A Vote and A Smile

I don't want to say this is the last thing I will write about John Kerry in Vietnam or the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Because it is likely that this story is not over and that there will be more revelations and controversy to come. The latest SwiftVet ad is sure to raise a few eyebrows and now that the SwiftVets have broken through into the mainstream of campaign coverage, if only to the level of being smeared before a larger audience, this ad cannot be ignored.

Never in Cambodia

STEVE GARDNER:   “I spent more time on John Kerry’s boat than any other crew member.

John Kerry hasn’t been honest, he’s been deceitful.

John Kerry claims that he spent Christmas in 1968 in Cambodia and that is categorically a lie.

Not in December, not in January.

We were never in Cambodia on a secret mission, ever.”

VO: “Swift Boat Veterans for truth is responsible for the content of this advertisement.”

This should put a nasty dent in whatever is left of the the credibility of Kerry's war stories.

The Captain at Captain's Quarters recently highlighted a news story in which it was pointed out that there is a strong possibility that much of the military documentation of events being used to support Kerry's stories may well have been authored by the candidate.

Sen. Symington asked Kerry, "Mr. Kerry, from your experience in Vietnam do you think it is possible for the President or Congress to get accurate and undistorted information through official military channels.[?]"

Kerry responded, "I had direct experience with that. Senator, I had direct experience with that and I can recall often sending in the spot reports which we made after each mission; and including the GDA, gunfire damage assessments, in which we would say, maybe 15 sampans sunk or whatever it was. And I often read about my own missions in the Stars and Stripes and the very mission we had been on had been doubled in figures and tripled in figures.

Kerry later added, "I also think men in the military, sir, as do men in many other things, have a tendency to report what they want to report and see what they want to see."

I don't personally have easy access to archives of Stars and Stripes from the four months of Kerry's combat service but some enterprising reporter (probably not for a major paper with the word Times in its name) could probably compare the paper's reports with Kerry's after action reports to see if this part of the story holds up as well as the rest seams to.

If that part of the story turns out to be true, then Kerry's defense of it is perfectly adequate. People see what they want to see. For instance if you want to see a hail of very poorly aimed gunfire from both banks of a river while you pull a guy out of the water and your comrades busy themselves tying a tow line to a damaged boat then that is what you will report. Especially if you want to come out of it with a medal.

For the record, I have never served in the military, and thus have never seen combat. I am very understanding of the stress of and terror and how that can effect a person's recollection of events. I also understand the tendency to exaggerate from time to time. I myself have even exaggerated once or twice. An exaggeration IS saying you sank 10 sampans when you only sank 8, or reporting that there were 12 enemy firing at you when there were only seven. Saying you were in a fire-fight in Cambodia on Christmas Eve when you were 50 miles away typing in your journal of visions of sugarplums is not an exaggeration it is a lie.

Kerry's lack of truthfulness, and his lack of a consistent position on the war in Iraq, his generally law enforcement/judicial response to terrorism and his eagerness to raise taxes and federalize the health care industry make opposition to his candidacy easy. I only wish there was enough about his campaign opponent to engender support as enthusiastic as my opposition to Kerry.

I support President Bush's response to terrorism completely. Waiting for them to come to us will only result in more of us getting killed. I think the tax cuts Bush fought for early in his administration were a good half step in the right direction. Making them permanent would make them a good first step. I support his proposals to partially privatize Social Security - again as a good first step. Unfortunately, that's pretty much where it ends. There's a whole list of things he has done that I cannot support. The Medicare Prescription Drug Program, Campaign Finance Reform, No Child Left Behind, and the whole Faith Based Initiative are probably at the top of the list. I'm not all that crazy about Bush's imposition of tariffs either.

I don't however want to see Bush change any of those positions out of political expediency. I would rather have a president with deeply held convictions some of which I disagree with, than to have president without principals, conviction or character. But I do need something. I need Bush to do something to get me past a vote based on grudging support of him and vehement opposition to his opponent. I'd like to be able to vote with a smile instead of a shrug.

Posted by: Stephen Macklin at 09:40 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment