*RAT) -- wonder how she would look in a Burkha? (05/21/2002)
CORSI: Mullah Ali'Gore-ah is very proud of his new Bin Laden beard and he hopes others in the Democratic Party will follow his lead. Hell-ary is disappointed she cannot grow a beard, but her press secretary reminds us she can still enroll in flight school. (01/07/02)
CORSI: Let the FAT HOG run!!! [regarding a possible presidential bid] (08/30/2003)
CORSI: Hellary should resign and go away. What ever happened to the people she ran over with her car at Westchester Airport? Can't anybody sue this b*tch? (11/17/2002)
CORSI: Anybody ask why HELLary couldn't keep BJ Bill satisfied? Not lesbo or anything, is she? (06/08/2003)
On Chelsea Clinton
CORSI: According to Talk Magazine, Chubby Chelsea had a very great adventure on 9/11 in NYC and Hell-ary had the details wrong -- oh, it was terrible. (12/07/2001)
CORSI: Did the Journalist see Chubbie Chelsea among the wives. Little Katie Communist [Katie Couric] on the NBC Today show interviewed Hillary this morning and mom is worried sick about Chelsea. She was last seen in Kandahar at a Starbucks. But now, as Little Katie Communist sighed, \"Who Knows?\" Even British disinformation planted reports such as this grocery crap will be useful. Anyone with information about Chubbie Chelsea's whereabouts should post it now. Mom wants to know her daughter is out of harms way. Mom also wants to be at the center of the story. (11/29/2001)
CORSI: But the real question is: WHERE IS CHUBBIE CHELSEA? Is she in Kabul in danger, looking for a Starbucks? Waldo wants to know. Please, Little Katie Communist, HELP US FIND CHELSEA. THE SITUATION MAY BE URGENT. (11/29/2001)
CORSI: HILLARY SAYS CHELSEA IS MISSING AND JANET RHINO DOESN'T KNOW WHERE SHE IS? (11/28/2001)
On former Vice President Al Gore
CORSI: Gore isn't available for television. He is growing his regulation length Bin Laden beard. Mullah Ali'Gore-ah, as he now wishes to be called, is focused on his new career as a pilot. \"Want to fly like bird,\" he says after his stint as a professor at Columbia. \"No need to learn take-off or landing, just soar like bird and look at buildings.\" As to Florida, Mulllah Gore-ah says, \"No big buildings,\" dismissing the importance of the state to his future plans.\" (12/15/2001)
On the Media
CORSI: Time to FREEP Chris Matthews of MSNBC. MSNBC is beginning to stand for \"More Sh*t, Nothing But Communism.\" (05/16/2002)
CORSI: I didn't realize Little Katie Communist of the NBC Today Show knew how to hack a website. Finally something impressive from the little wimp. [responding to news that USA Today's website had been hacked and that the hackers were mocking President George W. Bush's Christianity] (07/12/2002)
CORSI: COMMUNISM -- it's simple NBC = NOTHING BUT COMMUNISM. (04/19/2004)
CORSI: Susan Estrogen -- even the voice grates. But then with supporters like her and Ted Kennedy, who needs enemies. Let Susan BLAH BLAH screatch -- only Chrissy Matthews whines better. (04/13/2004)
Assorted
CORSI: Perfect Liberal -- lesbian, self-absorbed, hates America, anxious to impose her values on everybody else. [on Martina Navratilova] (06/26/2002)
CORSI: And now we get Pooh-LEFTY pushed on us by the RATS as Minority Leader in the House -- here come the SanFrancisco liberals -- hope the RATS go back to focusing the debate on gay marriages and other pro-choice topics close to Pelosi's heart. (11/18/2002)
CORSI: Too bad the plane didn't crash into the TV set of the NBC show \"THE LEFT WING\" -- especially when Martin Sheen was \"acting.\" (06/07/2003)
— D.B.B.
Posted to the web on Friday August 6, 2004 at 6:08 PM EST
Copyright © 2004 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.
QUOTE
fantomas:
Are you serious with this crap? Isn't Novak a committed right-winger? Kerry's records have been completely made available. You cannot WRITE YOURSELF UP for a Purple Heart, certainly not in Vietnam. The charge is so ludicrous it's just pathetic.
It sure is tiresome having to come in here and correct the mistakes you so often make.Are you serious with this crap? Isn't Novak a committed right-winger? Kerry's records have been completely made available. You cannot WRITE YOURSELF UP for a Purple Heart, certainly not in Vietnam. The charge is so ludicrous it's just pathetic.
Another pathetic attempt to skirt the issue by going after the messenger. Novak can say 2+2=4, and you and your ilk would say that can't be true because Novak said it.
QUOTE
But more on Novak and his \"lies,\" which you seem eager to lap up, though it's no suprise since you're so far to the right you actually are trying to justify the nonsensical Keyes candidacy and seriously compare it to Rodham Clinton's run for the Senate!
QUOTE
And by the way, if you are so non-partisan and not such a right-winger, are you ever going to speak out, on this forum, about the steady TIDE OF SLEAZE, LIES and MISSTATEMENTS by ANY of the people associated with W, including the Resident himself?
And me a right-winger? That's a laugh (as well as yet another untruthful comment from you--yawn)! Right-wingers don't vote Democratic as often as I do, genius.
QUOTE
fantomas:
More on the raving anti-Semitic, misogynistic co-author, Jerome Corsi, of this vile, mendacious attack on Kerry's service record. MIB, is this crap really \"credible\" to you? This is a man you'd listen to? Yikes!
I have already stated my views opposing this ad. Must I write it in the sky or something? More on the raving anti-Semitic, misogynistic co-author, Jerome Corsi, of this vile, mendacious attack on Kerry's service record. MIB, is this crap really \"credible\" to you? This is a man you'd listen to? Yikes!
What I do find interesting is that this ad from a 527 comes along, and you're all having conniption fits over it; yet Moveon.org and dozens of other 527's have been doing crap like this for months, and nary a word from the folks here.
Oh! The hypocrisy!
QUOTE
MIB:
What I do find interesting is that this ad from a 527 comes along, and you're all having conniption fits over it; yet Moveon.org and dozens of other 527's have been doing crap like this for months, and nary a word from the folks here.
Name me ONE ad from the Left currently airing that 1) tells such outrageous lies about W's past (i.e., Dr. "Letson" didn't even TREAT John Kerry's Bronze Star injuries!), or 2) that has people with the anti-Semitic backgrounds and disturbing links (to convicted felons like Chuck Colson). Please. Share these ads with us. I'll condemn them outright.
What I do find interesting is that this ad from a 527 comes along, and you're all having conniption fits over it; yet Moveon.org and dozens of other 527's have been doing crap like this for months, and nary a word from the folks here.
QUOTE
twin58:
My point was that military aviators in general, including POWs (and McCain's bravery as a POW is undisputed as far as I know), tend toward political conservatism even more than most of their colleagues in the armed services (so if McCain, for example, defends Kerry or disagrees with particular Bush statements or policies, it's not because McCain is a \"closet liberal\" as some Bush partisans might argue, but because McCain's particular views as a conservative -- and as a veteran -- differ from those of some other conservatives, particularly Religious Right types). My careless error unfortunately obscured that point.
****************************************
Originally posted by MIB:
Originally posted by fantomas:
So, MIB, you're saying a short-time lieutenant could "write himself up" for a Purple Heart without the approval of superior officers? And on whose authority are you saying this -- Novak's??QUOTE
The son and grandson of prominent Navy admirals, John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936. After graduating from the United States Naval Academy in 1958, McCain began a twenty-two year career as a naval aviator. In 1967, he was shot down over Vietnam and held as a prisoner-of-war in Hanoi for five and a half years (1967-1973), much of it in solitary confinement. He retired from the Navy as a Captain in 1981. McCain's naval honors include the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
As I said, I stand corrected. McCain served in the Navy, not the Air Force.My point was that military aviators in general, including POWs (and McCain's bravery as a POW is undisputed as far as I know), tend toward political conservatism even more than most of their colleagues in the armed services (so if McCain, for example, defends Kerry or disagrees with particular Bush statements or policies, it's not because McCain is a \"closet liberal\" as some Bush partisans might argue, but because McCain's particular views as a conservative -- and as a veteran -- differ from those of some other conservatives, particularly Religious Right types). My careless error unfortunately obscured that point.
