To "swift boat" is: to bring forth the truth swiftly.
Posted on 01/05/2008 10:26:45 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
More than three years after John Kerry's bitter defeat, at the dawn of what looks like a far more promising campaign cycle for the Democrats, the party is still haunted by the specter of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Once upon a time, "Swift boat" denoted an obscure military vessel, but thanks to the activities of this group it has come to represent movement conservatism's penchant for ruthlessly (and effectively) smearing any and all political opponents, from a sitting senator and war hero to an 11-year-old boy with a cranial fracture.
Research by The Nation into Federal Election Commission records of the group's top twenty donors reveals that they've been remarkably active in this cycle, contributing and bundling nearly $200,000 to presidential candidates. This does not bode well. During the last presidential campaign, the wealthy backers of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth--now rebranded as Swift Vets and POWs for Truth--didn't do their real dirty work until the general election, where as a tax-exempt 527 group they operated outside the restraints of direct campaign contributions. We may wish we were done with the Swift Boaters, but they aren't done with us.
In 2004 the top twenty donors all gave (with one exception) at least $50,000 to the group. The top three--Houston home builder Bob Perry, Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens and billionaire drugstore impresario and investor Harold Simmons--gave a combined $9.5 million ($4.45 million, $3 million and $2 million, respectively). Calculating the influence of these and the slightly less wealthy Swift Boat donors during this cycle is a touch more complicated than simply adding up their contributions. Each one exerts far more influence as a bundler, given the federal restrictions on individual giving, which limit donors to a maximum of $4,600 per cycle. So The Nation looked not only at the contributions of the donors themselves but also at those of their family members and employees. It's an imperfect method, since some employees are clearly contributing of their own volition (such as one employee of a Simmons company who gave money to Hillary Clinton), but it gives a rough estimate of who's backing whom and to what extent.
The most notable recipient of Swift Boat largesse is John McCain, erstwhile front-runner and Stand Up Guy. When the Swift Boat ads were first unleashed, McCain was alone among his Republican colleagues to condemn them. A fellow Vietnam veteran, a good friend of Kerry's and a former target of smears about his own service, McCain called the ads "dishonest and dishonorable," a "cheap stunt," and he urged Bush to condemn them. But in pursuit of the GOP nomination, McCain ditched the mantle of maverick for that of hack, and his once-floundering, possibly rejuvenated campaign has been aided along the way by $61,650 from Swift Boat donors and their associates. "There is such a thing as dirty money," said Senator Kerry in a statement, after The Nation informed him of McCain's FEC records. "I'm surprised that the John McCain I knew who was smeared in 2000 and thought so-called Swift Boating was wrong in 2004 would feel comfortable taking their money after seeing the way it was used to hurt the veterans I know he loves." (McCain's office did not return calls for comment.)
McCain's Swift Boat bounty is exceeded only by that of Mitt Romney, who has raked in $70,550. Romney's success with Swift Boat donors is significant because he has surpassed even McCain in his demonstrated willingness to do or say anything in pursuit of the presidency and because he has emerged as the GOP establishment's favored candidate. Last year, when McCain held that position, the Arizona senator received significant backing from Swift Boat donors. But many have subsequently switched their allegiance. Pickens, who donated to McCain in June 2006, is now an enthusiastic Giuliani donor and fundraiser (Giuliani ranks third in Swift Boat funding, with $47,950). Perry, who also recorded several donations to McCain's PAC in 2005 and 2006, is now a major donor and fundraiser for Romney. If the list of top Swift Boat donors is expanded to fifty, Romney's fundraising edge is even more pronounced. (Neither Romney nor Giuliani's campaign returned calls for comment.)
Also noticeable among the recipients of Swift Boat largesse is one who received only a single donation: Mike Huckabee. Despite meager fundraising and little national name recognition, the former Arkansas governor has experienced a bubble-like expansion of support and media attention, taking the lead in Iowa and approaching a steady lead in national polls. But the lack of Swift Boat contributions lends credence to the claim that Huckabee is viewed warily by the money men who call the shots in the modern GOP. Despite proposing a radically regressive tax change and taking Grover Norquist's antitax pledge, he's been attacked savagely by the Club for Growth and eviscerated by columnist George Will for "comprehensive apostasy against core Republican beliefs," among them "free trade, low taxes, the essential legitimacy of America's corporate entities and the market system allocating wealth and opportunity."
