August 20, 2004
SO THAT'S WHY HE WENT BALLISTIC ABOUT THE SWIFT VETS?:
A small sample and high margin of error, but the California results here might explain the Senator's seeming insanity today.
The Times has a big story on the Swift Vets ad tomorrow, Friendly Fire: The Birth of an Anti-Kerry Ad (KATE ZERNIKE and JIM RUTENBERG, 8/20/04, NY Times)
After weeks of taking fire over veterans' accusations that he had lied about his Vietnam service record to win medals and build a political career, Senator John Kerry shot back yesterday, calling those statements categorically false and branding the people behind them tools of the Bush campaign.His decision to take on the group directly was a measure of how the group that calls itself Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has catapulted itself to the forefront of the presidential campaign. It has advanced its cause in a book, in a television advertisement and on cable news and talk radio shows, all in an attempt to discredit Mr. Kerry's war record, a pillar of his campaign.
How the group came into existence is a story of how veterans with longstanding anger about Mr. Kerry's antiwar statements in the early 1970's allied themselves with Texas Republicans.
Mr. Kerry called them "a front for the Bush campaign" - a charge the campaign denied.
A series of interviews and a review of documents show a web of connections to the Bush family, high-profile Texas political figures and President Bush's chief political aide, Karl Rove. [...]
It all began last winter, as Mr. Kerry was wrapping up the Democratic nomination. Mr. Lonsdale received a call at his Massachusetts home from his old commander in Vietnam, Mr. Hoffmann, asking if he had seen the new biography of the man who would be president.
Mr. Hoffmann had commanded the Swift boats during the war from a base in Cam Ranh Bay and advocated a search-and-destroy campaign against the Vietcong - the kind of tactic Mr. Kerry criticized when he was a spokesman for Vietnam Veterans Against the War in 1971. Shortly after leaving the Navy in 1978, he was issued a letter of censure for exercising undue influence on cases in the military justice system.
Both Mr. Hoffmann and Mr. Lonsdale had publicly lauded Mr. Kerry in the past. But the book, Mr. Brinkley's "Tour of Duty," while it burnished Mr. Kerry's reputation, portrayed the two men as reckless leaders whose military approach had led to the deaths of countless sailors and innocent civilians. Several Swift boat veterans compared Mr. Hoffmann to the bloodthirsty colonel in the film "Apocalypse Now" - the one who loves the smell of Napalm in the morning.
The two men were determined to set the record, as they saw it, straight.
"It was the admiral who started it and got the rest of us into it," Mr. Lonsdale said.
Mr. Hoffmann's phone calls led them to Texas and to John E. O'Neill, who at one point commanded the same Swift boat in Vietnam, and whose mission against him dated to 1971, when he had been recruited by the Nixon administration to debate Mr. Kerry on "The Dick Cavett Show."
Mr. O'Neill, who pressed his charges against Mr. Kerry in numerous television appearances Thursday, had spent the 33 years since he debated Mr. Kerry building a successful law practice in Houston, intermingling with some of the state's most powerful Republicans and building an impressive client list. Among the companies he represented was Falcon Seaboard, the energy firm founded by the current lieutenant governor of Texas, David Dewhurst, a central player in the Texas redistricting plan that has positioned state Republicans to win more Congressional seats this fall.
Mr. O'Neill said during one of several interviews that he had come to know two of his biggest donors, Harlan Crow and Bob J. Perry, through longtime social and business contacts.
A few thoughts occur:
(1) If you've seen the Dick Cavett tape, no one would have needed to prod Mr. O'Neill much to get him gung-ho about this.
(2) Pretty funny that after months of the Democrats crowing about all their 527 money and ads, the only one that matters is this little one which no one has seen broadcast, only on news shows discussing it.
(3) Folks are demanding that the President ask them to stop running it, but doesn't that violate CFR, which says these groups can't co-ordinate with the campaigns?
N.B. On Diane Rehm this morning, Steve Roberts said the Senator's response yesterday was a direct result of the tepid welcome he got from the VFW. First of all, what did he expect? Second, if he's that undisciplined a candidate why would we want him for president?
Folks are demanding that the President ask them to stop running it, but doesn't that violate CFR, which says these groups can't co-ordinate with the campaigns?