****************************************
Originally posted by MIB:
Originally posted by fantomas:
QUOTE
Are you serious with this crap? Isn't Novak a committed right-winger? Kerry's records have been completely made available. You cannot WRITE YOURSELF UP for a Purple Heart, certainly not in Vietnam. The charge is so ludicrous it's just pathetic.
It sure is tiresome having to come in here and correct the mistakes you so often make.:confused:
And before you say "I didn't say that!" ... I don't see how the context of your comment allows any other interpretation (A + B = C). [sarcasm]But then you're the only poster on this board who never makes mistakes, so you can infallibly spot everyone else's, right?[/sarcasm]
Oh, and voting for Glenn Poshard hardly makes one a "moderate" -- especially if one supports the O'Malley/Pate/DuPage wing of the GOP and routinely blasts anyone to the left of Ashcroft as a "dangerous" liberal (or a "moron"). And that's what's getting "tiresome." (But what do I know? I just live here.)
[ August 10, 2004, 04:51 PM: Message edited by: danimal ]
QUOTE
danimal
As I said, I stand corrected. McCain served in the Navy, not the Air Force.
Sorry. Hadn't noticed that you had made the correction.As I said, I stand corrected. McCain served in the Navy, not the Air Force.
QUOTE
My point was that military aviators in general, including POWs (and McCain's bravery as a POW is undisputed as far as I know), tend toward political conservatism even more than most of their colleagues in the armed services....
Agree.
An article chart that spells out how the "Swifties" are tied to W, Rove and company (no surprise there). Sick, sad, pathetic...they don't even remember the stories (or lies?) they told just a few years ago. And yet a little money gives them power to influence our national elections....
The NY Times article (pace Novak and MIB), and the chart.
[Post modified to comply with photo policy. - Outsports moderator]
[ August 24, 2004, 11:04 AM: Message edited by: m1 ]
The NY Times article (pace Novak and MIB), and the chart.
[Post modified to comply with photo policy. - Outsports moderator]
[ August 24, 2004, 11:04 AM: Message edited by: m1 ]
In another thread, Adam posted
Now that numerous independent news organizations have proven claims made by the "Swift Boat Veterans for truth" to be false--and at least two Swift Boaters have come forward to say their comments are taken out of context in the ads--Bush can easily call for the ads to cease on those grounds alone, without having to generally criticize the "Swift Boaters." After all, when a Democratic Party-suupporting 527 created an ad attacking Bush for using his daddy to get into the Guard, Kerry called for it to be pulled on the grounds it wasn't factual--and the 527 pulled it. Instead, Bush is trying to have it both ways (how wishy-washy for someone proud of his perceived decisiveness!!) As a side issue, since the latest response from the Kerry camp compares the current "Swift Boat" ads to the 2000 smear campaign against John McCain, I wonder whetehr McCain will again call for Bush to condemn the Swift Boaters or even perhaps go further and again call Kerry "a man of integrity and character" and then surprise everyone by announcing that Bush's seeming lack of integrity and character on this issue has made him (McCain) re-evaluate his endorsement and come out for Kerry. McCain could proclaim people can disagree with questions of policy but not on integrity and character.
Munson Man replied
I think McCain has shown that he's not going to fulfill these Democratic wet dreams and directly help the Dems. If anything, he's moved more into W's corner in the past few weeks. I happen to believe that Kerry's service was completely honorable and his medals were well-earned. Kudos to him for that. However, the fact is he chose to make his Vietnam service a cornerstone of his candidacy, invoking it in commercials and on the campaign trail. So if the Republicans want to go after him on that issue, well, it's an issue he uses himself. I don't think anyone has the right to invoke a particular aspect of their candidacy and then cry foul when the opposition addresses that same aspect in an unflattering light. Make no mistake about it: Kerry's 527-sponsored ads give as good as they get. For him to wrap himself in the cloak of victimhood is absurd; frankly it smacks of whining. I was in Florida the past few days and was bowled over by the non-stop negative ads paid for by BOTH sides' 527 groups. You can't watch the Olympics in South Florida without getting a slew of political ads at every commercial break. Usually the ads were on back-to-back, thus making for a really dizzying juxtaposition. Moveon.org and other similar groups are being just as ruthless to Bush, and playing just as fast and loose with the facts. Neither candidate in this race has clean hands; for either man or his supporters to say they do strains credulity.
CPT_Doom replied
1. The pro-Kerry ads focus on Bush's tenure as President, not on his failure to serve his country, nor on his multiple failings in private life before he became governor.
2. Spinning the facts is one thing (a la, using Kerry's "most liberal" rating for one year and ignoring the rest of his tenure in the Senate), but the Swift Boat ads are slanderous - claiming that Kerry has out-and-out lied.
There should be some kind of fine line in political campaigning, and IMHO, these ads (like those aimed at John McCain in 2000) are WAY over it.
puckman1 replied
I pride myself on being extremely detail orientated, and on some of the new Shrub ads, they make claims, but they offer no proof to back up their claims. For example Kerry says this and that, but does this and that, and " Kerry was absent 76% of the time" etc. etc. etc. Usually they will supply where they got this information from, like for example the Congressional Record or something like this. There is nothing supplied in most of the new Anti-Kerry ads. Its clear the RNC will say or use anything to get elected. :mad:
gmginsfo replied
As a Vietnam-era USNavy vet, I am very interested in this issue - and very disappointed by the lack of reliable information to date that would help me resolve it in my mind. The pundits are all over the place, but those best positioned to find and accurately report the facts - i.e., the media - are lying low. So for now, all I can say is that there are questions of fact on both sides of this issue that need to be resolved before I can make up my mind whether Kerry inflated his record or justly earned and trumpeted the medals he holds.
Now that numerous independent news organizations have proven claims made by the "Swift Boat Veterans for truth" to be false--and at least two Swift Boaters have come forward to say their comments are taken out of context in the ads--Bush can easily call for the ads to cease on those grounds alone, without having to generally criticize the "Swift Boaters." After all, when a Democratic Party-suupporting 527 created an ad attacking Bush for using his daddy to get into the Guard, Kerry called for it to be pulled on the grounds it wasn't factual--and the 527 pulled it. Instead, Bush is trying to have it both ways (how wishy-washy for someone proud of his perceived decisiveness!!) As a side issue, since the latest response from the Kerry camp compares the current "Swift Boat" ads to the 2000 smear campaign against John McCain, I wonder whetehr McCain will again call for Bush to condemn the Swift Boaters or even perhaps go further and again call Kerry "a man of integrity and character" and then surprise everyone by announcing that Bush's seeming lack of integrity and character on this issue has made him (McCain) re-evaluate his endorsement and come out for Kerry. McCain could proclaim people can disagree with questions of policy but not on integrity and character.
Munson Man replied
I think McCain has shown that he's not going to fulfill these Democratic wet dreams and directly help the Dems. If anything, he's moved more into W's corner in the past few weeks. I happen to believe that Kerry's service was completely honorable and his medals were well-earned. Kudos to him for that. However, the fact is he chose to make his Vietnam service a cornerstone of his candidacy, invoking it in commercials and on the campaign trail. So if the Republicans want to go after him on that issue, well, it's an issue he uses himself. I don't think anyone has the right to invoke a particular aspect of their candidacy and then cry foul when the opposition addresses that same aspect in an unflattering light. Make no mistake about it: Kerry's 527-sponsored ads give as good as they get. For him to wrap himself in the cloak of victimhood is absurd; frankly it smacks of whining. I was in Florida the past few days and was bowled over by the non-stop negative ads paid for by BOTH sides' 527 groups. You can't watch the Olympics in South Florida without getting a slew of political ads at every commercial break. Usually the ads were on back-to-back, thus making for a really dizzying juxtaposition. Moveon.org and other similar groups are being just as ruthless to Bush, and playing just as fast and loose with the facts. Neither candidate in this race has clean hands; for either man or his supporters to say they do strains credulity.
CPT_Doom replied
QUOTE
Make no mistake about it: Kerry's 527-sponsored ads give as good as they get. For him to wrap himself in the cloak of victimhood is absurd; frankly it smacks of whining. I was in Florida the past few days and was bowled over by the non-stop negative ads paid for by BOTH sides' 527 groups. You can't watch the Olympics in South Florida without getting a slew of political ads at every commercial break. Usually the ads were on back-to-back, thus making for a really dizzying juxtaposition. Moveon.org and other similar groups are being just as ruthless to Bush, and playing just as fast and loose with the facts. Neither candidate in this race has clean hands; for either man or his supporters to say they do strains credulity.
Well, I've only seen a few of the MoveOn ads, as the DC area is not considered that "in play" (we all know MD and DC will vote Kerry, the only open question is VA), but from what I have seen and read about the ads, there are two big differences between the Swift Boat ads and the pro-Kerry 527 ads.1. The pro-Kerry ads focus on Bush's tenure as President, not on his failure to serve his country, nor on his multiple failings in private life before he became governor.
2. Spinning the facts is one thing (a la, using Kerry's "most liberal" rating for one year and ignoring the rest of his tenure in the Senate), but the Swift Boat ads are slanderous - claiming that Kerry has out-and-out lied.
There should be some kind of fine line in political campaigning, and IMHO, these ads (like those aimed at John McCain in 2000) are WAY over it.
puckman1 replied
I pride myself on being extremely detail orientated, and on some of the new Shrub ads, they make claims, but they offer no proof to back up their claims. For example Kerry says this and that, but does this and that, and " Kerry was absent 76% of the time" etc. etc. etc. Usually they will supply where they got this information from, like for example the Congressional Record or something like this. There is nothing supplied in most of the new Anti-Kerry ads. Its clear the RNC will say or use anything to get elected. :mad:
gmginsfo replied
As a Vietnam-era USNavy vet, I am very interested in this issue - and very disappointed by the lack of reliable information to date that would help me resolve it in my mind. The pundits are all over the place, but those best positioned to find and accurately report the facts - i.e., the media - are lying low. So for now, all I can say is that there are questions of fact on both sides of this issue that need to be resolved before I can make up my mind whether Kerry inflated his record or justly earned and trumpeted the medals he holds.
QUOTE
gmginsfo:
So for now, all I can say is that there are questions of fact on both sides of this issue that need to be resolved before I can make up my mind whether Kerry inflated his record or justly earned and trumpeted the medals he holds.
...as opposed to not showing up for duty at all? Yeah, I can see your quandary come election day.
So for now, all I can say is that there are questions of fact on both sides of this issue that need to be resolved before I can make up my mind whether Kerry inflated his record or justly earned and trumpeted the medals he holds.
Seph, you got it man. wink
QUOTE
As a Vietnam-era USNavy vet, I am very interested in this issue - and very disappointed by the lack of reliable information to date that would help me resolve it in my mind. The pundits are all over the place, but those best positioned to find and accurately report the facts - i.e., the media - are lying low. So for now, all I can say is that there are questions of fact on both sides of this issue that need to be resolved before I can make up my mind whether Kerry inflated his record or justly earned and trumpeted the medals he holds.
I don't think the media has been \"lying low\" - in fact both the NY Times and the Washington Post have reported on the inaccuracies in statements of the men in the anti-Kerry ads. And just today there was this article about a protest against an Assistant DA who appeared in one of the ads:
QUOTE
Several Vietnam veterans are calling for an assistant district attorney to resign after questions were raised about his statement in a recent ad criticizing Democrat John Kerry's military service.
Alfred French of the Clackamas County district attorney's office appears in the ad sponsored by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. In the spot, French says: \"I served with John Kerry. ... He is lying about his record.\"
A group of Vietnam veterans who protested outside the county courthouse Monday said French implied he had firsthand knowledge of Kerry's war actions when in fact he had heard about what Kerry did from friends.
Vets Protest Prosecutor in Anti-Kerry Ad
Alfred French of the Clackamas County district attorney's office appears in the ad sponsored by the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. In the spot, French says: \"I served with John Kerry. ... He is lying about his record.\"
A group of Vietnam veterans who protested outside the county courthouse Monday said French implied he had firsthand knowledge of Kerry's war actions when in fact he had heard about what Kerry did from friends.
Observers see eerie parallels in attacks on Kerry, McCain
QUOTE
NEWS ANALYSIS
Observers see eerie parallels in attacks on Kerry, McCain
As in 2000 campaign, Bush attempts to distance himself from hits against rival
....
\"It's amazing how similar this type of attack is to the pattern of attacks I have seen over two decades -- in some cases involving Bush's campaigns, in other cases they involved campaigns in which Karl Rove was a participant,'' said Wayne Slater, senior political writer at the Dallas Morning News, who has covered Bush since his early days in Texas politics and is author of the book \"Bush's Brain,'' about Rove.
\"In every case, the approach is the same: You have a surrogate group of allies, independent of the Bush campaign, raising questions not about the opponent's weakness but directly about the opponent's strength,'' Slater said. \"In every case it works.\"
In 1994, when Bush ran against Democratic Gov. Ann Richards in Texas, a whisper campaign began in East Texas that Richards had appointed gays and lesbians to state positions, which was true. The issue got little notice until Bush's East Texas campaign chairman accused the governor of naming \"avowed and activist homosexuals\" to high offices.
Bush tried to distance himself from the remarks, but the story garnered major media attention and turned one of Richards' greatest strengths -- the inclusiveness of her administration -- into a political liability, particularly in socially conservative East Texas.
....
Observers see eerie parallels in attacks on Kerry, McCain
As in 2000 campaign, Bush attempts to distance himself from hits against rival
....
\"It's amazing how similar this type of attack is to the pattern of attacks I have seen over two decades -- in some cases involving Bush's campaigns, in other cases they involved campaigns in which Karl Rove was a participant,'' said Wayne Slater, senior political writer at the Dallas Morning News, who has covered Bush since his early days in Texas politics and is author of the book \"Bush's Brain,'' about Rove.
\"In every case, the approach is the same: You have a surrogate group of allies, independent of the Bush campaign, raising questions not about the opponent's weakness but directly about the opponent's strength,'' Slater said. \"In every case it works.\"
In 1994, when Bush ran against Democratic Gov. Ann Richards in Texas, a whisper campaign began in East Texas that Richards had appointed gays and lesbians to state positions, which was true. The issue got little notice until Bush's East Texas campaign chairman accused the governor of naming \"avowed and activist homosexuals\" to high offices.
Bush tried to distance himself from the remarks, but the story garnered major media attention and turned one of Richards' greatest strengths -- the inclusiveness of her administration -- into a political liability, particularly in socially conservative East Texas.
....
CPT - Seph and Puckman's posts illustrate my point perfectly: if the media did HALF as good a job investigating the issue of Kerry's Vietnam service as they did on President Bush's time in the National Guard, we'd all know more and be in a much better position to make informed balanced decisions rather than uninformed biased ones. Where are the FOA requests, search for witnesses and records, painstaking accounting, etc. that marked the media's research into the President's service but are now missing in action from their inquiry into Kerry's? Fact is, they're just not there and we're ALL less informed for it. 
Ann Coulter's take on the issue.
Ann Coulter's take on the issue.
QUOTE
gmginsfo:
Ann Coulter's take on the issue.
I was almost with you up to here, but the context of your comments indicate you not only consider Anne Coulter a responsible media source on the topic of examining official records, but don't seem to know that her own track record makes Al Fraken and Bill O'Reily seem, well, fair and balanced.Ann Coulter's take on the issue.
