# John Kerry and Vietnam **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 4, 2004, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262 "2004-08-04T11:19:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 29
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/561 "2004-08-23T19:59:53Z")
Might be a deft manuever. While I very much doubt there is any direct and provable connection between the Swifties and the White House (in the sense of being actually _directed_ by the WH), the Bushiviks don’t want any public disclosure of how closely innertwined they actually are, which would necessarily come out as part of the “disclosure” proceedings. The Dems have already shown more connection than they are comfortable with…Perry to Bush, Perry to O’Neill, and so on… The damage is done, they’ve probably got all the juice out of it that they are going to, now is the time to try to clamor up to the moral high ground while they still can. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/562 "2004-08-23T21:36:40Z")
Ok, this headline and opening blurb on the front page of CNN just absolutely stunned me… > [@](#): > > **Bush urges Kerry to condemn attack ads** > > President Bush on Monday called for the so-called 527 groups to stop airing political ads, but he did not directly condemn commercials by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth that have attacked Sen. John Kerry’s war record. He went on to once again urge Kerry to also condemn all such ads. “I hope my opponent joins me in condemning these activities of the 527 – I think they’re bad for the system,” Bush said. Who _falls_ for this crap? Now it’s _Bush_ urging _Kerry_ to condemn these ads? _Now_?? And of course, not because that particular one is filled with lies, but because he wants to make it a _character_ issue; as in _he_ opposes such ads because they’re against the “rules,” and he wishes his opponent was as upright and honest as he was. I really and truly do think he’s pathologically mentally ill. Read the full, disgusting story [here](http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/23/bush.kerry/index.html). ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/563 "2004-08-23T22:16:22Z")
Bush’s craven talking point is even more disgusting if you recall that [Bush opposed the restrictions on political ads by independent groups](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020327.html): > [@](#): > > For Immediate Release > Office of the Press Secretary > March 27, 2002 > > President Signs Campaign Finance Reform Act > Statement by the President > > \ > > However, the bill does have flaws. Certain provisions present serious constitutional concerns. In particular, H.R. 2356 goes farther than I originally proposed by preventing all individuals, not just unions and corporations, from making donations to political parties in connection with Federal elections. > > I believe individual freedom to participate in elections should be expanded, not diminished; and when individual freedoms are restricted, questions arise under the First Amendment. > > **I also have reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising, which restrains the speech of a wide variety of groups on issues of public import in the months closest to an election. I expect that the courts will resolve these legitimate legal questions as appropriate under the law.** ---
**Author:** ![SnakeSpirit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snakespirit/32/7271_2.png) [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/564 "2004-08-23T22:22:50Z")
> [@Yossarian22](#): > > It is amazing that much of the current debate regarding the candidates for presidency involves what happened in Vietnam many years ago, particularly when there are issues regarding the economy, civil liberties, healthcare, the Iraq war and national security that are so pressing and important. This election may define the course that this country takes in the future, and we (joe public) are so easily duped into debating the merits of often baseless and slanderous claims about each candidate’s past. We have more important things to debate than the military records of each candidate! A lot is at stake! I mentioned this about a page ago. Not many are listening. I guess it’s more fun to shoot doves than to de-feather and clean them. ---
**Author:** ![SnakeSpirit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snakespirit/32/7271_2.png) [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/565 "2004-08-23T22:32:52Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > You gotta admire the \*chutzpah \* of the Kerry campaign-- bringing a law suit against the Bush campaign for coordinating activities with the Swifties on the one hand, and then calling on Bush to ask the Swifties to pull the ad. Looks like entrapment! 🙂 Way on early, either in this thread or a similar one, I commented that this was going to be a dirty campaign. I failed to mention how dirty and vehement the various supporters would become (not taking about you, **John Mace,** just using your post to show how dirty the campaign is). Both sides look like the blind leading the blind, _our candidate right or wrong._ Maybe I never noticed how dirty politics is before… but I’m disgusted in 2004! ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/566 "2004-08-23T22:45:43Z")
I’ve been sitting here for the last month or so trying to make some rational sense of this whole Swift Boat thing. It’s not been a notably successful effort. A few things are, however, apparent to me. The first thing is that the Bush Reelection Campaign ought to be smart enough to take the simple steps necessary to insulate its self from the Swift Boat guys. The fact that some level of coordination is hard or impossible to demonstrate by a preponderance of the credible evidence certainly does not mean that there has not been coordination. It seem to me that it is more likely than not that there has been coordination, covert though it may be. There probably is no common planning but it is easy enough for the word to pass from the President’s people to the people they know who know the Swift Boat guys that it would be very helpful to the President if the Swift Boat guys were put in contact with a good GOP PR outfit and if they got enough funding to put a TV publicity campaign together. In the real world no more than that is necessary to set off the chain of events. It has happened before; remember “will no one relieve me of this turbulent priest.” I am not so naive as to think that there is not similar communication of expatiations and hopes between the Kerry Campaign and Democrat section 527outfits. The second thing is that there is a new waive of Swift Boat guys ads coming which will concentrate on Kerry’s Congressional testimony – apparently the claim will be (is) that the Swift Boat guys had the war won but John Kerry went in front of Congress and the war was thereby lost. The atrocities described by Kerry to Congress, however, were common knowledge among people in the armed forces who were paying attention to what was going on. I was instructed in the fine art of decapitation bodies for the effect on the enemy by the finest of the First Infantry Division in the summer of 1965 – the mutilation of enemy dead was doctrine. My chief of military justice in Germany in 1969 was just returned from an airborne division in Vietnam where one of his duties was to remove photos of troopers holding up strings of ears like sunfish on a stringer from out going mail. Free fire zones were established and used pretty much without regard to what or who was living in the zone. Me Lie happened and may have happened more than once. Prisoners were pushed out of hovering choppers to encourage other prisoners to talk. There is at least one film of a POW coming out of a chopper. Peasants were machine gunned for the amusement of the gunners and for no excuse beyond running. It all happened again and again. It and more was verified by the Detroit testimony and was repeated to a disbelieving Congressional committee by Kerry and by others. Third, the attack by the Swift Boat guys is to the greatest extent insubstantial and seems to consist of three bitches – that Kerry’s action in February, 1969, was not up too their standard of bravery, that in March 1969 Kerry was not actually under enemy fire when he plucked 1LT Rassmunson from the river, and that Kerry was not sufficiently wounded to meet their requirements for the Purple Heart. Now, all that is just silly. It is especially silly when you know the criteria for the decorations are known along with the process for issuing them. Fourth, I know what is going on here. I’ve defended enough law suits to recognize the tactic. What is going on here is the use of information that is not sufficient to persuade that Proposition One is true to create doubt about the truth of Proposition Two. It only works if you do not have the burden of persuasion and it only works if you have a jury that wants to doubt Proposition Two. In a trial I have some control of who is on my jury but when dealing with the electorate you don’t have that luxury. The creation of doubt with information you are not prepared to vouch for is dishonest. It is perfectly legitimate to argue that evidence supports a conclusion but you have to be very careful not to let bad or questionable evidence contaminate your client if the jury wises up. Fifth, to continue the jury analogy, there is no way I’m going to let somebody who has made up their mind to accept Proposition One no matter what the evidence is serve on my jury no matter what side I represent. That guy catches a preemptory challenge right off the bat. Our friend **Razorsharp** falls into this category. In fact he can be counted to go into the jury room and concoct new arguments and facts not of record to advocate Proposition One. His disingenuous advocacy will drive other jurors away. Our friend **Sam** is the juror every defendant wants – you give him the merest whiff of a reasonable doubt – questionable credibility defense and he will lock up, sit is the corner and proclaim that the evidence just is not strong enough to make a decision. This guy is a walking hung jury. He wants proof absolute – proof beyond reasonable doubt, clear and convincing evidence, preponderance of the evidence is not good enough for him. He wants unanimity of opinion. It ain’t going to happen. He gets on my jury only if my case is weak and I have no other hope of protecting my client. Sixth, my President is incapable of candor. The characterization of his ideology ridden administration as incompetent and dishonest is wholly appropriate. He purports to see no difference between the fairly debatable proposition and one founded on deception and dishonesty and expedience. He has no business continuing to serve as the chief executive of the country I love and served in my relative youth. Seventh, if this election is a referendum on the Bush administration then the President is in real trouble. If he can turn it into a referendum on who can throw the most mud he has a chance. ---
