Kerry's big mistake?

[bowens43]

I'll probably get some flaming for this but here goes.

I'm a news junkie as well as a political junkie and what I have been seeing in the news tells me that the swift boat liars for bush are doing great harm to the Kerry campaign.

Kerry's big mistake was making an issue out of his military service. It should have been listed in his bio and that's it. To make it a campaign issue was a HUGE mistake, especially since he was a leader in the anti war movement after he returned from Vietnam . He now gets to spend the next couple of months defending his war record and his anti war record instead of concentrating on the issues that are important in this election cycle. I know that Kerry's record, as he relates it, is true. I have no doubt of that. That's not the point. The point is that he tried to use it as a weapon against the bushies and now they get to beat him over the head with it.

What Kerry did 30 years ago is irrelevant. What bush did or didn't do 30 years ago is also irrelevant.

The night of the convention when Kerry came out and said "I'm John Kerry and I'm reporting for duty." I knew that he had made a big mistake.

I still think he'll win but the battle will be much tougher than it needed to be.

[JPJones]

1. Let me loan you my time machine

and you can go fix the problem.

[bowens43]

7. You have a problem with people discussing the campaign?

Am I not allowed to state an opinion?

[wellstone_democrat]

25. LOL---hilarious

.

[Beetwasher]

2. That Was Called Foresight

He KNEW this attack was coming. The swift boat attack is LESS effective because of what Kerry had done to make everyone aware of his background. He shored up his image BEFORE the attack came. If Kerry had ignored his own military background, the attack STILL would have come, and people would have said that this was the reason WHY he was NOT talking about his record.

[bowens43]

4. I disagree.

I think that if he had been more low key about his military record the attacks would have had less of an impact. That's just my opinion.

[Beetwasher]

8. You're Entitled To Your Opinion

But you're being naive if you think the attack wouldn't have been as effective or would have somehow have had less of an impact...It would have come and been just as vicious, now at least Kerry was prepared and even more so because people were already aware of his heroic past.

[bowens43]

16. I didn't say that the attack wouldn't come.

I said I think it was a mistake to make it the center point of his campaign. I think he could have been prepared without making it the single most important issue in his campaign. If he had been more low key I think the swift boat attacks would have been more likely to be seen as the vicious smear tactics that they are.

[Beetwasher]

24. I Know What You're Saying

It just doesn't make any sense, no offense.

The attacks would have been able to be spun as such "The reason Kerry hasn't wanted to discuss his military past is because he's ashamed of the fact that he got medals he didn't earn and doesn't want to draw attention to it." Sorry, but you're naive to think otherwise.

Kerry got HIS story out first. That's ALWAYS smart and to some degree it inocculated him to these attacks. He doesn't have to retell his story to a whole lot of people. The ONLY story he has to tell now, is how these scumbags are lying. From a PR perspective, his heroic military past is called backstory, and it's the LAST thing you would want to have to build AFTER an attack comes. You're arguing against some very well know, tried and tested techniques. You are entitled to your opinion, but you'd be in a very small minority to think this way.

[bowens43]

29. I disagree.

I think it would have been more effective for him to be more humble about his actions in Vietnam. I didn't mean to imply that he should ignore his past.

[Beetwasher]

30. Yes, I Know You Disagree

And I'm glad you're not advising Kerry, no offense. This whole thing would have been much worse had he not been prepared for it by building his backstory so strongly and evidently beforehand. Marketing and PR 101.

I certainly hope you're not one of those people who were yelling about Kerry "not defining himself" enough and how the Repubs were going to define him themselves. That's what they are trying to do now, but it's not as effective because Kerry already defined himself as a war hero.

[bowens43]

34. Did I say he shouldn't have been prepared?????

No, I didn't. I said it should not have been the centerpiece of the campaign.

[Beetwasher]

It's Not

It's one facet, not the centerpiece...

And yes, you ARE arguing he shouldn't have been prepared. By arguing that he shouldn't have drawn as much attention to his heroic military background, you are arguing against his being as prepared as he was. He was only prepared because so many people were already aware of his heroic past and the reason they were is because much attention was drawn to it. It was most definitely not a mistake, it was foresight and terrific strategy. It's called building a strong foundation.