This all supports the notion that the people behind the Swift Boat operation are chiefly concerned with the continued upward redistribution of wealth that is, more or less, the contemporary GOP's raison d'être. In 2006 Perry ponied up $5 million to start the Economic Freedom Fund, a 527 group devoted to attacking Democratic incumbents, and landed a large donation from prominent Swift Boat donor Carl Lindner. All of which is to say that the Swift Boaters aren't some kind of side show, a coterie of vicious mudslingers operating at the edges of respectability. They are the show. They are modern conservatism's core funders and beneficiaries. With conservatives staring straight into the abyss, their activities in this election cycle could very well make the Swift Boat smears look tame by comparison.
Too funny.
hey, Chris, did they manage to do it without 1000 purloined FBI files?
WOW!! I didn’t realize they called Graeme Frost unfit for duty
Nice editorial illustrating liberal/progressives “penchant for ruthlessly (and effectively) smearing any and all political opponents”.
Swift Boat Veterans to tax the poor ?
ping
Nice of the Nation to cheer me up this morning. So the Swift Boat Vets are back at it. Excellent.
What must really gripe the Nation is the fact that the Swift Boat Vets were right on target. Pretty hard to refute proven truth.
Fixed.
Emmett Terrell’s countdown clock for JFK to produce the evidence of the lies expired yesterday, I think, but boone Pickens’ million dollar offer is still on the table, right?
Looks like the author of that article isn’t keeping up with the times. It is the Dems with their filthy tactics and filthy monies.... foreign and domestic and the liberal media helps them on that endeavor such as Hillary’s CNN.
I myself have not been keeping up with the times. I heard about a guy offering a bunch of money.... a million bucks to anyone that could disprove the swift boat people’s claims.
John Kerry said he would take him up on that but complained about having to actually prove his point.
I haven’t heard what ever happened to that deal. It should be a fast million for Kerry. Did he ever get to collect or did he...... cut and run
“I’m surprised that the John McCain I knew who was smeared in 2000 and thought so-called Swift Boating was wrong in 2004 would feel comfortable taking their money after seeing the way it was used to hurt the veterans I know he loves.”
Maybe he finally discovered the truth about you kerry!
To "swift boat" is: to bring forth the truth swiftly.
another steaming pantload from the Left ...
As soon as I read about the SVT in 2004 I made a large contribution. I can’t think of another donation that I have ever made which has brought me more satisfaction. Great, I can do it again!
Wait... it already has!
Semper Fi
I still feel it was one of my best donations that year.
Full of emotional words, lots of polemics and no substance, this is some typical soft argument that pretends to have an argument. You can tell from how he writes he’s got a degree in: history, rhetoric, English, philosophy, or psychology- guaranteed.
Lot’s of statements like; “Kerry’s bitter defeat” or “ruthlessly (and effectively) smearing any and all political opponents” already in the first paragraph give insight to his agenda and political orientation. When you read further you realize this guy is educated and can write, but lacks a brain to think rationally- i.e. the soft science types I saw going into tough fields like psychology while at school.
If this is an opinion piece it’s OK, because we all have opinions; as the wise adage says. Typically people who have a hard time with reasoning out things and live in a world of “beliefs” feel compelled to attack those that shake their value and belief system with ideas that are incompatible. The Swift Boat guys didn’t lie. They told the truth. It’s their money and if they want to put the word out and remind people of Kerry’s own words (Public testimony), this does not make them in any way dubious or unmoral. He might not like the message and is sad that it sank Kerry, but neither where the money came from, who the videos were made by, how it was released, distributed, nor even the content is in question. Basically when you really get down to it, what he’s saying is “I didn’t like what they said, they should be muzzled.”
One drop of chlorine in a swimming pool of sewage, and they are still haunted by it!!!
The article gave me a reason to re-up!! Swift Boaters...man the bulwarks!
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.