Doug Ross @ Journal

"Lies and half-truths"

The shrill and intellectually dishonest Susan Estrich claimed in a recent column that the Swiftboat Veterans were "assassins" and that their charges were "lies and half-truths".

The central premise of Susan's column is this statement:

...all the newspapers and news organizations that investigated the charges of the Swift Boat assassins found them to be full of lies and half-truths...

She then goes on to recommend spending the Democratic war-chest on such voter-relevant issues as the current administration's past drinking habits (despite the fact that the Left already pursued that course of action... four years ago). And that's the best tactic she can come up with. In a near-hallucinogenic flight of fancy, she goes on to invent her own Swiftie-like groups ("George Bush's Former Female Friends for Truth").

Back in the real world, we can ask: what do the Swiftboat Veterans claim? And why didn't Susan Estrich address a single one of their "lies and half truths"?

"It is a matter of public record that John Kerry lied before Congress when he falsely portrayed his fellow service personnel in Vietnam as rapists and baby killers."

Kerry, himself, said that his broad-brush Congressional comments were, "a little bit over the top" - as close to an admission of falsehood as we'll likely get. Point for the Swifties.

"[We] believe that [Kerry's] testimony endangered our prisoners of war."

Paul Galanti, a Navy Pilot who spent seven years in Hanoi as a POW, said as much: "...during torture sessions, [Galanti] said, his captors cited the antiwar speeches as 'an example of why we should cross over to [their] side.'". Point for the Swifties.

The book "Unfit for Command" raises several eye-witness issues with Kerry's war stories, including "Christmas in Cambodia" and his first purple heart.

Kerry's campaign has backtracked on both of these issues. Regarding Christmas in Cambodia, "[the] Kerry campaign responded, initially, that Mr Kerry had always said he was 'near' Cambodia. Then a campaign aide said Mr Kerry had been in the Mekong Delta 'between' Vietnam and next-door Cambodia - a geographical zone not found on maps". And several other versions of the story, including CIA drop-offs months later, have arisen. Point for the Swifties.

Regarding the first purple heart, Kerry's own campaign has again backtracked. According to Fox News, "Kerry received a Purple Heart for wounds suffered on December 2nd, 1968. But an entry in Kerry's own journal written nine days later, he writes that, quote, he and his crew hadn't been shot at yet, unquote. Kerry's campaign has said it is possible his first Purple Heart was awarded for an unintentionally self-inflicted wound.". In other words, the first Purple Heart was, shall we say, bogus. Point for the Swifties.

"Winning three Purple Hearts, the Bronze Star and the Silver Star in four months is rare. We have received letters from countless veterans outlining serious injuries -- far more serious than any Kerry sustained -- who said they did not seek a Purple Heart, because they did not feel it was warranted by the minor nature of their wound. In any case, the Senator’s full disclosure of his military records will shed light on the truth."

Over 250 Swiftboat veterans, many of them eye-witnesses to the events in question, oppose John Kerry. Perhaps 15 or less support him. Full disclosure of Kerry's records -- by signing a Form 180 -- will clear up the remaining issues.

There are a bunch of lies and half-truths floating around, but none that I can find on the part of the Swiftboat Veterans.

The title "Michael Dukakis' campaign manager" says pretty much all you need to know about Susan Estrich. Feel free to write Susan with your thoughts.

Susan: when will John Kerry sign a Form 180, so we can clear up the remaining "lies and half-truths"?

SBVT FAQ

John Kerry's Biggest Problem

<Exactly what is John Kerry's most formidable problem in marshaling support for his campaign? J.B. Williams diagnoses Kerry's reactions to the Swiftboat crisis and mentions an ominous surprise that may be waiting in the wings. If true, it could throw a few more anvils on the desk of his sinking candidacy.

...John Kerry’s biggest problem is John Kerry. He can’t run on his Senate career because his voting record is opposite to his campaign rhetoric. He can’t run on his ability to run anything, a company, a state, a municipality, a Girl Scout troop, because he has never run anything. And now, he can’t run on his self-proclaimed hero status because despite the fact that he has a dozen or so willing to stand with him in this effort, there are more than 250 standing opposed, and they won’t go away. There’s more: former POW’s tortured with his pictures and words in captivity have a September surprise of their own for Kerry. Kerry’s implosion is completely self-inflicted and it was completely predictable. Snared by his own web of lies and cornered by all the bridges he burned over the years, he is in serious trouble... ...Kerry is depending on the American people not noticing that through his barrage of counter attacks, he has yet to answer a single charge.

John Kerry's Biggest Problem Is John Kerry

John Forbes Dukakis

Is any sort of criticism of John Kerry valid? Or are all critiques "smears" and "lies"? Glenn Reynolds asks some poignant questions.

It's hard to criticize John Kerry these days. Apparently, every criticism of him is unfair. At least, we're not supposed to criticize his time in Vietnam -- or even what he's said about Vietnam more recently -- because that would be a "smear" (even when the Kerry campaign admits, as it has regarding Kerry's Christmas-in-Cambodia claims, that he hasn't been telling the truth)... ...One question for voters -- among many, many others that we're apparently not supposed to be asking -- is this: If Kerry can't run a campaign, how can he run the Presidency?

John Forbes Dukakis

Pataki

I missed Governor George Pataki's speech but just had a chance to read it. Great stuff. Here are some highlights:

Almost four years ago, George W. Bush raised his right hand and took the oath of office. And from the first, he showed us something we hadn't seen in a while. When he said he was going to do something, he meant it. And then he did it. Given recent history, that's amazing. He inherited a recession. And then came September 11th. But George Bush said he would turn around the economy and create new jobs. He said he'd do it. And he did. He said he would cut taxes on the middle class and ease the tax burden on all Americans. He said he'd do it. And he did. He said he'd help small businesses, protect Social Security and expand home ownership. He said he'd do it. And he did. He said he'd apply tougher standards to our schools. He'd help our seniors get the prescription drug coverage they need. He said he'd do it. And he did. And George Bush said he'd fight to allow the power of faith to help our young and help our troubled. He said he'd do it. And he did. There's much more, but you get the point. ... Where does Senator Kerry stand on [the terrorist attacks]? In Boston, he said that in the future "any attack would be met with a swift and certain response." Well, respectfully, Senator, that's not good enough. We've already been attacked, time and again. And President Bush understands we can't just wait for the next attack. We have to go after them, in their training camps, in their hiding places, in their spider holes, before they have the chance to attack us again. ... Senator Kerry says, "America should go to war not when it wants to go to war but when it has to go to war." Well, Senator, the firefighters and cops who ran into those burning towers and died on September 11th didn't want to go to war. They were heroes in a war they didn't even know existed. America did not choose this war. But we have a president who chooses to win it.

Demos: Can we panic now?

The Left-leaning pundits are starting to sound the alarm claxons. Others are simply rearranging the deck chairs on the sinking vessel that is the Kerry campaign. What is that off in the distance... is that a Swiftboat?

He's a good closer! In Massachusetts! For Kerry, the race is at worst very close, and there's plenty of time. I'd be more confident of his ability to pull himself out of his rut, though, if I could think of any instance when he's aggressively campaigned over a sustained period before an electorate that wasn't overwhelmingly Democratic and actually moved the needle significantly in his direction. I can't. If anyone out there can, please let me know. ...

Can we panic now?