This started as a comment yesterday.
I figured it was worth expanding on.
Jeff Fecke left the comment near the end of a long thread on the latest revelations from the Swifties. Jeff said, in a nutshell:
For starters; leaving aside any empirical proof of Bush's presence at AANG drills (I say it's been proven, the left covers its ears and goes "Nya nya"), at no point has the President EVER said "I'm qualified to be your president because I was a crackerjack F102 jock". In March, the Dems were chortling with glee, though - I heard at least one say "Kerry's experience at crisis leadership *dwarfs* the president's" because of Vietnam. So - if significant parts of that experience were made up from whole cloth, what DOES that say about the experience that's been the cornerstone of his career?
And yes, Kerry needs to provide proof of Kerry's presence in Cambodia, NO MATTER WHAT Bush's TANG record was. If the President dropped dead tomorrow of natural causes (calm down, Slash, it's hypothetical), Kerry's alleged lies would still be fully germane.
Corroborable evidence of any mission to Cambodia - documentary, eyewitness, SOMETHING - WILL exist. If the mission ever happened, anyway.
By the way - the left keeps repeating statements that the Swifties "have been caught lying" is, I'll be kind, an exaggeration. There are certain questions of chronology, details remembered wrongly, yadda yadda. In the end, though, the key question is, "Did Kerry exaggerate his war record (putting himself in places and on missions he never went on), his accomplishments (claiming credit for Peck's firefight, exaggerating his medal claims), his sacrifice (the extent of his injuries, and whether the injuries caused him to go home earlier than with other veterans; there was apparently not a consistent "three injuries and you're going home" policy; if there had been, a lot of soldiers who shot themselves in the foot, might not have), and his exposure to action (when he signed up for Swift boats, they were a fairly safe and cushy assignment) and so on. It's on the table because, if true, it's his only qualification for office. If not true...
By the way, I'm not recusing myself from discussing the circumstances behind Kerry's medals because I don't think there's a case; I'm doing it because as a non-Veteran, it's not my place. We have real veterans doing that. It's a great call for the Dem's bluff; after years of bellowing "chickenhawk" every time a Republican sounds off about war, they're faced with a group of guys who have more cojones than 99.9% of the party - and all the chickendoves can do is bleat about political connections, like you're not supposed to have them to voice an opinion!
Finally - it doesn't matter if Kerry was eight miles from Cambodia, eight feet, or eight time zones; being "almost" on an illegal, spook-carrying, gun-running secret mission is like beingt "almost" a virgin; it doesn't count.
In a rational world, we wouldn't need the Swifties to tell us this; By any remotely dispassionate measure, Kerry is an empty suit, vapid Yalie, an Ivy-league silver spooner with no redeeming life experience, a politician of no demonstrable heft, peddling a platform of baked wind, that doesn't deign to go into ANY specifics. All he has is his war record, and if we elect president based on war record then both George HW Bush and Bob Dole would have won in landslides.
John Kerry is no Bob Dole.Posted by Mitch at August 24, 2004 05:50 AM | TrackBack