Posted on 08/27/2004 6:07:55 AM PDT by kattracks
There have been several articles, one in the WSJ today, John O'Neil and one by Kerry's direct superior in Vietnam, explaining that the group started in January after Kerry's authorized biography came out. The officer that started the group said that he was so angered by the claims that Kerry made in the book (he directly smeared the officer) that he called some of his old buddies and they got off the ground with about 100 of the old veterans. This is very personal for them and not political at all. They have been all over the tv and in print, saying this and people are hearing them. The polls are proving that this story has traction, and it won't be just the actions that Kerry lied about that the group high lights. Wait until they get into the background of Kerry's post active duty allies, the VVAW. The VVAW were nothing but a Democrat backed group of domestic terrorists, and if the new crop of domestic terrorists do a rerun of the 68 Democrat convention, the comparison can't be avoided. That's a major problem for the Democrats.
---The point I am trying to make is that in the media battle for the middle, especially with it biased against the Swifties, what is presented will never get beyond, "One politically motivated Republican hack claims he was on the boat with Kerry and some other mysterious unnamed person, while our glorious President in waiting (and war hero...he was in Vietnam, you know) Kerry and two other honorable veterans stand together and insist it was just the three of them" ---
Perhaps we could interview those two that stood up with Kerry at the convention. Perhaps they'd like to swear out some afidavits! Then again perhaps not! I think we need to exploit every weekness in the Kerry version of these stories. Some are knockout blows; some are not. Every one of these adds a little to the Kerry portrait and it's not pretty.
bump
What a surprise.
Kerry is scum. Get a nice tough rope, Effin, and hang yourself now........... Teraaaaaaaaayza's not going to leave you any money anyhow!
NO!
You're right about the fantasies, but it's not such a big joke since America's most ruthless and dangerous enemy, THE LAMESTREAM MEDIA is propping Kerry up.
Time to get the Woody Allen "gubs" ('Take The Money And Run' [1968]) and have a revolution.
It might be fun to do a short comic Walter Mitty take off, starring Ltjg Walter Mitty Kerry, and distribute it on the internet.
It seems this guy was 'on the same boat' the way the article is written.
I think they can use that.
Remember when folks here on FR brought up the reality that sooner or later people who were NOT members of the Swift Vet for Truth would come forward.
I don't know if this is sooner or later.....
but....they're back.
Swing voters are not going to be paying attention to details of these stories. In a few weeks there will be a consensus opinion as to whether Kerry has responded effectively.
My guess is that the SwiftVets are going to escalate. I suspect they have domuments showing that Kerry wrote up all these incidents and was in fact, the author of his own medal citations.
Kerry hobnobbed with the Kennedys as a child. It was not irrational for him to aspire to be president. He might have had a chance if he'd been honest in his youth. Meaning, served his full tour, and been honest in his anti-war activities.
I agree that swing voters are not going to be paying attention to details. That is why I think the Swifties have to stick to simple stories with an easy to make case like Christmas in Cambodia.
I agree that the Swifties under O'Neill have been pretty well prepared. I hope they have some more and big ammo though. It will take something pretty thermonuclear to break through the media walls of silence and the media wall of deceit.
I think there are two simple stories here. The first Purple heart was a fabrication. Christmas in Cambodia was a fantasy.
Those two are rock solid. The other medal stories are lost in the fog of war, but if it turns out that Kerry wrote his own citations, watch out.
You're right. They're not going to stop. This is an intensely personal issue with these guys. They're believable and they're having an impact.
Yeah, but Kerry will dispute it, and successfully with limited media focus. Despite all the deeper evidence (Schacte always did it, Kerry was too new etc) 3 people saying it was them is much more powerful than one saying it wasn't. It won't fly. At least not until a different angle really crack's Kerry's credibility.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.