And even before we get to the Wicked Witch of the Beltway, from what I've read so far, the actual records of the incidents in question have been examined to the point of being unable to determine authorship for the report that led to the bronze star in question, leaving open the possibility that everyone is lying. However, I'm still somewhat amused by the fact that two people got bronze stars out of that incident, one of which is saying Kerry lied on the report, thus invalidating his own bronze star, which he has, as yet, failed to give back, much less repudiate. That, as far as I'm concerned, is the greatest blow to the credibility of this group so far.
gmginsfo:
I just saw a piece on this whole flap on NBC Nightly News - not the most in-depth coverage, I grant you, but a good summary of the incident in which Kerry saved his fellow soldier Rasmussen.
Issues not in question:
1. There were 5 swift boats that approached a booby trap - Kerry's and one another went around it to the right, the other three to the left. One of the left boats hits a mine and begins to sink.
2. Kerry's boat gets around the booby trap and returns to help Rasmussen out of the water. The other boats, including Thurlow, the heard of the swift boat group, help the other survivors.
3. Both Kerry and Thurlow receive medals for valor.
The only issues under question:
1. Was there enemy fire?
2. Were Kerry's injuries significant?
On the second issue - one record says his arm was bleeding and he was in pain, the other merely says he was bruised - I am not clear if either report came from Kerry himself, but I think we can agree this is a relatively minor issue.
On the first issue, which seems to be the big one, the official records all state there was enemy fire. Kerry, Rasmussen and others from Kerry's boat and at least one other (I believe) say yes. Thurlow says no and states he will return his own Bronze Star if it were only given because they were under fire. Thurlow also admits his memory may be clouded because of his anger at Kerry for protesting the war when he returned.
*****************************************
One thing I learned in my psych major in college is that memory is incredibly malleable. So I am not surprised that nearly 25 years later there is confusion among the surviving witnesses. As I understand it, these boats had only a few people each, and all the witnesses still alive have been identified - some agree with Kerry, some don't.
Unless you really believe that Kerry, in 1971 , deliberately lied about the incident because he thought he might one day be President, you cannot really accuse him of lying. You cannot really accuse Thurlow of lying, either. Both are now retelling the incident as they truly remember it. Even if one of them, sometime in the past, added or deleted a key detail, that memory is now imprinted as they are currently retelling it.
More importantly, for me, is the link to the article on the similarities to the smears against McCain. This is all being done as a smokescreen to discredit a candidate because the Bush administration knew it was losing significant ground. Now Kerry (who incidentally is limited in his ability to respond during this month before Bush is nominated) has to waste time fighting these smears, and cannot actually run his campaign the way he wants.
Such tactics by themselves, even if only implicitly approved and condoned by the campaign (which they have been) are grounds for not voting for Bush.
I just saw a piece on this whole flap on NBC Nightly News - not the most in-depth coverage, I grant you, but a good summary of the incident in which Kerry saved his fellow soldier Rasmussen.
Issues not in question:
1. There were 5 swift boats that approached a booby trap - Kerry's and one another went around it to the right, the other three to the left. One of the left boats hits a mine and begins to sink.
2. Kerry's boat gets around the booby trap and returns to help Rasmussen out of the water. The other boats, including Thurlow, the heard of the swift boat group, help the other survivors.
3. Both Kerry and Thurlow receive medals for valor.
The only issues under question:
1. Was there enemy fire?
2. Were Kerry's injuries significant?
On the second issue - one record says his arm was bleeding and he was in pain, the other merely says he was bruised - I am not clear if either report came from Kerry himself, but I think we can agree this is a relatively minor issue.
On the first issue, which seems to be the big one, the official records all state there was enemy fire. Kerry, Rasmussen and others from Kerry's boat and at least one other (I believe) say yes. Thurlow says no and states he will return his own Bronze Star if it were only given because they were under fire. Thurlow also admits his memory may be clouded because of his anger at Kerry for protesting the war when he returned.
*****************************************
One thing I learned in my psych major in college is that memory is incredibly malleable. So I am not surprised that nearly 25 years later there is confusion among the surviving witnesses. As I understand it, these boats had only a few people each, and all the witnesses still alive have been identified - some agree with Kerry, some don't.
Unless you really believe that Kerry, in 1971 , deliberately lied about the incident because he thought he might one day be President, you cannot really accuse him of lying. You cannot really accuse Thurlow of lying, either. Both are now retelling the incident as they truly remember it. Even if one of them, sometime in the past, added or deleted a key detail, that memory is now imprinted as they are currently retelling it.
More importantly, for me, is the link to the article on the similarities to the smears against McCain. This is all being done as a smokescreen to discredit a candidate because the Bush administration knew it was losing significant ground. Now Kerry (who incidentally is limited in his ability to respond during this month before Bush is nominated) has to waste time fighting these smears, and cannot actually run his campaign the way he wants.
Such tactics by themselves, even if only implicitly approved and condoned by the campaign (which they have been) are grounds for not voting for Bush.
QUOTE
CPT_Doom:
More importantly, for me, is the link to the article on the similarities to the smears against McCain. This is all being done as a smokescreen to discredit a candidate because the Bush administration knew it was losing significant ground.
Yet John McCain is not only supporting Bush in the campaign but More importantly, for me, is the link to the article on the similarities to the smears against McCain. This is all being done as a smokescreen to discredit a candidate because the Bush administration knew it was losing significant ground.
taking a major role in it, and there are still people who think he's a moderate or a maverick or whatever. Give me a break. John McCain may be a lot of things, but one thing he isn't is worthy of being President any more than Bush.
Uh oh, now we learn that W's lawyer has ties to the "Swifties," after W said there were no ties. First, the "Swifty" Cordier had to resign from W's re-election campaign (oops!), and now lawyer Benjamin Ginsberg has been advising the Swifties. In addition to again being truth-challenged, W may be in violation of the law.
Yahoo! News: W campaign lawyer tied to anti-Kerry group's ads
Yahoo! News: W campaign lawyer tied to anti-Kerry group's ads
QUOTE
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - A top lawyer for President Bush's re-election campaign has been providing legal advice to the group that has accused Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites) of lying about his Vietnam War record, informed sources said on Tuesday.
The sources, who asked not to be identified, said Ben Ginsberg, the Bush campaign's chief outside counsel, has also been giving legal advice to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the group that is attacking Kerry.
Bush's campaign insists it has no relationship with the group and has denied Kerry's charge that it is a front for the president's re-election team.
The Bush campaign declined to comment on the disclosure that Ginsberg is tied to the Swift Boat group, which has run a series of television commercials assailing Kerry and accusing him of lying about his service during the Vietnam war.
Bush campaign spokesman Scott Stanzel said: \"There has been no coordination at any time.\"
As a young Navy lieutenant commanding a gunboat in Vietnam, Kerry was decorated five times for valor and sustaining combat wounds. He still carries shrapnel in his leg from one of those wounds.
Ginsberg is the second person working for the Bush campaign who has been linked to the group attacking Kerry.
\"It's another piece of the mounting evidence of the ties between the Bush campaign and this group,\" said Kerry campaign spokesman Chad Clanton.
[snipped]
Records show the Swift Boat group received some of its funding from long-time Bush supporters. Its new commercial also features one veteran, Ken Cordier, who was on a Bush campaign committee until last week, when he was forced to quit.
The Bush campaign has both an outside and an inside counsel. Ginsberg also served as chief outside counsel to the Bush campaign in 2000.
Federal election rules bar organizations that take unrestricted donations from coordinating their activities with campaigns or political parties.
More on Yahoo! News site!
The sources, who asked not to be identified, said Ben Ginsberg, the Bush campaign's chief outside counsel, has also been giving legal advice to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the group that is attacking Kerry.
Bush's campaign insists it has no relationship with the group and has denied Kerry's charge that it is a front for the president's re-election team.
