It just dawned on me, where are the Swift Vets priorities?

[Tim4319]

How can they attach someone who went to Vietnam, and regardless of how he received his ribbons and medals, put his life on the line for his country. But, say nothing about the president, his dodging going to Vietnam, then once he becomes president is notorious for cutting their benefits! How can they knock Kerry?

[Kagemusha]

1. Because the ends justify the means.

I'm not sure I can put it any blunter than that.

[snippyMcNippy]

2. How can they attack someone who went to Vietnam?

Easy...the same way that we attack the swift boat vets.

[in_cog_ni_to]

5. BUT,

we are NOT questioning THEIR service, how they got THEIR medals or the veracity of how they received THEIR injuries. Maybe we should be. We ARE questioning the truthfulness of their attacks on Kerry. Big difference.

By standing with the idiot-in-chief, they ARE cutting off their nose to spite their face.

[Warpy]

6. Had those guys said anything approaching the truth

and had they been honest enough not to produce a fake doctor who never saw Kerry and had they not pressured the chain of command to sign affadavits, they wouldn't be attacked right now.

They came out, chose the low road, and are doing a typical Lee Atwater type smear, and it's not the first time.

I think Kerry knew stuff like this would happen, that some vets have been all twisted up with hate ever since he testified in front of Congress, having misunderstood every word he said.

Surviving horror doesn't confer sainthood on anyone. Some rise above it and dedicate their lives to making sure it never happens again. Others try to pretend it was something it wasn't, and resent the former group throwing cold water on their fantasies of glory in war.

The SmearBoat vets deserve to be examined, their lies examined, and the partisanship of their founders and funders exposed.

Even at that, they're all a far cut above that coward in the White House.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

8. Yup.

These guys deserve a full-blown oppo research initiative, including forensic accounting.

Sauce for the goose...

[Lerkfish]

9. hmmm...

well, I don't think we are attacking the swift boat vet's actual service, but their dishonest campaign to defame Kerry. Big difference.

Certainly their credibility is being questioned, but that should always happen if someone is attempting to destroy the credibility of a public figure. I also apply the same jaundiced criteria to those who have "dirt" on Bush... I try to determine if they could actually possess that information, how they arrived at it, or what their motivations are.

I think its HEALTHY to question any detractor of anyone, but that questioning should stop once you're convinced.


As to the original poster, the motivation of the swift boat detractors is apparently that they are being funded (meaning money) by one of the Bush campaign's larger contributors, a Mr. Perry from texas who is a huge housing developer, as I understand it.

O'Neill, the leader of the swift boat detractors had been used as a blunt weapon against Kerry in the past by President Nixon, who wanted to discredit Kerry's views on the Vietnam war.

Its significant to point out that the Swift Boat Detractors did not serve on the same boat with Kerry, yet seem to be calling him dishonest, while those who DID serve with Kerry all support him.

I think more to the point is that the Swift Boat Detractors, either because they're getting paid or for their own political beliefs, object to Kerry's POLITICS and instead of attacking him in the arena of his politics, which would be a valid and healthy way to deal with such a disagreement, are allowing themselves to be use to attack his SERVICE, which is not the same as his political views.

[Tim4319]

15. Because these men did not serve on the same boat as John Kerry

should discredit a lot of what they are saying from the beginning.

[Bridget Burke]

10. "we" are not attacking them for their service, but for their lies.

!

[Bridget Burke]

11. "we" are not attacking them for their service, but for their lies.

!

[sandnsea]

14. Who attacked their service?

I have never seen anybody attack the service of one of these guys. Their lies and bullshit politics, yes, but not their service.

[liberalnurse]

3. We need a Private Investigator

to get a file on each one of them....to see what they have been doing for the past 20 years! Have they been active in the VFW, church, outspoken about any other Vet's. Have they been arrested, drunks, have they neglected their ex-wives and children and not paid child support? What has been their employment history?

Apparently bashing political veterns has been a pattern....follow the trail. ......EXPOSE THEM......

[demnan]

7. Looks like a job for Larry Flynt

Larry, where are you when we need you?

[the Kelly Gang]

4. bacause they are 'anti American' and they hate Vietnam Vets

[dansolo]

12. They think that Kerry betrayed them

When Kerry spoke out against the war, in their minds, he was no better than the war protesters who avoided the war. In addition, when Kerry spoke about atrocities commited by U.S. Soldiers, some of these guys probably realized that he may have been talking about them. They seem to take crticism of the policy of the war as a personal attack on them, so anyone who protested the war, even if they themselves served, is an enemy, and anyone who supported the war, even if they avoided service, is a friend.

[skygazer]

13. Follow the money

Doesn't it always boil down to that?

[lunarboy13]

16. Not to mention...

That GW and Cheney were FOR the Vietnam War, yet both chose not to fight. Talk about standing up for your convictions!

[Norquist Nemesis]

17. What!?! You mean it doesn't matter that John O'Niell is

a LAWYER? *shocked beyond disbelief*