August 13, 2004
"A whole book's worth of ugly lies"
Charlene tore a column out of the SF Examiner and brought it home for me to enjoy: Backlash of Kerry Claims, by Kathleen Antrim.
Now granted the Examiner's no longer a terribly important paper, and Antrim's no fan of Senator Kerry, but still, it's a pleasure to read something like this in liberal San Francisco. I enjoy it not so much because of Kerry (he's toast, he's a pre-breakfast snack for Karl Rove, and the campaign's become a bore) but because it opens one more fissure into the news blackout that the major media are trying to do on this little hot-potato. That's what annoys me, after they savaged the President about his military service. (Blogged here, here, und here)
John F. Kerry's campaign for president is imploding. And he knows it.The anti-war candidate went public as a pro-war candidate this week, and the members of his beloved "Band of Brothers" are exposing a whole book's worth of ugly lies. And they've got details, evidence, footnotes, signed affidavits and witnesses who back up their claims.
Kerry himself bestowed immense credibility on his "Band of Brothers" when he used a picture of some of them in his campaign ad titled "Lifetime."
Essentially, Kerry made Vietnam, and these men, the centerpiece of his campaign. Of course, that was when he thought they'd support his candidacy. No matter that he'd never bothered to ask their permission to use them to promote his political career.
Now, however, the Kerry campaign is on a search-and-destroy mission to attack the credibility of these same men -- calling them liars, all 60 of them, and saying they didn't serve in the military with him. Really? Then why'd Kerry use their pictures in his ad campaign?
These are the same men who Kerry hailed as his "Band of Brothers," who he implied knew him well and could vouch for him as a wonderful soldier and man.
These men, who Kerry inferred that we, the American people, could trust to tell us that he would make a great president, are suddenly liars. And why? Because they aren't saying what Kerry wants them to say....
Posted by John Weidner at August 13, 2004 03:59 PM | TrackBack
Nice job. I posted the results of my Google search for "Kerry Cambodia Christmas 'New York Times'". Nothing. Oh dear, what could I have misspelled. I'm still chuckling.
Posted by: Tom Bowler at August 13, 2004 05:59 PMDo you look at the polls? John Kerry would win if the election were held today. Plus, the whole Cambodia story is being confirmed by his journal, in broad outlines if not exactly. He was within 50 miles of the border dropping of CIA guys.
Meanwhile, Bush was busy not showing up for his flight physical in the Air National Guard.
Posted by: Brennan Griffin at August 13, 2004 06:53 PMBrennan,
The "within 50 miles" line is easily disputed with this map, the election isn't today, it's in November, after Unfit For Command hits the stands, the Republican convention, the third anniversary of 9/11 and any October surprise or two the administration might be planning. And even minus all that, not all of today's polls show Kerry winning.
And your crack about Bush's physical is a reminder that the media has to start covering Kerry's service in 'Nam with something approaching the same level of scrutiny they've given Bush's service in the ANG, or hang up any hope of appearing to be within 50 miles of being objective.
Ed
Posted by: Ed Driscoll at August 13, 2004 07:26 PMHe's toast? It's going to be painful fall for you buddy. Cambodia? or Alabama? I placing my bet on Cambodia. At least Kerry was serving in dangerous territory, but then Alabama is still dangerous for some folks.
Posted by: Mark York at August 13, 2004 07:39 PMCarry on wingnuts. The victory against this pack of corporate elite liars will be ever so sweet.
Posted by: Mark York at August 13, 2004 07:41 PMBrennan obviously has not done his homework, and is just repeating the latest lame Kerry talking points.
50 miles is not exactly "near" and the whole point of Kerry's story is that he was "in" Cambodia...if not in Cambodia, the story's point falls apart.
Kerry told the story in the context of speaking out against presidential lying; the central irony was that Kerry was supposedly in Cambodia while the president was denying there were any US troops in Cambodia. If Kerry is 50 miles away, then his story becomes "The president lied, because while he said there were no troops in Cambodia, I was near Cambodia." Not exactly the same.