The Bush campaign declined to comment on the disclosure that Ginsberg is tied to the Swift Boat group, which has run a series of television commercials assailing Kerry and accusing him of lying about his service during the Vietnam war.
Bush campaign spokesman Scott Stanzel said: \"There has been no coordination at any time.\"
As a young Navy lieutenant commanding a gunboat in Vietnam, Kerry was decorated five times for valor and sustaining combat wounds. He still carries shrapnel in his leg from one of those wounds.
Ginsberg is the second person working for the Bush campaign who has been linked to the group attacking Kerry.
\"It's another piece of the mounting evidence of the ties between the Bush campaign and this group,\" said Kerry campaign spokesman Chad Clanton.
[snipped]
Records show the Swift Boat group received some of its funding from long-time Bush supporters. Its new commercial also features one veteran, Ken Cordier, who was on a Bush campaign committee until last week, when he was forced to quit.
The Bush campaign has both an outside and an inside counsel. Ginsberg also served as chief outside counsel to the Bush campaign in 2000.
Federal election rules bar organizations that take unrestricted donations from coordinating their activities with campaigns or political parties.
QUOTE
Joe in Philly:
Yet John McCain is not only supporting Bush in the campaign but
taking a major role in it
In politics is that called covering your a--? He wants it both ways and may instead get it in both ends.
Yet John McCain is not only supporting Bush in the campaign but
taking a major role in it
This has gotten so serious that lurch is now phoning the dudes and plead for their support, you know the 60 of the vs the 3-4 he scraped up.
This is pretty funny... Kerry demands that W's records come out, but hasnt released his...
That right wing nut, suprano or something, spends millions of dollars on web sites to compare W to Hitler. The little hollywood elite bankroll the concerts in the grass to say how evil and mean W is... Kerry runs ads saying that he poisons kids and prego moms.
But yet this is a TERRIBLE thing he has done here LOL... you guys are too much.
Actually my question is this, if he came back and hated the war, hated the killing, hated the raping, hated the burning of the villiages... etc... why would he want the Vet vote, it's not like he's not turned his back to them since he threw his metals away? It's not like he carpet bagged his way against them into office.
HAHA then again, it's not like any majority of vets are even voting for him.
http://www.georgewbush.com/KerryMediaCenter/
at the bottom is what is wishy washy lurch is going to find as his downfall... Everythign he touted W as doing to mislead, he said himself.
This is pretty funny... Kerry demands that W's records come out, but hasnt released his...
That right wing nut, suprano or something, spends millions of dollars on web sites to compare W to Hitler. The little hollywood elite bankroll the concerts in the grass to say how evil and mean W is... Kerry runs ads saying that he poisons kids and prego moms.
But yet this is a TERRIBLE thing he has done here LOL... you guys are too much.
Actually my question is this, if he came back and hated the war, hated the killing, hated the raping, hated the burning of the villiages... etc... why would he want the Vet vote, it's not like he's not turned his back to them since he threw his metals away? It's not like he carpet bagged his way against them into office.
HAHA then again, it's not like any majority of vets are even voting for him.
http://www.georgewbush.com/KerryMediaCenter/
at the bottom is what is wishy washy lurch is going to find as his downfall... Everythign he touted W as doing to mislead, he said himself.
Does this mean that chickenhawk PhillyFan has flipped flopped and will now be voting for chickenhawk Bush?
QUOTE
gmginsfo:
Where are the FOA requests, search for witnesses and records, painstaking accounting, etc. that marked the media's research into the President's service but are now missing in action from their inquiry into Kerry's? Fact is, they're just not there and we're ALL less informed for it.
Ann Coulter's take on the issue.
This one really went over your head gmg. See, the difference is Kerry actually showed up (volunteered) for service, in sharp contrast to your AWOL idiot. Where are the FOA requests, search for witnesses and records, painstaking accounting, etc. that marked the media's research into the President's service but are now missing in action from their inquiry into Kerry's? Fact is, they're just not there and we're ALL less informed for it.
Ann Coulter's take on the issue.
Kerry: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Three Purple Hearts
Bush: Teeth cleaning in Alabama.
Since you're giving us Ann Coulters take, why not
those of your fellow rethuglicans, Rush, Jerry Falwell, etc.
Is anyone else as fed up with this as I am? Its time to move on, and put this garbage behind. Enough already. There are simply to many issues that are too important that are not being given the full attention to, including the 43 million Americans without health insurance, the 35 million Americans who live in poverty in this rich country, jobs that are going overseas, a huge mess of a budget defiecit that gets bigger with each second, and so on and so on. Its time to stop this and now. If this doesn't stop and soon, both parties run the risk of turning off a lot of potential votes, at a time when neither party can ill afford to. It doesn't matter who started this, or who chose to make it an issue, its time to put a period in this and move on.
But Puckman, don't you see, the point of this mess was to do two things: confuse people about Kerry's record, despite the fact that THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION HAS BEEN FULLY RELEASED ON HIS SERVICE AND TESTIMONY BEFORE CONGRESS (unlike W), AND to DISTRACT PEOPLE from the fact that W HAS DONE NO RECORD TO RUN ON--IN FOUR YEARS, HE HAS BEEN A DISASTER!
Let's see, under his watch: 9/11, Cheney's energy cabal and the California energy gouging scandal (which Enron was part of), the spectacular business scandals (including Enron's implosion), the SEC shenanigans, the misguided war and subsequent occupation debacle in Iraq, the WMD lies, the intelligence failures, billions leaving our treasury to fund the war, over 1 million jobs lost when millions were promised, a more "promiscuous" overseas commitment of our military forces despite his criticism of Clinton, "Some Children Left Behind," gutting of environmental regulations, the outing of a CIA agent, FMA, etc.., etc. Not a record to run on by any measure.
Kerry volunteered for Vietnam. He didn't have to. He served TWO tours. He was multiply wounded AND saved a man's life. The men who served on his boat back up his account AS DO THE OFFICIAL RECORDS. Now others who served alongside him--as opposed to these "Swifty" liars who weren't even in his unit--back up his testimony. What is at all hard to understand about this?
W has NEVER released ALL of his records from his "service" in the Air National Guard. WHY? Where are all HIS records? If his service was honorable, why won't he release them, after being in office for four years and strutting around on an aircraft carrier claiming "MIssion Accomplished" and then flipflopping and blaming the military for the banner? Why can't he do the BASIC THING of finding at least as many guardsmen as Kerry has--as well as official government documents--to back up his account that HE WAS NOT AWOL?
[ August 25, 2004, 08:08 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]
Let's see, under his watch: 9/11, Cheney's energy cabal and the California energy gouging scandal (which Enron was part of), the spectacular business scandals (including Enron's implosion), the SEC shenanigans, the misguided war and subsequent occupation debacle in Iraq, the WMD lies, the intelligence failures, billions leaving our treasury to fund the war, over 1 million jobs lost when millions were promised, a more "promiscuous" overseas commitment of our military forces despite his criticism of Clinton, "Some Children Left Behind," gutting of environmental regulations, the outing of a CIA agent, FMA, etc.., etc. Not a record to run on by any measure.
Kerry volunteered for Vietnam. He didn't have to. He served TWO tours. He was multiply wounded AND saved a man's life. The men who served on his boat back up his account AS DO THE OFFICIAL RECORDS. Now others who served alongside him--as opposed to these "Swifty" liars who weren't even in his unit--back up his testimony. What is at all hard to understand about this?
W has NEVER released ALL of his records from his "service" in the Air National Guard. WHY? Where are all HIS records? If his service was honorable, why won't he release them, after being in office for four years and strutting around on an aircraft carrier claiming "MIssion Accomplished" and then flipflopping and blaming the military for the banner? Why can't he do the BASIC THING of finding at least as many guardsmen as Kerry has--as well as official government documents--to back up his account that HE WAS NOT AWOL?
[ August 25, 2004, 08:08 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]
More OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION that supports Kerry's account:
Yahoo! News: Unit's report supports Kerry's version
Yahoo! News: Unit's report supports Kerry's version
QUOTE
Unit's Report Supports Kerry's Version
Wed Aug 25, 6:33 AM ET
By MATT KELLEY, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - The Navy task force overseeing John Kerry (news - web sites)'s swift boat squadron in Vietnam reported that his group of boats came under enemy fire during a March 13, 1969, incident that three decades later is being challenged by the Democratic presidential nominee's critics.
The March 18, 1969, weekly report from Task Force 115, which was located by The Associated Press during a search of Navy archives, is the latest document to surface that supports Kerry's description of an event for which he won a Bronze Star and a third Purple Heart.
The Task Force report twice mentions the incident five days earlier and both times calls it \"an enemy initiated firefight\" that included automatic weapons fire and underwater mines used against a group of five boats that included Kerry's.
Task Force 115 was commanded at the time by retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffmann, the founder of the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which has been running ads challenging Kerry's account of the episode.
A member of the group, Larry Thurlow, said Tuesday he stood by his assertion that there was no enemy fire that day. Thurlow, the commander of another boat who also won a Bronze Star, said task force commanders probably relied on the initial report of the incident. Thurlow says Kerry wrote that report.
The document, part of thousands of pages of records housed at the Naval Historical Center, is one of several that say Kerry and other servicemen were shot at from the banks of the Bay Hap River on March 13, 1969. The Associated Press located the document Tuesday during a search of available records.
Earlier this month, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth aired a television ad claiming Kerry lied about the circumstances surrounding his medals. Several members of the group who were aboard nearby boats that March 13 said in the ad and in affidavits that there was no enemy gunfire during the incident.
The anti-Kerry group has not produced any official Navy documents supporting that claim, however. The man Kerry rescued, Jim Rassmann, and the crew of Kerry's boat all say there was gunfire from both banks of the river at the time.
Wed Aug 25, 6:33 AM ET
By MATT KELLEY, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - The Navy task force overseeing John Kerry (news - web sites)'s swift boat squadron in Vietnam reported that his group of boats came under enemy fire during a March 13, 1969, incident that three decades later is being challenged by the Democratic presidential nominee's critics.
The March 18, 1969, weekly report from Task Force 115, which was located by The Associated Press during a search of Navy archives, is the latest document to surface that supports Kerry's description of an event for which he won a Bronze Star and a third Purple Heart.
The Task Force report twice mentions the incident five days earlier and both times calls it \"an enemy initiated firefight\" that included automatic weapons fire and underwater mines used against a group of five boats that included Kerry's.
Task Force 115 was commanded at the time by retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffmann, the founder of the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which has been running ads challenging Kerry's account of the episode.
A member of the group, Larry Thurlow, said Tuesday he stood by his assertion that there was no enemy fire that day. Thurlow, the commander of another boat who also won a Bronze Star, said task force commanders probably relied on the initial report of the incident. Thurlow says Kerry wrote that report.
The document, part of thousands of pages of records housed at the Naval Historical Center, is one of several that say Kerry and other servicemen were shot at from the banks of the Bay Hap River on March 13, 1969. The Associated Press located the document Tuesday during a search of available records.
Earlier this month, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth aired a television ad claiming Kerry lied about the circumstances surrounding his medals. Several members of the group who were aboard nearby boats that March 13 said in the ad and in affidavits that there was no enemy gunfire during the incident.
The anti-Kerry group has not produced any official Navy documents supporting that claim, however. The man Kerry rescued, Jim Rassmann, and the crew of Kerry's boat all say there was gunfire from both banks of the river at the time.
puckman, I agree with you that there are far more important & timely issues that should be the focus of the campaign, but Kerry must respond (forcefully) to the false accusations being leveled at him on his service record or the Bush machine will continue to use misleading--or out-and-out lies--information to attack him on other issues as well.
~Adam
~Adam
I agree with Puckman. There are too many other issues that are more important and that should be addressed.
The people involved and responsible for the "Swift Boat" ads seem to have succeeded in shifting many of us away from more important issues.
The bottom line for me, regarding the "Swift Boat" ads is that Kerry served his country. He was honored more than once for his military service so he must have done something right. I feel it's time to move on and not fall victim to what seems to be a desperate attempt to distract us away from important issues currently taking place.
The people involved and responsible for the "Swift Boat" ads seem to have succeeded in shifting many of us away from more important issues.
The bottom line for me, regarding the "Swift Boat" ads is that Kerry served his country. He was honored more than once for his military service so he must have done something right. I feel it's time to move on and not fall victim to what seems to be a desperate attempt to distract us away from important issues currently taking place.
QUOTE
fantomas:
Uh oh, now we learn that W's lawyer has ties to the \"Swifties,\" after W said there were no ties. First, the \"Swifty\" Cordier had to resign from W's re-election campaign (oops!), and now lawyer Benjamin Ginsberg has been advising the Swifties. In addition to again being truth-challenged, W may be in violation of the law.
Now Ginsberg has resigned from Shrub's campaign. He denies doing anything wrong but doesn't want to "distract" from the real issues. How do they say these things with a straight face? Uh oh, now we learn that W's lawyer has ties to the \"Swifties,\" after W said there were no ties. First, the \"Swifty\" Cordier had to resign from W's re-election campaign (oops!), and now lawyer Benjamin Ginsberg has been advising the Swifties. In addition to again being truth-challenged, W may be in violation of the law.
Anybody who's an attorney or has ever worked in a law firm knows that the first thing you do when you take on a new client is perform a conflicts check. How is it that this "brilliant" lawyer didn't see this "conflict" in representing Bush and this 527 group?
Sounds shady to me . . .
Sounds shady to me . . .
QUOTE
KeyWest Guy:
Anybody who's an attorney or has ever worked in a law firm knows that the first thing you do when you take on a new client is perform a conflicts check. How is it that this \"brilliant\" lawyer didn't see this \"conflict\" in representing Bush and this 527 group?
Sounds shady to me . . .
...or just not too swift. Anybody who's an attorney or has ever worked in a law firm knows that the first thing you do when you take on a new client is perform a conflicts check. How is it that this \"brilliant\" lawyer didn't see this \"conflict\" in representing Bush and this 527 group?
Sounds shady to me . . .
While perhaps not violating the letter of the law, both campaigns/parties have counsel serving in similar capacities.
From today's AP story on the matter (note that the following is buried in the final two paragraphs of the story):
Joe Sandler, a lawyer for the [Democratic National Committee] and a group running anti-Bush ads, MoveOn.org, said there is nothing wrong with serving in both roles at once.
In addition to the [Federal Elections Commission's] coordination rules, attorneys are ethically bound to maintain attorney-client confidentiality, Sandler said. They could lose their law license if they violate that, he said.
And from the NYT:
The campaign of Senator John Kerry shares a lawyer, Robert Bauer, with America Coming Together, a liberal group that is organizing a huge multimillion-dollar get-out-the-vote drive that is far more ambitious than the Swift boat group's activities. Mr. Ginsberg said his role was no different from Mr. Bauer's.
From today's AP story on the matter (note that the following is buried in the final two paragraphs of the story):
Joe Sandler, a lawyer for the [Democratic National Committee] and a group running anti-Bush ads, MoveOn.org, said there is nothing wrong with serving in both roles at once.
In addition to the [Federal Elections Commission's] coordination rules, attorneys are ethically bound to maintain attorney-client confidentiality, Sandler said. They could lose their law license if they violate that, he said.
And from the NYT:
The campaign of Senator John Kerry shares a lawyer, Robert Bauer, with America Coming Together, a liberal group that is organizing a huge multimillion-dollar get-out-the-vote drive that is far more ambitious than the Swift boat group's activities. Mr. Ginsberg said his role was no different from Mr. Bauer's.
QUOTE
PennState4Ever:
Mr. Ginsberg said his role was no different from Mr. Bauer's.
Sure it is - Kerry didn't disavow association with Bauer's group.
Mr. Ginsberg said his role was no different from Mr. Bauer's.
QUOTE
GatorJamie:
Hey, I report, you decide. wink QUOTE
PennState4Ever:
Mr. Ginsberg said his role was no different from Mr. Bauer's.
Sure it is - Kerry didn't disavow association with Bauer's group. Mr. Ginsberg said his role was no different from Mr. Bauer's.
Seems like a perfect bar exam question to me...at any rate, this should give the ABA ethics section something to chew on over martinis.
So, what Ginsberg did was legal - fine. There's precedent for such work, and clearly the other side is doing the same.
BUT, Kerry did disavow MoveOn ads he believed were inappropriate.
More importantly, if an ethical lawyer (okay, hold your laughter until I'm done) suddenly faces a quandry like this - in that he works for two organizations, but one organization has been found to be putting out misleading, at best, information, if not downright inaccurate - wouldn't you quit that organization instead? Or does Ginsberg so enjoy the hatchet job being done by the anti-Kerry group that he wants to continue working for them (certainly the Bush/Cheney campaign should be able to pay him more)?
BUT, Kerry did disavow MoveOn ads he believed were inappropriate.
More importantly, if an ethical lawyer (okay, hold your laughter until I'm done) suddenly faces a quandry like this - in that he works for two organizations, but one organization has been found to be putting out misleading, at best, information, if not downright inaccurate - wouldn't you quit that organization instead? Or does Ginsberg so enjoy the hatchet job being done by the anti-Kerry group that he wants to continue working for them (certainly the Bush/Cheney campaign should be able to pay him more)?
QUOTE
GatorJamie:
Are you saying then that the Kerry campaign is in fact associated with ACT? As I understand it, that would be illegal under current campaign finance law.
QUOTE
PennState4Ever:
Mr. Ginsberg said his role was no different from Mr. Bauer's.
Sure it is - Kerry didn't disavow association with Bauer's group. Mr. Ginsberg said his role was no different from Mr. Bauer's.
QUOTE
William1865:
Are you saying then that the Kerry campaign is in fact associated with ACT?
No.
Are you saying then that the Kerry campaign is in fact associated with ACT?
QUOTE
GatorJamie:
I'm trying to work through this...so the Kerry campaign isn't associated with ACT, but nobody's bothered to ask if the Kerry campaign is associated with ACT, and thus Kerry hasn't had to disavow such association, whereas the Bush people were asked if they were associated with the Sboat people, and said they weren't, so thus it's okay for Kerry's lawyer to work with the group they're not associated but not okay for Bush's lawyer to work with the group they're not associated with. Right? If that's the case, I'm sure I can get somebody in the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy to ask Kerry about ACT, if it would balance things out.
QUOTE
William1865:
Are you saying then that the Kerry campaign is in fact associated with ACT?
No. Are you saying then that the Kerry campaign is in fact associated with ACT?
Not to take this topic off-subject, but those who complain questions of military service have somehow pushed all other issues aside aren't reading the same papers I am. Cable & radio talk shows may be consumed with it, but newspapers have been offering details on tax policy, health care initiatives, environmental proposals....the full gamut of far more timely issues. Any voter who feels uninformed on issues other than Kerry's service record has only him/herself to blame. Since Bush refuses to hold press conferences or answer any sort of question regarding his service record, (and too many of the press corp have become lapdogs waiting for a handout rather than investigate on their own) we're kind of SOL on that angle. And anyway, once the Republican convention gets into full swing, even the cable blowhards will focus on what's being spewed from the podium in NY.
~Adam
~Adam
Yes, maybe Lurch should move onto the issues... let's start on what his stand on Iraq is right now. Lets pin him down for ONE WEEK. He's for it and against it so much, it's hard to keep up.
Then again he did sucker ya'all in to vote for him being anti-war, even though he voted for the war. But now that you voted for him, he's for the war. Till next week when he's talking to the little tree huggers up in SF. Then he's against the war.
Then again, the honored Vet that Kerry is should count up his vet votes... this decorated vet of the people for the people and by the people cant even scrape 50% of the vet vote. Such a shame. Then again that's what happen when you call your fellow vets rapists.
Then again he did sucker ya'all in to vote for him being anti-war, even though he voted for the war. But now that you voted for him, he's for the war. Till next week when he's talking to the little tree huggers up in SF. Then he's against the war.
Then again, the honored Vet that Kerry is should count up his vet votes... this decorated vet of the people for the people and by the people cant even scrape 50% of the vet vote. Such a shame. Then again that's what happen when you call your fellow vets rapists.
What a truly tired epithat.
I really wish all these front groups would die, on both sides of this intensely partisan election. This country has gone into the shitter. And its our own damned faults. The electoral process is broken.
QUOTE
PhillyFan:
Yes, maybe Lurch should move onto the issues... let's start on what his stand on Iraq is right now. Lets pin him down for ONE WEEK. He's for it and against it so much, it's hard to keep up.
Then again he did sucker ya'all in to vote for him being anti-war, even though he voted for the war. But now that you voted for him, he's for the war. Till next week when he's talking to the little tree huggers up in SF. Then he's against the war.
Then again, the honored Vet that Kerry is should count up his vet votes... this decorated vet of the people for the people and by the people cant even scrape 50% of the vet vote. Such a shame. Then again that's what happen when you call your fellow vets rapists.
ZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzYes, maybe Lurch should move onto the issues... let's start on what his stand on Iraq is right now. Lets pin him down for ONE WEEK. He's for it and against it so much, it's hard to keep up.
Then again he did sucker ya'all in to vote for him being anti-war, even though he voted for the war. But now that you voted for him, he's for the war. Till next week when he's talking to the little tree huggers up in SF. Then he's against the war.
Then again, the honored Vet that Kerry is should count up his vet votes... this decorated vet of the people for the people and by the people cant even scrape 50% of the vet vote. Such a shame. Then again that's what happen when you call your fellow vets rapists.
bitch bitch bitch
moan moan moan
Tell us where you candidate stands PF, come on - stand up for what you believe in.
I know chickenhawks dont usually do that but hey, suprise us.
QUOTE
AU Tiger in ATL:
I really wish all these front groups would die, on both sides of this intensely partisan election. This country has gone into the shitter. And its our own damned faults. The electoral process is broken.
I don't think it is. If people's votes are changed, thrown away, trashed, and if voters--especially the elderly, black voters, ex-felons, latinos, etc.--aren't intimidated (as the GOP has already begun to do in Michigan and Florida), and if more young women vote, Kerry will win easily. But it may be a lot to ask--the people at the top of the GOP--that is, not all Republicans, but the ones like DeLay, W, etc.--don't really like democracy that much. Which is why they're always trying to do as much as they can to "fix" (as in, rig, not correct) it.
I really wish all these front groups would die, on both sides of this intensely partisan election. This country has gone into the shitter. And its our own damned faults. The electoral process is broken.
Came across the following timely editorial in this week's issue of the Pacific Northwest Inlander. As far as I am concerned, this is and should be the last word on the subject:
I will not offer the entire editorial because of size, but here is the jist of it:"
"Taking Fire Again," by Robert Herold:
He was first introduced as someone who had been there and seen it all firsthand this seemingly authoritative, but certainly dour and angry guest, who had been given a national television forum by Pat Buchanan on MSNBC'S Scarborough Country. Using all the military lingo that comes with the territory, he charged that John Kerry wasn't all that seriously injured, that he had earned a silver star by killing a North Vietnamese who had already been wounded in the leg, and that Kerry had never crossed into Cambodia. Meet Ted Sampley, co-founder of an organization calling itself Vietname Veterans Against John Kerry.
Buchanan then turned to MSNBC political analyst Lawrence O ' Donnell, his debate partner, and asked for a response. Instead O' Donnell driected a question at Sampley. He asked if Sampley wasn't the same person, who had been arrested back in 2000, for assaulting a member of John McCains campaign staff. After a blink or two and stunned silence by Buchanan, Kerry's would be exposer admitted that yes, back during the 2000 campaign, he had been arrested for assaulting a member of John McCain's staff. He then muttered something to the effect, that he could "back up" everything he had said about McCain. O 'Donnell then fried back for effect: "You said John McCain was brainwashed and and is a 'Manchurian Candidate', and is an agent of another government. That's who we now have. Thats who we are sharing this broadcast with right now."
