Reality and Sanity

May 28, 2006

Kerry: He Was For Moving On Before He Was Against It

Filed under: Bias? What bias?, Stupid Democrat Tricks — Paul @ 12:13 am

Scroll for updates…
John Kerry won't give it up: Kerry Pressing Swift Boat Case Long After Loss.

Three decades after the Vietnam War and nearly two years after Mr. Kerry's failed presidential bid, most Americans have probably forgotten why it ever mattered whether he went to Cambodia or that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth accused him of making it all up, saying he was dishonest and lacked patriotism.But among those who were on the front lines of the 2004 campaign, the battle over Mr. Kerry's wartime service continues, out of the limelight but in some ways more heatedly — because unlike then, Mr. Kerry has fully engaged in the fight. Only those on Mr. Kerry's side, however, have gathered new evidence to support their case.

Maybe they're about to present some 'fake, but accurate' documents. Maybe they are getting too far out in front of the news cycle.

Mr. Kerry, accused even by Democrats of failing to respond to the charges during the campaign, is now fighting back hard."They lied and lied and lied about everything," Mr. Kerry says in an interview in his Senate office. "How many lies do you get to tell before someone calls you a liar? How many times can you be exposed in America today?"

His supporters are compiling a dossier that they say will expose every one of the Swift boat group's charges as a lie and put to rest any question about Mr. Kerry's valor in combat. While it would be easy to see this as part of Mr. Kerry's exploration of another presidential run, his friends say the Swift boat charges struck at an experience so central to his identity that he would want to correct the record even if he were retiring from public life.

Oh really? Then why is this paragraph in the story:

Mr. Kerry portrays himself as a wary participant in his own defense, insisting in the two-hour interview that he does not want to dwell on the accusations or the mistakes of his 2004 campaign. "I'm moving on," he says several times.

Which is quickly followed by…

But he can also barely resist prosecuting a case against the group that his friends now refer to as "the bad guys."

John Kerry. He was for moving on before he was against it.

Update: Patterico's response to the "gathered new evidence" line is devastating.

Update II: Captain Ed also responds:

If Kerry really wants to open the topic for debate again, there are plenty of questions contained within the category that have never been answered. Here are just a few:

1. Why did Kerry appropriate Tedd Peck's battle record into his own record?

2. Why did Kerry allow David Alston to appear at numerous campaign events and misrepresent himself as an eyewitness to Kerry's Silver Star engagement?

3. Why did Alston disappear from the campaign after this became public, and why didn't the Kerry campaign explain his absence?

4. If Kerry came under fire on the December 2, 1968 incident for which he requested and eventually received his first Purple Heart, why then did Kerry write in his journal on December 11 that he had not yet been shot at?

If he can explain all this with new evidence, I'll be glad to post it. Until then, this looks like the same bluster that his supporters have used all along — to claim that the Swift Boat veterans have been thoroughly debunked and that Kerry had been vindicated without producing a single piece of supporting evidence for either conclusion. It also proves that Kerry will never get past Viet Nam, and as long as he occupies a leadership position in the Democratic Party, neither will the Democrats.

Update III: Scott Johnson, Tom Maguire and Jon Henke have joined the fray. Bruce Kessler of the Democracy Project is right on target: New York Times is full of Kerry.

Allahpundit points out a poll:

Well, Rasmussen decided to re-run the 2004 election and discovered two things. First, Kerry wins this time by seven points. And second, he’s still a terrible candidate:

President Bush is still trusted by a few more voters than Kerry on the National Security issue. However, the President’s advantage is much smaller than it was during the election season–44% now trust the President more while 41% opt for Kerry…

On immigration, 43% trust the President more while 40% prefer Kerry.

You don’t need a poll to tell you how terrible he is, though. Some of the righty blogosphere’s heaviest hitters are reacting this morning to news that Kerry wants a rematch with the Swift Vets.

Kerry better come up with some compelling evidence and answers to the myriad of questions about his service, which I'll be happy to post provided it's detailed and accurate. But there is so many holes that I doubt he can plug a few of them, let alone all.

Update IV: Here's excerpts from the book Kerry suppressed about his testimony before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on April 22, 1971: The New Soldier.

Advertisements

Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: