Article

2004-08-21 Home Front: Politix

Kerry Camp: MoveOn Ads Okay; Swift Boat Ads Not Okay

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Super Hose 2004-08-21 04:05|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Newsmax also has an article: Don't Forget 'The Kerry Committee' about Kerry's fellating of Daniel Ortega back when Lurch was just a freshman senator.

Posted by Super Hose 2004-08-21 4:15:59 AM|| 2004-08-21 4:15:59 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 the Bush campaign would rather focus on the major issues - including Sen. Kerry's spotty attendance at Senate Intelligence Committee hearings.

This is as damagine as anything else IMHO. Kerry has already bagged all of those who have their identity locked up in The Summer of Love. But the one's who will decide this election, are those lone individuals who are more interested in the fact that their grandchildren might have also have a few summers of fun in the sun, rather than in the madrassa.

Kerry isn't ready for prime time.

Posted by B 2004-08-21 6:30:41 AM|| 2004-08-21 6:30:41 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 damaging

Posted by B 2004-08-21 6:31:11 AM|| 2004-08-21 6:31:11 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 "In other shocking news developments, the sun appeared to rise from the eastern horizon this morning. Top scientists attributed the phenomenon to the Earth's rotation . . . ."

Posted by Mike 2004-08-21 7:12:24 AM|| 2004-08-21 7:12:24 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Millerwise, "It's Bush time."

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-08-21 7:21:14 AM|| 2004-08-21 7:21:14 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Theresa Heinz-Kerry contributes MILLIONS to the Tide Foundation. Tides then funds a number of communist and leftist orgainizations. Tides also contributes to CAIR.

Tides funds MoveOn.Org. Direct connection between Kerry and anti-Bush MoveOn.Org adds...

Posted by jawa 2004-08-21 9:24:45 AM|| 2004-08-21 9:24:45 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Kerry objects to what in the new ad? They used his own 1971 testimony audio, and POW vets describing their own feelings, thoughts. He can't claim it's false, except to say he was lying through his stinking teeth

Posted by Frank G 2004-08-21 9:51:10 AM|| 2004-08-21 9:51:10 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 skerry is making a huge mistake, instead of being a 'real man' and owning up to what did or didn't happen in 'nam, he wants an ad removed because it is obviously impacting his campaign - typical pussy tactics from the poodle. But then again, most politicians I've seen are pussies.

Posted by Jarhead 2004-08-21 10:06:46 AM|| 2004-08-21 10:06:46 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 Even if I live to a hundred, I'll never figure out how in the world these Donk idiots calculated that Kerry should run on this nonsensical "Vietnam War Hero" platform. What did he do there? He spent four and a half months in the war and got a reputation that can hardly be described as positive: several dozen people he served with there approve of his conduct, but several HUNDRED of them (including every commanding officer he ever had, apparently) were left with a very negative opinion of him.

After the war he made a name for himself as a peacenik, a buddyfucker (that's a Vietnam-era military term for someone who leaves his fellow soldiers in the lurch, or lets them down in a big way) and even a traitor, giving aid and comfort to the enemy by smearing his former comrades with false accusations of war crimes and atrocities. I personally was never spit upon or called a "baby killer," but I certainly suffered some damned rude treatment as a soldier back in the early 70's, thanks to John Kerry.

Kerry actually claims to take pride in his antiwar activities for having "shortened the war"; but what he really did was help talk America into losing the war by losing heart.

And the despicable bastard is doing it again, today, with Iraq.

Posted by Dave D. 2004-08-21 10:32:24 AM|| 2004-08-21 10:32:24 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 Dave, The 'vietnam war Hero' mantra is the only thing Kerry can run on.

He can't run on his anti-defense, anti-intelligence senate record.
The economony is recovering (and people know it) and is much more stable then the boom, so he can't run on 'lost jobs'.
He can't run much on healthcare costs since his running-mate is part of what sent them thru the roof (I think people will start to realize that too).
He can't even refute the allegations of the SwiftVets -- he can only launch direct attacks against them.

Posted by CrazyFool 2004-08-21 10:53:24 AM|| 2004-08-21 10:53:24 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 He's running on "Vietnam" because he can at least keep that at a boil, and his base is the same bunch that protested it and thier kids now protest Iraq.

It also, very conveniently, keeps things away from his voting record in the Senate - the MOST LIBERAL voting record of anyone there! It hides is consistent votes to cut defense and intelligence spending, and the lack of his introduction of any relevant or major bills in the Senate.

He now can play the victim (typical Democrat victimology) against those "mean Texas" critics, while dodging the hard questions about his political carteer, from his meetings wiht the North Vietnamese, to supporting the Sandinistas, to his vote against Gulf War I, etc.

