BuffettNews.com

krusin1 wrote:

FunkHouse9 wrote:

flyboy55 wrote:To defend such obvious fabrications and smears is to condone them, don't you think?

When the 'Swift Boaters' attacked John Kerry's war record (a record which contrasted starkly with Bush's own 'silver spoon service' stateside) with a fabricated smear, he was criticized by pundits and some supporters for not responding in kind. That attack alone likely played a significant role in his loss in 2004.

This type of stuff is my biggest problem with many people. People hear nonsense like the swift boat criticisms of Kerry, believe it and vote based on it. It's really sad that some people take everything at face value.

Sorry man... the criticisms came from guys who were THERE. Combine that with the obviously fabricated parts of John Kerry's story (Christmas in Cambodia???) and then you have to make a judgment call - were the Swiftees talking "nonsense"... or was John Kerry?

In all honesty, I know little to nothing about the facts on this topic, so I won't try to argue a point or get elaborate on something I'm uneducated about. But, from my perspective, Kerry was a good man who was the subject of a smear campaign. Overall, I have heard more to suggest that it was unjust than I have otherwise.

And, although I may be mistaken, most of the criticisms came from people who were there, but not right there with him.

From what I've read, they weren't smearing him. The standard practice when you're being attacked on your record is to complain about being smeared. All I needed to know about Kerry was this:

Staredge wrote:From what I've read, they weren't smearing him. The standard practice when you're being attacked on your record is to complain about being smeared. All I needed to know about Kerry was this:

No I disagree. The standard practice when you have no record (or chance of winning on issues) is to smear the other guy. In 2004, Karl Rove knew that he had to attack Kerry's war record because he knew that his own candidate (who was claiming to be the 'War President) didn't have much of a record of military service to speak of.

Some Vietnam era veterans may believe they have reason to dislike John Kerry for the stand he took against the war when he got home, but the fact remains that John Kerry actually went overseas and fought in that war while many of his critics (notably Vice President Dick Cheney who received FIVE college deferments and who famously said about his lack of military service that he "had other priorities in the '60s") stayed at home and avoided service altogether. It should also be remembered that many, many of John Kerry's fellow Vietnam veterans joined him in speaking out against the war when they returned from the jungles of southeast Asia.

There is another aspect to the treatment of John Kerry that irritates me. Anyone who hasn't given the same service in wartime that John Kerry did all those years ago may have the freedom to criticize his actions in opposing the war that he had recently returned from, but I don't think they have earned the privilege or moral right to do so.

The fact that a small group of fellow veterans (the so-called Swift Boat veterans), upset at his opposition to the Vietnam war, would agree to discredit his military service in that conflict with lies and innuendos as a form of retaliation to settle an old score, doesn't say much for their honor, IMHO.

For the record, the Swift Boat veterans' claims were later thoroughly discredited, unfortunately for John Kerry's candidacy too late to do any good. But that's the way the smear works. The lie doesn't have to be good enough to stand up to detailed scrutiny. It only has to plant a seed of doubt in people's minds and it has done its job. Two months later nobody cares that the lie gets exposed for what it was. Memories and attention spans are very short and in these cynical times we are easily persuaded to believe of politicians that 'they're all scum'.

Now Harold Simmons, the same Texas billionaire who contributed to the funding of the 2004 Swift Boat ad is behind an ad which is being used to smear Obama by implying that there is something unsavory about Obama's serving on a Chicago based nonprofit's board of directors with Bill Ayers, currently college professor and former 60s student radical and founding member of the Weather Underground.

Either John McCain has given over the running of his campaign to the same GOP snakes that ran Bush's 2004 campaign, or he isn't half the man I thought he was. Either possibility depresses me.

Moonie wrote:

Dutch Harbor PH wrote:No....Swift Boat is a noun as it is the name of a type of boat......however if you are describing a boat that is fast then you can have a somewhat incomplete sentence using it as a verb "Swift Boat"

yeah, no more a verb than brown water Navy.

I lost a very good friend on one of those swift boats, patrolling the Delta...

Condolences, Moonie......don't know what else to say.....

Staredge wrote:From what I've read, they weren't smearing him. The standard practice when you're being attacked on your record is to complain about being smeared. All I needed to know about Kerry was this:

Simple needs = ?

flyboy55 wrote:

Staredge wrote:From what I've read, they weren't smearing him. The standard practice when you're being attacked on your record is to complain about being smeared. All I needed to know about Kerry was this:

No I disagree. The standard practice...

~snip~

For the record, the Swift Boat veterans' claims were later thoroughly discredited, unfortunately for John Kerry's candidacy too late to do any good.

~snip~

Actually, NO they were NOT discredited. Left-wingers so WANT to believe they were discredited they actually think they were. And in the same vein, left-wingers so WANT to believe Bush stole an election that they think he actually did (when truth is, Bush still won the FL vote count - completed after the fact by investigative journalists.)

Left-wingers WANT to believe a lot of stuff... but WANTING just don't make it so.

I checked out that website. I wanted to see what it said and how it portrayed some of the things being said about Barak and Michelle. So I decided to look at the claim that Michelle said "this was the first time she was proud of this country". I actually think this is all sound and fury, no substance, but it was interesting that this website did not have the original clip. Instead it had her defence. Why would they not provide the original so you can see for yourself what she said? Or did I just miss it?

FunkHouse9 wrote:

flyboy55 wrote:To defend such obvious fabrications and smears is to condone them, don't you think?

When the 'Swift Boaters' attacked John Kerry's war record (a record which contrasted starkly with Bush's own 'silver spoon service' stateside) with a fabricated smear, he was criticized by pundits and some supporters for not responding in kind. That attack alone likely played a significant role in his loss in 2004.

This type of stuff is my biggest problem with many people. People hear nonsense like the swift boat criticisms of Kerry, believe it and vote based on it. It's really sad that some people take everything at face value.

Didn't Boone Pickens offer 1 million dollars to anyone that could prove the Swift Boat ads against Kerry were false?

jackiesic wrote:Didn't Boone Pickens offer 1 million dollars to anyone that could prove the Swift Boat ads against Kerry were false?

He did. No one disproved anything that was stated in the ads.

jackiesic wrote:

FunkHouse9 wrote:

flyboy55 wrote:To defend such obvious fabrications and smears is to condone them, don't you think?

When the 'Swift Boaters' attacked John Kerry's war record (a record which contrasted starkly with Bush's own 'silver spoon service' stateside) with a fabricated smear, he was criticized by pundits and some supporters for not responding in kind. That attack alone likely played a significant role in his loss in 2004.

This type of stuff is my biggest problem with many people. People hear nonsense like the swift boat criticisms of Kerry, believe it and vote based on it. It's really sad that some people take everything at face value.

Didn't Boone Pickens offer 1 million dollars to anyone that could prove the Swift Boat ads against Kerry were false?

T. Boone Pickens is a welcher.

Although most of the documentation that Pickens claimed he needed in order to hand over the million dollars had already been released during the 2004 campaign (and all of it by 2005), and even though Kerry offered to visit Pickens with any documentation required, at the time and place of his choosing, Pickens has refused to make good on his boast. Billionaire that he is, Pickens doesn't care whether you or I know him to be a welcher. Why would he?

John Kerry is still waiting for the 1 million dollars which he has made clear will be donated to the Paralyzed Veterans of America.

What most folks don't know is that NONE of the veterans who joined the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth served with John Kerry during the actions for which he was awarded his decorations. Some of these guys later admitted that their motivation for signing on to SBVT was that they were upset at Kerry's action AFTER he returned from Vietnam and had no direct knowledge of his war record. One of these even quit the group when he realized that it was politically motivated to smear Kerry's reputation.

This is all very well documented in the public sphere, but unfortunately it's yesterday's news so nobody cares. In this regard, the smear was an unqualified success.

Notably, the surviving members of Kerry's crew campaigned with him during the 2004 election, as his 'band of brothers'.

If you wonder why Pickens never paid up, why don't you call him and ask him about being a welcher?

I don't think that swift boat should be a verb and I also think we should stop adding the word "gate" to the end of every type of political scandal.

Elrod wrote:

jackiesic wrote:Didn't Boone Pickens offer 1 million dollars to anyone that could prove the Swift Boat ads against Kerry were false?

He did. No one disproved anything that was stated in the ads.

Some veterans of that conflict don't like Kerry because he turned against the war when he returned from Vietnam and became a vocal critic of America's involvement.

Fine. Disagree with the man. But to fabricate lies as part of a politically motivated smear campaign is positively scandalous. Have these men no shred of honor left to treat a fellow veteran this way?

If you care to spend five minutes researching this issue, you will understand that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were anything but. You will also understand that T. Boone Pickens either conveniently 'forgot' his offer or he is a world class welcher.

BFinnsUp wrote:I don't think that swift boat should be a verb and I also think we should stop adding the word "gate" to the end of every type of political scandal.

Can we still add the word "gate" to the end of our fortune cookie messages?

bravedave wrote:

BFinnsUp wrote:I don't think that swift boat should be a verb and I also think we should stop adding the word "gate" to the end of every type of political scandal.

Can we still add the word "gate" to the end of our fortune cookie messages?

Nope.. add the words "In bed" ....