Bring it on?
Swiftboat Vets is kicking ass, and taking names. I’ve watched them debate with Kerry’s people - and it’s amazing how the debate works:
Swift Vets: During Christmas 1968, Kerry wasn’t anywhere near Cambodia - let alone over the border.
Kerry Campaign: You guys suck!
Well it’s not exactly like that, but Swift Vets charges are never refuted by Kerry’s people. Instead Kerry’s team always attacks the Swift Vets personally. As anyone experienced with debate knows, such ad hominem attacks are usually indicative of an inability to refute charges.
August 21st, 2004 at 6:04 pm
Hey Scott -
Bullshit.
I’ll make it short and sweet. The Swift Boat guys are full of crap. You could find this out by doing a minimal amount of homework.
Facts:
Kerry went. Kerry got shot. Kerry saved a guy’s life. Kerry went to Cambodia — oops, it was January, not December. Sorry!
Bush stayed home.
Kerry is a self-aggrandizing politician. If that turns you off, that’s your right. He’s also got balls. He’s also done things for this country, more than I have and probably more than you have.
Bush is a pissant. He’s a self-righteous, ignorant, jumped-up rich white frat boy playing cowboy. His tough talk costs him nothing, and costs our country a lot.
My two cents.
“Buh-bye!”
R
August 26th, 2004 at 9:43 am
Russ:
I’m doing my homework. But I’ll tell you this: You - and everyone else - who’ve criticized the Swiftboat Vets - are attacking the men - not their arguments.
I know enough about debate to know that people resort to ad-hominem attacks when they can’t argue the facts.
And when you say “The Swift Boat guys are full of crap” you are in effect saying that 260+ Vietnam Vets are liars.
I’m trying to buy the book - but am having trouble finding it….
August 26th, 2004 at 12:03 pm
Scott -
Fair enough.
Rather than make the “ad hominem” statement that they are full of crap, I will make the equivalent statement of fact: the most damning claims made by the SBV are, as far as I can tell based on a pretty thorough reading of the available information, factually false.
I’ll be more specific.
The Swift Boat guys seem to be making a few major points:
1. The medals Kerry received are undeserved, and were awarded based on misrepresentations (i.e., lies) about the actual events.
2. Kerry has embellished his wartime experiences in the years since for political effect.
3. His testimony about Vietnam era atrocities was inexcusable because it put all Vietnam servicemen in a bad light, in particular while they were still there.
The guys making statement (1) appear to be deliberately lying.
The guys making statement (2) are not lying, but I’m not sure there’s all that much there to criticize Kerry with. I put the “Christmas in Cambodia” issue in this bucket — in one statement on the floor of the Senate some number of years ago, he claimed he was in Cambodia on Christmas Eve. Looks like he was there shortly thereafter. The Christmas Eve version has more punch — did he misspeak? Did he remember incorrectly? Did he intentionally revise the story for dramatic effect? Don’t know, but it just doesn’t bug me all that much. He was there, carrying out questionable or perhaps illegal operations under the orders of his government, and the experience, as he says, “seared” him.
The guys making statement (3) (who are the majority of the SBV) have a totally understandable point of view, but Kery’s statements as far as I can tell were all true. They can hate Kerry if they like, but I don’t believe they can call him a liar.
I have no problem with guys who don’t like Kerry for his self-promotion, for his politics, or for taking advantage of the opportunity to leave Vietnam after 4 months.
I have a big problem with guys who lie in order to impugn the record of a guy who, after all, did go when he could have gotten out of it, did get shot, and did save a guy’s life. Especially when they are doing so to support a guy who didn’t go at all, and doesn’t appear to have fulfilled the stateside duty he chose instead.
Thanks!
R
August 27th, 2004 at 4:17 am
I found the book and will read it myself. I’m not an ideologue or an idiot for that matter, and will keep your comments in mind. I’ll write about my findings after I’m done.
Regard,
Scott