This is on a nationally televised broadcast, supposedly devoted to enlightning people about the presidential race. Incredible! Anyone watching had to be asking why Pat Buchanan, or anyone had given Sampley a national television audience, then actually introduced him as a man who could be taken seriously. If we can answer this question, maybe we can get to the bottom of all the Kerry bashing going on.
So far its been the "exposer" who have been easily exposed. For example, we now know that the doctor who calimed that one of Kerry's wounds wasn't that serious wasn't the doctor whose name went onto the medical record. And Sampley? He wasn't anywhere near Kerry's swift boat as it came under fire back in Feburary of 1969.
Now four more sailors and one more officer who were at the battle in question have come forward to reaffrim what the members of Kerry's own boat, and the institution we call the United States Navy, have said for years: by all military measures, Kerry performed heroically.
According to Navy policy, even minor wounds, if received in combat, qualify for the Purple Heart. So what are these guys suggesting, that we go back throughout the history of American wars, and revisit the size of each wound suffered by each veteran and decide if it was bad enough? No, just for John Kerry it turns out.
The Ahab to Kerry's Moby Dick has been John O'Neil. This Naval Acadmeny graduate, Vietname Vet.(and part time partisan mouthpiece for Chuck Colson of Watergate infamy) decalred war on Kerry more, than three decades ago, when Kerry testified before the Fullbright Committee in 1971. Most unacceptable to O'Neil was Kerry's charge, that Americans had been made to commit war crimes. For more than three dacades, O "neil has been in denial.
To slice and dice events in a war, now more than 30 years old, misses the larger point that Kerry was trying to make: that the officially approved rules of engagement in Vietname actually called for war crimes to be committed. Kerry referred to the so called free-fire zones. Imagine if you will that the local police, in search of a dangerous felon, pour into your neighborhood, with orders to shoot on sight, anyone or anything that moves. That's a free fire zone. Kerry argued that such zones, violated the Geneva Conventions, and he was right.
Naturally this leads to President Bush, who apparently didn't think it was all that important to go to Vietname to help "smoke em out."
This whole episode is a repeat of the South Carolina primary in 2000, when these same guys, came out of the woodwork to help Bush by questioning the service of John McCain.
Sadly enough, it worked, and McCain lost in South Carolina. Most important, McCain's momentum was deariled, and Bush's money advantage allowed him to take over and win the nomination. In South Carolina, Bush was desperate, now despite finally calling Kerry's service "admirable," he's just unwilling to offend his base by refusing to condemn these attacks. Will he do the right thing?
So far he hasn't. The linkage between his campaign and the funding for the anti-Kerry commercials calls for him to do more than offer up a sanitized statement on how such commercials are bad for "the system". Bad for the system? No, these attacks are bad period. Let me take a crack at drafting the statement Bush should make:
" I denounce those who attackJohn Kerry over his war record. The Senator was and is a war hero. To attack him like this is to attack all who who were awarded medals for bravery by the U.S. Navy. Kerry came home from Vietnam as critic of the war, as did many. That he expressed deep concern over a very devisive and tragic war does not justify this truly reprehensible attack on a patriot whp put himself in harm's way to serve his country."
Here..here..Mr. Herold!!!!
I will not offer the entire editorial because of size, but here is the jist of it:"
"Taking Fire Again," by Robert Herold:
He was first introduced as someone who had been there and seen it all firsthand this seemingly authoritative, but certainly dour and angry guest, who had been given a national television forum by Pat Buchanan on MSNBC'S Scarborough Country. Using all the military lingo that comes with the territory, he charged that John Kerry wasn't all that seriously injured, that he had earned a silver star by killing a North Vietnamese who had already been wounded in the leg, and that Kerry had never crossed into Cambodia. Meet Ted Sampley, co-founder of an organization calling itself Vietname Veterans Against John Kerry.
Buchanan then turned to MSNBC political analyst Lawrence O ' Donnell, his debate partner, and asked for a response. Instead O' Donnell driected a question at Sampley. He asked if Sampley wasn't the same person, who had been arrested back in 2000, for assaulting a member of John McCains campaign staff. After a blink or two and stunned silence by Buchanan, Kerry's would be exposer admitted that yes, back during the 2000 campaign, he had been arrested for assaulting a member of John McCain's staff. He then muttered something to the effect, that he could "back up" everything he had said about McCain. O 'Donnell then fried back for effect: "You said John McCain was brainwashed and and is a 'Manchurian Candidate', and is an agent of another government. That's who we now have. Thats who we are sharing this broadcast with right now."
This is on a nationally televised broadcast, supposedly devoted to enlightning people about the presidential race. Incredible! Anyone watching had to be asking why Pat Buchanan, or anyone had given Sampley a national television audience, then actually introduced him as a man who could be taken seriously. If we can answer this question, maybe we can get to the bottom of all the Kerry bashing going on.
So far its been the "exposer" who have been easily exposed. For example, we now know that the doctor who calimed that one of Kerry's wounds wasn't that serious wasn't the doctor whose name went onto the medical record. And Sampley? He wasn't anywhere near Kerry's swift boat as it came under fire back in Feburary of 1969.
Now four more sailors and one more officer who were at the battle in question have come forward to reaffrim what the members of Kerry's own boat, and the institution we call the United States Navy, have said for years: by all military measures, Kerry performed heroically.
According to Navy policy, even minor wounds, if received in combat, qualify for the Purple Heart. So what are these guys suggesting, that we go back throughout the history of American wars, and revisit the size of each wound suffered by each veteran and decide if it was bad enough? No, just for John Kerry it turns out.
The Ahab to Kerry's Moby Dick has been John O'Neil. This Naval Acadmeny graduate, Vietname Vet.(and part time partisan mouthpiece for Chuck Colson of Watergate infamy) decalred war on Kerry more, than three decades ago, when Kerry testified before the Fullbright Committee in 1971. Most unacceptable to O'Neil was Kerry's charge, that Americans had been made to commit war crimes. For more than three dacades, O "neil has been in denial.
To slice and dice events in a war, now more than 30 years old, misses the larger point that Kerry was trying to make: that the officially approved rules of engagement in Vietname actually called for war crimes to be committed. Kerry referred to the so called free-fire zones. Imagine if you will that the local police, in search of a dangerous felon, pour into your neighborhood, with orders to shoot on sight, anyone or anything that moves. That's a free fire zone. Kerry argued that such zones, violated the Geneva Conventions, and he was right.
Naturally this leads to President Bush, who apparently didn't think it was all that important to go to Vietname to help "smoke em out."
This whole episode is a repeat of the South Carolina primary in 2000, when these same guys, came out of the woodwork to help Bush by questioning the service of John McCain.
Sadly enough, it worked, and McCain lost in South Carolina. Most important, McCain's momentum was deariled, and Bush's money advantage allowed him to take over and win the nomination. In South Carolina, Bush was desperate, now despite finally calling Kerry's service "admirable," he's just unwilling to offend his base by refusing to condemn these attacks. Will he do the right thing?
So far he hasn't. The linkage between his campaign and the funding for the anti-Kerry commercials calls for him to do more than offer up a sanitized statement on how such commercials are bad for "the system". Bad for the system? No, these attacks are bad period. Let me take a crack at drafting the statement Bush should make:
" I denounce those who attackJohn Kerry over his war record. The Senator was and is a war hero. To attack him like this is to attack all who who were awarded medals for bravery by the U.S. Navy. Kerry came home from Vietnam as critic of the war, as did many. That he expressed deep concern over a very devisive and tragic war does not justify this truly reprehensible attack on a patriot whp put himself in harm's way to serve his country."
Here..here..Mr. Herold!!!!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.