August 22, 2004

Bush's Attacks On Vets In 2000 & 2004 President Bush has refused to condem the Swift Boat Veteran For the Truth ads. Conservative monkeys can think that's fine because it's against Kerry and Bush isn't paying for the ads (it's actually an old crony Bob Perry who is).

Now the Kerry campaign is running an ad with John McCain in 2000 telling Bush he should be "ashamed." This came from a debate hosted by Larry King. Do a text search for ashamed. Bush's response is amazing. He refused to pull the ads he had against McCain. What's even more amazing is the Green Beret that Bush had at his paid event who accused McCain a traiter and intentionally left other POWs in Nam, also attacked Dubya's father. Bush admits this in the debate. Bush brought someone on stage that made bizarre attacks on his own dad to attack a Vietnam POW. That is amazing coming from someone who let his pilot's license lapse while still in the National Guard.

posted by Sullivan 20 years ago
  • The NYTimes did a great piece on the connections between the Swift Boat Vets and Bush. And an editor from the Chicago Tribune who was also a swift boat commander himself at the time gave his own perspective of those events.
  • Newsflash: Politics are dirty. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign is pretty much in the same category as anything MoveOn does. And since we're on the subject, I think it's ridiculous that while we have so many valid concerns in this country, anyone who jumps into this debate fresh at this point would think we're having a national critiquing session on what kind of job John Kerry did 30 years ago during his four-month stint in Vietnam. The Republicans are guilty of shady accusations (as well as some true ones) but this would never be happening if John Kerry didn't mention Vietnam every 3.5 seconds. The entire situation sucks.
  • And there's more recent history which should be much more relevant to the campaign anyway: How John Kerry busted the terrorists' favorite bank.
  • De Carabas, not that I disagree with the spirit of your comment, but I'm still waiting for evidence linking Kerry's campaign directly with MoveOn. Yeah, MoveOn wants bush replaced by Kerry, but I do to... and I'm still waiting for my cheque from the Kerry campaign. Next thing you know someone's going to try to say the internet was invented by liberal 3l33ts supported by the democratic party and Al Gore to make it easier for people to post baseless anti-republican slander without fear of retribution.
  • The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign is pretty much in the same category as anything MoveOn does. There is a vast difference between being an advocate for the opposition's point of view (Moveon) and spreading bald-faced lies (Swift Boat Veterans). By the way, here's another Swift Boat lie: their website's list of veterans that support its group includes veterans who are not supporters: "I just called one of these guys - Dennis Spranger - and he had no idea that he was listed on their website.  He said they keep calling him and he told them that he didn't know Kerry and didn't even serve at the same time as Kerry. (link)
  • The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign is pretty much in the same category as anything MoveOn does. Bullshit. MoveOn's been around since the Clinton impeachment trial, (When the original slogan was, "Censure and Move On") The swift boaters coalesced out of the ether this year and with only one agenda, slime Kerry and muddy the waters. If you're gonna argue about the 527s, please try to avoid the neocon talking points. Next thing, you'll be using the buzzword, "shadowy".
  • Actually, surly, some of the "Swift Boat veterans" have been on the Republican payroll since the Nixon era, and have made a career out of smearing Democrats who went to Vietnam. And why is service in Vietnam such an issue? The Republicans seemed to think it mattered in '92. They seem pretty keen to talk about who's tough on defence and can be trusted with the keys to the millitary.
  • Good point, rogerd. O'Neill especially has been connected to various right-wing dirty trick squads. (Though he'll swear up and down that he's non-partisan, despite a bunch of evidence to the contrary.) And as far as your second point goes, other people have voiced similar opinions.
  • As if it's not enough that many people have jumped to Kerry's defense of the stars he earned, now Dole has decided to question the validity of Kerry's war wounds. And once again "Dole also called on Kerry to release all the records of his service in Vietnam." "This would never be happening if John Kerry didn't mention Vietnam every 3.5 seconds." There's nothing wrong with pointing out something that makes you a better president than the incumbent. It would make the neocon's argument a lot stronger if they had any actual FACTS to back themselves up instead of just saying the same damn thing over and over again.
  • They can't genial. This is the party of the soundbite. If you repeat it enough, it'll filter through the masses and by the time the, "he said, she said" dies down, the less critical thinkers are left with a voice in the back of their head telling them there's gotta be some credence to it. Just look at how many people still think Iraq was connected to 9/11.