Also, Kerry is very vivid about his experience. In one account he fixes his exact location as 5 miles within Cambodia...not some rough guess that one is inside Cambodia, but an exact mileage. And of course Kerry talks about it being Christmas and the people shooting off guns and being drunk in celebration of Christmas. Now even the Kerry Kamp says that was a misstatement, that he was in Cambodia in January. Then why the strong recollections of Christmas? Again, it isn't like he said "around December..."...he specifically said Christmas and noted the celebration of it.
Also, of course, there is the famous statement of Kerry as saying this incident was "seared" into his memory. Supposedly this was a very formative incident in Kerry's personal history...the time when he decided the Vietnam war was wrong...the time he decided to oppose the war. Plus, he has repeated this story for about 30 years now. All of this doesn't jive with him just having some memory lapse.
There is no doubt that Kerry has been caught in a lie. The only question is whether the media has enough integrity and honesty left to report it and give it the attention it deserves. If not, we will have an amazing display of media bias and the last of their credibility will have been shredded.
Posted by: Thoughtful at August 13, 2004 07:41 PMI just finished ‘Not Fit For Command.’ It is devastating. Not so much in exposing Senator Kerry’s disconnect from truth, as much as from reality. The sub portrait is one of a physical and military dufus, isolated mentally and socially. A sick, ticket punching medal hound, seeing and acting as if everything was a prop. In Kerry’s best light, it is very bad. The only thing left from keeping Kerry from becoming a confirmed nutjob is his refusal to authorize the release of his Department of Defense Standard Form 180 and his medical records. Both of these have been released by President Bush.
Posted by: Paul Coyle at August 13, 2004 08:53 PMAh, Buddy. Enjoy those sensations now. You won't have long to enjoy them so, please, savor them. Revel in them. They are yours until November 3. Get all you can, while you can...
Posted by: Buddy at August 13, 2004 09:16 PMI love how these Kerry guys make their points. Such arrays of facts, clarified by logic and lightened with wit. And of course, always consistent with their deeply-held and well-thought-out political philosophy. Much like the Senator himself...
Posted by: John Weidner at August 13, 2004 09:46 PMCan anyone remember how the Times took an advocacy role against Augusta National and tried to make Martha Burke a celebrity? They tried to make the news then but are trying to ignore the news now.
Thank God for the Internet where I get to decide which stories are important and worthy of my time.
Posted by: chris at August 14, 2004 03:47 AMPossibly the best indication of just how damaging the current news is to the Kerry campaign is the CNN transcript of the Crossfire session with John O'Neill, James Carville, Bob Novak and Lanny Davis.
If you must shout to keep your opponent from being heard, then ipso facto, you have no argument with which to counter him.
Posted by: Francis W. Porretto at August 14, 2004 06:12 AMI think John Kerry served honorably and courageously in Vietnam. At the same time I think he was engaging in self serving political myth building for the future while he was there. Why else would he film reenactments of his heroism? (Be honest, who doesn't think he was fantasizing about JFK and PT109 as he was patrolling Nam in is swift boat?)
When he joined the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, he came into contact with many people who out and out lied about their service, many claiming combat experience when they actually sat behind a desk in Guam or something similar. So he did the same. To help him prop up his exaggerated claims, he embellished his service. Not enough to be a decorated war hero, he had to be personally involved in the President's secret war in Cambodia, floating surreptitiously across the border to drop off CIA operatives who gave lucky boonie hats as gifts. The VVAW is where he learned his politics and forged his reputation. Why would anyone be surprised to find falsehood in anyone involved with that organization?
Posted by: Tito at August 15, 2004 09:36 AMWhat is the real deal on Kerry's three purple hearts? Who gets three purple hearts and doesn't have a scar to show for it? Where is the record of Kerry's hospitalization, and the extent of the medical treatment required? Is it true that two injuries were self-inflicted?
How insulting to the war vets who have lost limbs and sustained serious and permanent injury while serving!
I had friends killed in Vietnam. How dare Kerry try to equate his sacrifice with theirs.
