Replies

Why did it take 3 weeks to get the MSM to let the Swiftboat Vets into the newspapers and on the tube? That's how long it took to develop a coordinated counter-offensive between the Kerry campaign, the MSM and the 527's to be developed and focus-grouped. The first time the NYT recognized the Swifties existense was to attack them as Republican mud-slingers.
If you believe it took only 4 days to create and get the moveon.org anti-Swiftie ad on tv, I've got a gold mine in NJ I'd like to sell you.
The Vets will not be presented as "sympathetic" figures, they will be attacked personally, not on the merits of their service or the accuracy of their information. This is the second time around these guys to be hung out to dry.
I find it extremely interesting, John Kerry is referred to as a "war hero" for 4 months of service in Vietnam, yet the 260 +/- vets who served longer are being portrayed as crackpots, right-wing lunatics, Republican shills, etc., etc,.

The MSM barely reported on this story UNTIL a few people stepped forward to defend Kerry.

Kerry has had every opportunity to defend himself against the charges made by the Swift Boat vets but hasn't. Because he can't. So instead he will attack the messengers. Then the timing.

The Vets will not be presented as "sympathetic" figures, they will be attacked personally, not on the merits of their service or the accuracy of their information. This is the second time around these guys to be hung out to dry.

Whether presented as sympathetic or not, they come off to most viewers as credible. Polling proves that.

"Why did it take 3 weeks to get the MSM to let the Swiftboat Vets into the newspapers and on the tube?"

1) Because they have been investigating them to find flaws needed to rebut their charges.

2) To give Kerry & Co. time to think of plausable (to them) denials.

3) The MSM probably had absolutely no idea that "UNFIT FOR COMMAND" was going to be a #1 seller, and that publisher, Regnery, could not print it fast enough to keep up with demand. ( basically what you have said)

"The first time the NYT recognized the Swifties existense was to attack them as Republican mud-slingers."

No surprise here. And this will continue, along with charges the Bush campaign is behind the entire enchalada.

"The Vets will not be presented as "sympathetic" figures, they will be attacked personally, not on the merits of their service or the accuracy of their information. This is the second time around these guys to be hung out to dry."

Again ... no surprise here. Did you think suddenly the MSM was going to become Bush cheerleaders? Tell the truth? Investigate in a non-partisan way?