Kerry's problem with veterans (The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth)

Nineteen of the 23 officers who served with John Kerry and every one of his commanding officers in Vietnam have signed a letter that says he is not fit to be commander in chief. In a press conference yesterday, members of The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth released the letter criticizing Mr. Kerry's slanderous statements about alleged widespread atrocities by American soldiers during the war. Being on the defense against fellow veterans could do serious damage to the Kerry campaign, especially as the country is at war again. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth could have impact because of the impressive number of veterans involved. Hundreds of Vietnam vets, from admirals to seamen, have signed the letter. According to John O'Neill, who was in Mr. Kerry's unit during the war, "[The signers] run across the entire spectrum of politics, specialities and political feelings about the war." This large group goes a long way toward countering the handful of veterans who have defended Mr. Kerry in commercials and on the stump.

Did Kerry recant in some way between 1971 and 1996?

Kerry doesn't recant, except to put old wine in new bottles. He has metamorphosed from an antiwar, anti-American leftist radical to a self-promoting war hero, who uses his military record in Vietnam to intimidate his political opponents, most of whom have never served. In 1971 Kerry claimed to have tossed his medals away and a decade later we find that he has them prominently displayed in his office.

Certainly Kerry being inconsistent is no surprise, but I continue to think that the past support of these veterans for Kerry, well subsequent to Kerry's own bashing of the military and his fellow veterans, is going to dilute the power of this story. Is there a mistake in my timeline? Did I misunderstand the date of the video clips on Fox?

First of all, inconsistent is a euphemism for lying. I don't know what the motive was of one or several of this swift boat veteran's group to support Kerry in 1996 in his bid for reelection to the Senate against a tough opponent. The way I understood it from one of these veterans, the only one I know of, is that Kerry requested his support and told him that he was sorry for the remarks he made about all Vietnam veterans being war criminals and commiting atrocities. Subsequently, Kerry has stated on MTP and in his recently released biography, "Tour of Duty" that he stood by his remarks in 1971. The media and the Kerry camp are trying to use this to invalidate the over 200 member group's opposition to Kerry. I don't think it will work.

I really wanted this story to have legs, but I'm concerned that its effect is going to be easily blunted by the Kerry camp.

Wanted or want. Without questioning your sincerity, I believe this story will have legs despite Kerry's smear tactics trying to link this group to the GOP and Bush. This group is the true "Band of Brothers" that Kerry wishes he had. When you have ADM Hoffman who was in overall charge of the PCFs in that region and Hibbard and Elliot who were Kerry's direct supervisors while he was in Vietnam declaring Kerry unfit to be CIC, it is pretty powerful stuff. None of the officers who were COs of other PCFs support him. It is a damning indictment of Kerry.

Moreover, there will be additional items that will come out over the next months and a coming together of Vietnam and other veterans against Kerry to stage large demonstrations against him. Look for some anti-Kerry sentiment at the end of May with Rolling Thunder in Wash DC., which draws over 350,000 participants. The press conference was the opening slavo of much bigger things to come. So rest easy, this story has legs.

I hope you are right that this story does continue and expand. I haven't seen anything more in the newspapers today... as you say, it may be that more items will develop. Certainly it should seem likely. I find it hard to believe there isn't some damaging information out there beyond what's been identified to date. I think Kerry's refusal to release his complete records should get more attention. I still don't understand that issue, though; I've read about other phony veteran claims being debunked by groups who obtained records through FOIA requests. I never have seen an explanation as to why Kerry's records cannot be obtained by that means. I would expect medical records to be exempt, but not complete service records. As for the timing of the Fox video clips, I thought one was from the 1996 campaign. I cannot recall the other, but in my recollection the film was kind of grainy and the speakers were wearing fairly wide ties... so probably 1970s or early 80s. So far, I remain disappointed because the story appears to me to have kind of faded, but maybe it's just the eye of a storm for Kerry. Kerry's response about the veterans having "ties to" the Bush campaign seemed pretty weak to me (not to mention the issue of whether he is questioning these veterans' patriotism!). I also have been somewhat intrigued to see Kerry's statements on the recent Iraqi prisoner events. Given that he "admitted" to having committed war crimes himself (purely for political gain), maybe he ought to keep his mouth shut? How I'd love to see a reporter ask Kerry for his "unique perspective" on the actions of the American soldiers, quoting Kerry's testimony about all the horrible stuff he claims he and his "band of brothers" did in Vietnam and pressing him to compare them. Seems to me that would be a no-win question for Kerry any way he answered it, and at least would provoke another one of his temper tantrums. It will never happen, of course.... the complicity of most of the media in allowing Kerry to reinvent his past over and over has been glaringly obvious. Well, I hope you are right about the swift boat veterans' story developing further and getting wider attention....time will tell.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.