That should be President Bush's response: I can't do anything because that would be illegal coordination in violation of McCain-Feingold. Didn't you vote for McCain-Feingold, Senator Kerry?
Posted by: Mike Morley at August 20, 2004 7:11 AMOn OJ's point that Kerry is running a startlingly poor campaign, I'm just stunned they aren't happy to take this hit and move on before Labor Day, after which they can dismiss it as old news. No one is paying attention right now, unless Kerry makes them.
Posted by: David Cohen at August 20, 2004 11:19 AMOh, and not to pick on the poor guy but . . .
Apparently he told the Firefighters that he learned in Vietnam that, when someone's shooting at you, you drive your boat right at them. That is what he got his Silver Star for. But, as I understand it, doctrine was actually to take your boat away from small arms fire, get out of range, and then open up with your big gun. Too bad that in this fight he doesn't have a big gun.
Posted by: David Cohen at August 20, 2004 12:18 PMDavid:
And isn't his proposed application of this doctrine in Iraq to pack up and scurry home?
Posted by: oj at August 20, 2004 12:26 PMDavid-
Kerry is running the best campaign he can. His accomplishments in Congress are pathetic. His foreign policy ideas since enterting politics have been consistently, unequivocally wrong. His domestic agenda is re-heated Great Society, re-ditributionist liberalism. The guy lives in a time warp which has formed his identity as JFK II. I think he's nuts.
Posted by: Tom C, Stamford,Ct. at August 20, 2004 12:32 PMThe second ad from the Swifties seems even more devastating, especially after Kerry's response. He can't say it's all lies, since that's certainly his voice. So if it's true, why exactly is he so proud of his service? Brilliant.
Posted by: brian at August 20, 2004 1:07 PMKerry is learning about the Italian proverb: "Revenge is a dish best served cold".
And there isn't a darn thing the NYT, WaPo, and LAT can do about it. There are just too many of those blasted veterans out there who remember.
Of course, Kerry could always go on "Hardball" and play with Chris Matthews. Wouldn't that be a hoot?
Posted by: jim hamlen at August 20, 2004 1:37 PMI sure would like to see a good reporter(s) do some actual reporting on this.
Nothing is going to persuade me that Nixon was president in 1968, but most of the rest is at least up for grabs.
As Orrin would tell you, military records do not always reflect what happened. His hero Lindbergh's 2 aerial victories over inferior Japanese planes do not show up there, for example.
The attempt by big media to underreport and ignore the story is scandalous.
On the other hand, before the bloggers break their arms pounding themselves on the back, there are some pretty weird things being offered as evidence.
One, highly commended analysis looked quite convincing until I read that Kerry couldn't have blundered into Cambodia because "a PT boat patroled the border" to stop such things.
Hoo boy. Glad I didn't pull that duty.
Big gaping hole in the big media coverage, among several, seems to be almost no mention of the book, only the TV ads.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at August 20, 2004 2:55 PMHarry:
Lindbergh's numerous flights on combat missions had to be hidden from FDR, whose petty vindictiveness kept him from the official service. But Lindbergh wasn't in it for the medals.
Posted by: oj at August 20, 2004 4:25 PMYes, but the point is, military combat records are not all that reliable.
I could have cited other instances, but I wanted to yank your chain.
That swift boats were penetrating Cambodia is not an absurd idea. The AF was faking bombing records about that time, too.
One advantage of being old now is that I can remember what happened then.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at August 20, 2004 5:14 PMHarry:
I'll bet you any amount you want that the Senator doesn't borrow your "all decorations are bogus" defense.
Posted by: oj at August 20, 2004 5:29 PMThat's not what I said.
What I said is that I cannot make even a reasonable guess what went on, based on the reports I've seen.
The fake story seared into his memory is nailed down.
"the point is, military combat records are not all that reliable. "
Posted by: oj at August 20, 2004 9:04 PMHarry Eagar:
One, highly commended analysis looked quite convincing until I read that Kerry couldn't have blundered into Cambodia because "a PT boat patroled the border" to stop such things.
In case you didn't see this, it explains the local geography relevant to the above very clearly, I thought:
http://www.augustafreepress.com/stories/storyReader$25169