[MrSlayer]

6. Hear Hear!

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I think he did better by getting his side out there first.

[bowens43]

9. I hope I'm wrong

[mazzarro]

46. IMO you are very wrong on this!

The thing that amazes me is that democrats keep giving the rethuglicans the benefit of the doubt! Rethuglicans can always count on democrats to want to soft pedal hot-button issues in other to continue in their futile attempts to appear as sensitive to the independents or moderates. Whereas when one looks back to Clinton's first run for the presidency, the one thing he did well was not allowing any rethuglican attack to go unanswered asap. My problem with Kerry is not responding quickly and hard enough when this whole mess started. I do hope that he will look beyond his DLC-directed advisers and get some die-hard democratic operatives that are eager to do battle with the neo-cons and rethuglicans to add their own advices to the mix.

[Seabiscuit]

14. Agreed

And I forgive Kerry for his two week delay in responding forcefully to those damnable liar " smearboat vets" - he needed to get all his ducks in order first, and he certainly did - and now he's filing suit on top of it all. I say "Heah.. heah...!!!"

[RobertSeattle]

3. I disagree

The entire DNC could have been about tiddy winks and these attacks would have come anyway. Just because Kerry brought it up doesn't mean the counterattacks are warranted - the Swiftvet stuff was in the works well before the DNC convention.

[bowens43]

5. He did a whole lot more than bring it up.

He made it the center piece of his campaign.

[napi21]

10. I don't think so. Shrub started it with dribbling out his records, and

saying "I'm a war President! Dems have had a stigma of never being willing to go to war, even in defense of our Country, and Kerry had to put that idea to bed. This 'Nam thing has surfaced in every Senate campaign Kerry has ever run in, so it was going to be mand an issue anyway. This foolishness is having an impact now because it's new and the media red meat of the week or so. Daily, there are more people coming in Kerry's defense and these idiots will be exposed for what they are.

Don't worry, I'm sure there will be something else next week or the week after. The current occupants of the WH aren't about to go quietly.

[Seabiscuit]

18. BINGO!

Shrub started it all with the phony/half-baked dribblings of his war record.

[alcuno]

11. Don't buy the "we're only doing this because Kerry made a big deal

out of the convention" spin. They would have done it anyways. I'll repeat myself. They would have done it no matter what.

Kerry was right to make a "big deal" out of it. It's called preemption.

[bowens43]

21. Call it what you like

I think it was mistake. His war service is not relevant to the presidency. He should have been prepared to defend himself when the attacks occurred but IMO to make it the single most important issue of the campaign was wrong.

[Old and In the Way]

43. If Kerry hadn't, Republicans would have led with the Anti-war

Kerry smear. He was not about to let them put him on the defensive on this issue.

[faithnotgreed]

12. ill just add that he hadnt "made an issue" of his service. journalists

have said that kerry wasnt speaking of it much in the primaries and that it was only when jim rassman volunteered to show up in iowa to tell of how kerry saved his life, that is when his service got major attention.
and as you must likely know, this is one of the pivotal points in kerrys campaign comeback

so people did want to hear of his service to his country.

since this group didnt formally exist until after kerry became the nominee (for all intents and purposes). oneills blood has been boiling ever since kerry protested the war and that seems to be the crux of this whole disgraceful mess.
NOT kerrys service to his country

[latebloomer]

I agree

but mostly because I am so turned off with all this military posturing. " Who can be the bigger militarist?" "I'm the war hero, you're not!"

Then voila-- perfect opportunity for the rabid hordes who foam at the mouth at the mention of "Hanoi Jane" to come barking on the scene.

[bowens43]

27. That was what I intended my point to be.

Kerry has done much more for this country than go to Vietnam. I think his service would have been a more effective weapon if he used it humbly. It also would have made the swift boat liars attacks seem all the more unjustified and vicious.

[adolf batwing]

13. this is a non-issue

what about united employees getting screwed out of their retirement? the big mistake of kerry is to be just a dull version of the status quo.

[Zorra]

15. Bu$h opened the window to let the swifties out, and his Deserter scandal

in.

[never cry wolf]

39. An amazingly succinct and insightful post!

In ANY comparison of military records, Kerry wins. Let the facts come out, PLEASE!