The problem ofr Kerry is that he has been exposed as a liar (Christmas in Cambodia), and these Swiftvets are bringing to light his damning testimony in front of Congress. On top of that, Kerry's campaign organizatiopn has some problems with the truth - substituting BOB Kerry's record for JFKerry's in a response to the SwiftVets, making claims that Kerry's boat stayed and the others fled (when the opposite was true), etc.

If we had a truly free press, they would be having a field day with this kind of inconsistency from a major political figure and his organization.

The fact that the Washington Post and NYTimes are launching attacks on the Vets is a disservice to this country. They should be investigating the claims, not the people making them. Prove the claims false first - then go after the "liars" who brought them.

The problem for the NYT is that when they do investigate, it makes the vets look good and Kerry bad - becasue from what I have seen the facts and credible witnesses support the SwifVet's claims. So the NYT and other liberal papers and TV news organizations are running away from doing ther job because of their politial bent. Nobody seems to have the guts to do a "Watergate" style expose of Kerry and his duplicitous operation.

Thank God for the internet - the NYT and WaPo can no longer bury stories like Cambodia and the basic dishonesty of John Kerry and his backers. The facts ARE coming out. And its estimated that 45% of all voters have ssen the SwiftVets adds, evne though they have only been run a few times in limited markets: Its the internet! Drudge, the blogosphere and places like this are doing the job the Mainstream Media was supposed to do.

If the WaPo and NYT continue down this path of becoming organs of the Liberal/Democrat political movement, they will find themselves drifting in to irrelevancy because they will ahve broken the cardinal rule of news: report ALL the news and report it as news without interjected viewpoints and opinion.

Support Rantburg, the bloggers and other sites like it: they are upholding one of the main pillars of democracy that the left has rotted away.

Hit Fred's tip jar!

Posted by OldSpook 2004-08-21 10:58:22 AM|| 2004-08-21 10:58:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 "If we had a truly free press, they would be having a field day with this kind of inconsistency from a major political figure and his organization."

Did you really mean "free?" Or would "honest" be more applicable in that sentence? Because they certainly aren't honest.

I don't really have any problem with the press being biased. We all have our viewpoints, and even the most fair-minded of journalists is going to have at least some difficulty keeping his own opinions out of his coverage of events.

But what I do have a problem with-- a big one-- is the press being both biased and dishonest about it. Or, just as bad, being biased and completely clueless about it.

There's a good article about blogs and the MSM in today's American Thinker, at

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3769

which includes this passage:

"Gone forever is the pretense of an objective mainstream press, reporting the facts and letting the public decide. America's media have gone British. Our newspapers, like their British cousins, have a political agenda, and the readers they still retain know it. Of course, unlike the British press, they cling to the fiction of objectivity."

"Gone British." Absolutely spot-on, and I'd be perfectly content with "conservative news shows" and "liberal news shows" if only our media were honest about their sympathies.

But they're not, and so we're left with the ideological descendents of that roaring asshole Walter Cronkite passing themselves off as the "most trusted men in America."

Posted by Dave D. 2004-08-21 11:19:12 AM|| 2004-08-21 11:19:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#13 I was talking with my father last night, and the conversation scared me. What news he gets comes from the MSM, and he, a Republican for most of his life, was slamming Bush for picking up on the questions that the Swift Boat Vets are raising, claiming that it slammed Kerry unfairly. "He went over there, knowing he was entering a unit that would see combat," Dad said (I'm paraphrasing). "Bush didn't. Now, everybody was doing that, going into the reserves, and they weren't called up as much for some reason - which is fine, except now he's Commander-in-Chief . . ." To be fair, Dad did have a similar complaint about Clinton.

I pointed out that I understand that what Kerry went through over there probably was very rough, and that he came back disillusioned, but that by denouncing it he essentially lost his right to use it as a campaign centerpiece. You went over there, fought? Fine. Use it by all means - we've had several presidents as generals. Except that none of them denounced the war and tried to use it later. If anything, Kerry's embracing of what he once denounced should count against him (in a rational world, I suppose it might), since if he "knows the dangers of combat" then he would be more eager to avoid sending more men into such dangers.

Only slightly related, I fear, but it shows me what the Vets and others are up against when the media gives Kerry more credit than anyone else (and that's an understatement). Random people - even bright, discerning men like my father - can miss crucial facts that change the whole story, and in missing those facts they construct lines of argument that make us look like the bad guys when we try to explain what else is going on.

Posted by The Doctor 2004-08-21 11:31:02 AM|| 2004-08-21 11:31:02 AM|| Front Page Top

#14 great rant, OS.

Posted by B 2004-08-21 11:31:49 AM|| 2004-08-21 11:31:49 AM|| Front Page Top

#15 Damn right oldspook! I just hit Fred's tip jar.