  • If you're gonna argue about the 527s, please try to avoid the neocon talking points. Next thing, you'll be using the buzzword, "shadowy". Dude, any time I say anything about politics in any thread I get accused of this Hannity and Colmes shit by you and that other cat whose name I can't recall right now. Jesus. I am a regular, independent voter who couldn't give a shit about "talking points" or neocons or whatever else the those buzz words are, but to hear you tell it I'm Rush fucking Limbaugh. Just because you're obsessed with right-left circle jerks doesn't mean I am. Cut it out. Please. And to reiterate my earlier point -- this would never have happened if Kerry didn't mention Vietnam constantly. Just because you read a NYT article from Saturday's edition doesn't mean you have exclusive authority on what's dirty politics and what isn't. Your man is absolutely ignoring any discussion of his decades in the Senate in favor of incessantly touting his four months of combat duty, so he had this coming. And maybe the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign isn't the exact equal of MoveOn.org, but it's damn close. I didn't see you screaming about dirty political attacks when Farenheit 9/11 came out, and as a matter of fact I seem to remember you being among the folks who were drooling in anticipation over it. I could care less about Bush, but it's funny to see folks cheer Michael Moore and then get their GAP sweaters tied in a bunch when one negative word is lobbed at John Kerry. Grow up.
  • Dude, any time I say anything about politics in any thread I get accused of this Hannity and Colmes shit by you and that other cat whose name I can't recall right now. Jesus. I am a regular, independent voter who couldn't give a shit about "talking points" or neocons or whatever else the those buzz words are, but to hear you tell it I'm Rush fucking Limbaugh. Just because you're obsessed with right-left circle jerks doesn't mean I am. Cut it out. Please. Methinks the lady doth protest too much... But, to respond to your cries of unfair treatment, I wasn't accusing you of any sort of hannity-isms, just the usual uncritical jumping on of neocon party lines that goes on everywhere these days. Blitzer, of the paragon of that so-called "liberal media" CNN has been whipping out the "shadowy" lately and making no distinction between MoveOn and the swifties. Now, as for "my boy" pushing his Vietnam record, he's my boy by default, not by choice much like the shrub is probably yours. Of course, I could be wrong and you could be one of those people that actually thinks he's doing a good job. And "drooling in anticipation of F9/11'? Hardly. I lived through 9/11, I didn't need a movie to help me relive it or the bulllshit that led up to it. Did I see it? Of course I did, but I've also read most of the stuff critical of Kerry as well in the interest of hearing everything. Can you say you've done the same? I'd say, "I doubt it", but I'm too busy adjusting my Gap sweater to do that.
  • "..if Kerry didn't mention Vietnam constantly." He does? Post proof or retract.
  • From surlyboi's link: "Voters need to awaken to this tactic, and realize how much contempt it shows for the workings of democracy and for the intelligence they bring to the task of choosing this nation's leaders." Unfortunately many voters don't really to care, and actually share that contempt themselves.
  • de Carabas, it's plainly obvious you do not have a basic understanding about politics. John Kerry is not connected with Moveon. George W. Bush's campaign is connected with the Swift Boat ads and has probably violated the 527 law. Yahoo News
    Still, the Swift Boat group plans to launch a new commercial on Tuesday in three key states, which features one veteran, Ken Cordier, who until last week was on a Bush campaign committee. Federal election rules bar organizations that take unrestricted donations from coordinating activities with campaigns or political parties.
    Let's not forget this flyer that the Bush campaign was handing out in one of their Florida offices.
    * Citing "overwhelming evidence
  • via Atrios The co-author of the book "Unfit for Command," former swift boat commander John O'Neill said Kerry made up a story about being in Cambodia beyond the legal borders of the Vietnam War in 1968. O'Neill said no one could cross the border by river and he claimed in an audio tape that his publicist played to CNN that he, himself, had never been to Cambodia either. But in 1971, O'Neill said precisely the opposite to then President Richard Nixon. O'NEILL: I was in Cambodia, sir. I worked along the border on the water. NIXON: In a swift boat? O'NEILL: Yes, sir. (END VIDEOTAPE) JOHNS: Now, O'Neill may have an explanation for this but he has not returned CNN's calls.
  • I don't really get fafblog, but many do, and find it a good thing. I prefer this guy. Hopefully these links will encourage The [email protected], and his mate Ted Barlow from over here to have a good old shout on these pages. Because they're good people and I like them. So the damn hell there.
  • Also, if MikeD via MonStErTrucKNoRthRup.com catches up with this joint on an egosurf, come and sing a mad song over here. (Faint hope, but dim signal sent.)
  • Heh, heh, heh, you said chicken hawk!
  • Something more than mere support for a war without fighting in it is required to earn the "chicken hawk" label. Chicken-hawkism is the belief that advocating a war from afar is a sign of personal courage and strength, and that opposing a war from afar is a sign of personal cowardice and weakness. A "chicken hawk" is someone who not merely advocates a war, but believes that their advocacy is proof of the courage which those who will actually fight the war in combat require. Which, I didn't see, preferring the first definition. in the second link. Namely, war hawks who have never served, nor would. The second definition makes a lot of sense though.
  • "Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Tuesday accused critics of the Bush administration's Iraq and counterterrorism policies of lacking the courage to fight terror." Now watch this drive.
  • Mmmmm . . . sleazy.