[lapfog_1]

17. Not a flame

but I disagree.

The Not-so-swifties were going to do this no matter what. Kerry
introducing his swift boat comrades and his "reporting for duty"
and stuff did focus this, but they were coming for him anyway.
The book had to be started weeks and weeks ago, maybe months,
not since the Democratic convention.

And the VRWC echo chamber has picked up its que and launched the
attack.

As an example, I doubt that McCain made a BIG deal out of his Vietnam
war experience in South Carolina in 2000, but that didn't stop them
from launching the attack ("McCain got special treatment from the
VCs, he must have collaborated with them", "McCain spent most of the
war in prison, not fighting", "McCain fathered an illegitimate
child with a BLACK woman and then he and his wife adopted the child,
see... she's BLACK") and when he finally responded by defending his
war record... ("See, he's unstable, overly emotional").

Now, it's Kerry. Same shit. Same PEOPLE doing it (the powers
behind the Not-so-swift vets).

This shit was coming anyway.

[bowens43]

23. I disagree with the whole concept of his service being relevant .

I know this shit was coming , it always does.

[Seabiscuit]

42. Look, there's a war going on and Bush declaring himself the War President

Bush created the issue. Then responded to questions by phonying up a bunch of half-baked records (it took them soooo long to find any, then produced a fraction of them, many of which had been altered - see Moore's "Farenhiet 9/11").

Then Bushco's buddies doing the anti-Kerry Fraudboat Vet ads. What do you expect? The right wing media has been playing along with Bush all along. Isn't it right and proper for Kerry to go on the counter-attack with the truth plus a lawsuit?

When you've got a President of a dismal war based on lies promoting himself as the "War President" and questions in the right wing press about war credentials, followed by these lying ads about Kerry's Vietnam service, the sad fact of the matter is, Kerry's service HAS BECOME RELEVANT, like it or not. It HAS to be addressed by Kerry, and forcefully, and that's what Kerry and Edwards have finally done, after careful and necessary preparation.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

19. You need know but one thing:

Who is attacking Kerry, and by extension, the grunt veterans and the system that awarded them for merit and valor?

I'll tell you who:

Chicken Hawks.

Crazy Lifers.

Bitter Old Men.

Texas Republican idealogues who want the money to keep flowing to them. Money that would stop flowing to them if Kerry gets into office, for verily, the sugartit would be pilled from their greedy, swinish lips.

Who's funding this clusterfuck? Perry, Koch Brothers. Harlan Crow. All Texas Repuke idealogues and all people who stand to profit from 4 more years of Nepotism Boy. The Koch Brothers alone, through yet another no-bid contract, administer The Strategic Oil Reserve, which has been instrumental in the incredible hike in oil prices and windfall profits to Energy companies. Many of those companies are based in Texas, because of the Homestead Act, that allows the energy rapists to sink their money into huge mansions and keep them off the block when they go bankrupt or have their assets seized,

This is a craven act by the lowest of the low. I say Kerry should be all elbows, knees and headbutts. Political Brazilian JuJitsu. Gouge their eyes out. Bite their throats out and spit them in their faces.

Let's rumble. It's about time.

[bowens43]

33. I know this.

I agree completely. He needs to hit hard and fast. I just think that he would have had an easier time neutralizing these attacks if he hadn't been waving the 'hero' flag quite so vigorously.

[Gloria]

20. Kerry can use this and turn it around on Bush.....and he should

Go for the jugular....Josh Marshall has it exactly right today...

This is the time to destroy Bush....ruin his convention, and obliterate him afterwards.

It's down to the character of this bastard. His lies, his duplicity, his cowardice ...Marshall describes Bush's "rich boy" attitude about letting everybody do the dirty work for him...It's Kerry's chance to show he's the real man, as Cleland said on Hardball the other night.

[bowens43]

28. I hope so.

[StClone]

22. In a nutshell

Kerry can present his military record but the Bush "Truth Boaters" don't need create lies about it to harm Kerry since Bush has no war experience.

[farmbo]

26. Post 9/11 elections are different...he had to push his war-hero Bio

However, he should have responded earlier.

His response, if done properly, will not only stop the bleeding, but it could sway undecideds once and for all.