Dave, My problem is that the media is 1) taking its talking points from the Democrats and 2) isn't even trying to be fair anymore. The problem the media has is that people have other sources (Hit Fred's tip Jar!) for their news and notice it a lot more.

Doc, Kerry joined the Naval Reserve and not the Navy itself.

Posted by CrazyFool 2004-08-21 11:36:53 AM|| 2004-08-21 11:36:53 AM|| Front Page Top

#16 Really? I'll have to mention that in my next discussion with my father . . . thanks, CF!

Posted by The Doctor 2004-08-21 11:41:06 AM|| 2004-08-21 11:41:06 AM|| Front Page Top

#17 "The problem the media has is that people have other sources (Hit Fred's tip Jar!) for their news and notice it a lot more."

I first got exposed to blogs 2-1/2 years ago while I was stuck at home recuperating from a hernia operation-- I was hurting too bad to go anywhere, but not hurting bad enough to take my mind off politics.

Nowadays I get nearly all of my news from blogs. Not directly from them, but from the news articles they link to. Editorials are a different matter: one of the great surprises with blogs, IMO, is the huge quantity of high-quality, thoughtful opinion they provide collectively. I visit between two dozen and three dozen blogs each day; and between the "linkers" and "thinkers" I figure I'm now much, MUCH better informed than I was before.

Gone forever is the era of watching an hour of CNN each day and thinking it makes me "well-informed." HA!!!!!

Posted by Dave D. 2004-08-21 12:07:54 PM|| 2004-08-21 12:07:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 The Good Ship J. F. Kerry has hit an iceberg.

The press is on board the GS JF Kerry and reporting that although taking on water, it is bad water, and because the press says it is bad water, none of the passengers should worry about it. The SS Kerry will continue to steam onward to port at full speed.

Meanwhile the GS GW Bush nearby has signalled the JF Kerry asking them if they need a little help as it appears they have struck an iceberg, are steaming full speed ahead in circles and perhaps should stop trying to move full steam ahead with an iceberb ripping full sections of the hull away.

The Captain of the SS Kerry signals the SS GW Bush, "No, you fuckers should have told us there were icebergs in these waters; we'll get to port on our own thankyouverymch."

Posted by badanov 2004-08-21 12:28:54 PM|| [http://www.rkka.org] 2004-08-21 12:28:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 The band is on the Promenade Deck of the GS JF Kerry playing hits from the 60's. You'll know they've figured out what happened when Abide with Me starts.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-08-21 12:31:24 PM|| 2004-08-21 12:31:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 Funny you should mention the Titanic, badanov. Here's a view of what's going on right now up on the bow:

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/dilatush/titanic.jpg

Posted by Dave D. 2004-08-21 12:34:26 PM|| 2004-08-21 12:34:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 surprising the GS Kerry should turn to port...not

Posted by Frank G 2004-08-21 12:37:44 PM|| 2004-08-21 12:37:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Soros admits donating $16 million to defeat Bush. Perry donated $100,000 to the SBVT as seed money for their book project. Conclusions:
1)Republicans supporters are more effective
2)Kerry's campaign flinches easily
3)The partisan media is blind in their left eye

Does anyone remember where to find the post of one of Kerry's managers bragging that the MSM would provide cover for them? I've run a couple of archive searches and can't find it.

Posted by GK 2004-08-21 1:27:35 PM|| 2004-08-21 1:27:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Doc, Kerry joined the Naval Reserve and not the Navy itself.

heh, heh...don't ever say that in a bar full of Naval Reservists, unless you want to get beat up.

Posted by B 2004-08-21 3:55:20 PM|| 2004-08-21 3:55:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 Sorry B, I didn't mean to imply that there was a difference between the Reserve and Regular.

(Now if I can only get this foot out of my mouth....).

Posted by CrazyFool 2004-08-21 5:26:02 PM|| 2004-08-21 5:26:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Doc...also from what I've read when Kerry joined the swift boats, it was not a high combat job. At that time they were patrolling the coast out of combat areas. Not long after Kerry joined them their mission got changed to interdiction of VC boats with supplies.

And I've also read he only joined up because his number was up and like many at that time went with the Navy (and for others Air Force) instead of having to be in the Army.

Posted by AF Lady 2004-08-21 8:35:35 PM|| 2004-08-21 8:35:35 PM|| Front Page Top

00:55 Lucky
00:51 rex
00:39 Lucky
00:37 Silentbrick
00:35 liberalhawk
00:09 .com
00:08 Lurks Often
00:01 A Jackson
23:59 Super Hose
23:58 Zenster
23:54 .com
23:45 Zenster
23:44 Frank G
23:31 Zenster
23:21 Zenster
23:11 .com
23:11 Zenster
23:08 crazyhorse
23:07 Fred
23:04 Fred
22:58 .com
22:43 Bryan
22:42 Valentine
22:39 mhw