[Julien Sorel]

31. Kerry's primary campaign was dead in the water until

he started bringing his band of brothers along for the ride. He needed the military angle to pre-empt the inevitable Republican attack on his patriotism -- it's the major thing that got him the nomination. It also is a hell of a story, one that is getting a lot of play now, and people like stories.

As someone else pointed out, the Swift Boat crowd were going to come out of the sewer no matter what, but Kerry has already established himself in the eyes of many as a hero and a patriot, and a guy who has made life or death decisions in his past. These guys won't be able to take that away from him, and this whole thing is looking like it will backfire anyway.

And in the end, this too shall pass. And when it does, we're still in Iraq, still down 1.5 million jobs, the Patriot Act is still around, and Bush is still the most right wing idealogue ever to occupy the White House.

[murielm99]

38. I have seen lots of veterans where I live who are paying

attention to Kerry for the first time.

Vietnam veterans feel that they are a forgotten group. People did not welcome them home from an unpopular war. Older vets do not accept them very well in the Legions and VFWs. One of their own is finally getting some recognition.

This is a large voting bloc. They are finally getting some respect.

Also, * is the one who started the whole over-the-top patriotism thing, after 9/11.

No matter how you look at it, it is a character issue. Young men then had to decide what they wanted to do about their service. They could evade the draft and face jail or ex patriot status, enlist, or sit still and wait for it. Very few had shrub's options. Those that did at least fulfilled them!

I lived through those times. I think it is about time we talked about Nam. I know how very large an issue it was for young men. I think how they dealt with this issue is extremely important. It says a lot about how they will lead now.

Is the person who started this thread too young to remember the issues of Vietnam? I can only conclude that is so.

[spanone]

32. Nay, Nay, Americans don't like people taking shots at our Servicemen

Whether they are real guns or politics. This will not serve bush* well.

[bowens43]

35. I think you're right.

I just think that it could have been neutralized easier if Kerry had focused more on other issues and less on this one. I knew I'd get beat up for this one. I think I'll just keep my opinions to myself from now on.......

[Beetwasher]

45. You Shouldn't Feel That Way

Certainly don't keep your opinions to yourself!

I hope you didn't think that I was beating you up, I didn't intend to.

I just disagreed and was hoping you'd see the real why's and how's of Kerry's preparation for this. The fact that Kerry really was prepared for this should make you happy! Kerry really, really knows what he's doing! ;-)

[sallyseven]

41. A veteran who served in the same area

just came out and said the swift scum are not telling the truth. I also saw that Elliot changed his mind again.

[DU GrovelBot]

36. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our third quarter 2004 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

[Old and In the Way]

37. Kerry had to make his service a central theme.

Bush was running as a "war pResident" and the whole meme would be you don't replace Presidents during a war. The Republicans have made Americans believe that they are the party that protects America...Kerry had to address that line of baloney head on.

[Comicstripper]

40. Kerry's A-OK

polls show him "neck and neck" or maintaining his lead, the polls show the nation split among party lines as to that ad's trustworthiness (in other words, people who believe those ads aren't voting for kerry anhow), and if this is what the GOP has, they're playing their (weak) hand way too early.
the debates are gonna turn this election around. that's all that kerry will need.
(Oh, and bush will debate. if he declines, we'll see what we saw with Condi: a lot of pressure, big headlines, and eventually, he'll give in, look like a fool for ever refusing, and then on top of that, fail miserably)

[BOHICA06]

44. He had to separate himself in the primaries

... and his Vietnam experience was his edge. It was a bit dangerous because with it comes the VVAW period that might turn off fellow vets and swing voters. He doesn't have a legislative record he can point to and some of his votes are hard to explain (i.e., No for Gulf War I and Yes for Gulf War II).

Anything doing with Vietnam can be fraught with peril - the other Kerry, Bob - looked good as a future presidential candidate in the 80s & 90s, but his service included some potential civilian deaths and it took him out of the picture.

[OneBlueSky]

47. well, here's someone who agrees with you 100%, bowens43 . . .

The purple heart of a campaign
Kerry is playing into Bush's hands with his pseudo-military posturing
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/comment/story/0,14259,1284048,00.html