**Author:** ![SnakeSpirit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snakespirit/32/7271_2.png) [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/567 "2004-08-23T23:12:37Z")
> [@Spavined Gelding](#): > > The atrocities described by Kerry to Congress, however, were common knowledge among people in the armed forces who were paying attention to what was going on. I was instructed in the fine art of decapitation bodies for the effect on the enemy by the finest of the First Infantry Division in the summer of 1965 – the mutilation of enemy dead was doctrine. You’re an attourney? You should know better. Just because this was part of _your_ experience (let me add allegedly), does not mean it was doctrine. I can’t let this stand. VietNam veterans have been maligned enough and for too long. I question, even, your experience. If it’s even true, I submit that you were the victim of a sick individual operating outside the normal chain of command. This was certainly not doctrine in the 4th Division in 1968. I’ve known enough 1st Division soldiers and veterans also, to doubt your statement. There were individuals who went “over the edge.” There were officers and NCOs who, acting on their own, encouraged atrocities. I know that the ones who were caught in our AO were routinely court-martialed and subsequently reassigned. Since you are alledging this was “doctrine,” should we assume that Lt. Kerry engaged in these atrocities, too? I think you owe VietNam Veterans an apology. Even if your experience is true doesn’t mean all of us were like you. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/568 "2004-08-23T23:18:01Z")
> [@minty green](#): > > Bush’s craven talking point is even more disgusting if you recall that [Bush opposed the restrictions on political ads by independent groups](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020327.html): What’s wrong with being personally opposed to these types of ads, but realizing that it would be unconstitutional to ban them? You might doubt Bush’s sincerity here, but his position is rock solid. ---
**Author:** ![GLWasteful](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f05b48/32.png) [@GLWasteful](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GLWasteful)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/569 "2004-08-23T23:23:29Z")
> [@Razorsharp](#): > > You asked for “evidence”, right? You seem to have a problem differentiating “proof” and “evidence”. Not at all. Are you saying that you would be willing and comfortable to present what you have referred to as evidence to a court of law? Not that I would be surprised, you understand, I’m just curious. As to the point that you oh, so desperately, think that you are making (said point being that John Kerry reenacted heroics for the camera), he did no such thing. Also, I led off asking for “credible” evidence and finally got around to conceding that “barely credible” would do. Congratulations! You have come up with evidence that is barely credible. A little better than what I would have expected, truth be told. And you didn’t answer my question. So, I’ll pose it again: > [@Razorsharp](#): > > Did campaign staffers ask, “Say, you wouldn’t happen to have some film that documents your valor in Viet Nam, would you?” > > Or, did Kerry say to his staff, “Hey, I just happen to have some films that you might put to good use.”? To which I asked, “I don’t know if they did or not. Do you?” Occam’s Razor has dick all to do with this, it is a simple question. Do you know? Or are you trying to pose questions that you think will set someone up? I’m guessing the latter, but am always willing to be surprised. > [@](#): > > Another “Doper” tactic… calling for a “cite” on something that is common knowledge to the public at-large. There are only two reasons for such a request. (1.) Either the one who makes the request is truly ignorant of a fact that is generally known to the populace, or (2.) The one making the request is trying to score debate points by putting up hoops for opposition to jump through, in hopes of annoying his opponent into “disappearing”, thus enabling the one making the petty request to claim victory. You wound me, sir! Grievously! And since you brought it up, I went to Google and entered “Kerry Swift boat film footage” to see if any reputable (as opposed to WorldNetDaily, really now. . .tsk, tsk) organizations had reported on this. As I expected, nothing of the sort had happened. Instead I encountered Drudge, WorldNetDaily, Coulter and National Review Online. Now, perhaps these are legitimate sources for information in your fevered imagination, but they don’t mean shit here in the real world. Too, this entire sordid little episode has been debunked. Something that you, I’m guessing, missed. It seems, though, that you miss an awful lot. > [@](#): > > It never came up??? You don’t recall Clinton’s draft-dodging as an issue? ? You don’t recall Clinton getting help from the ROTC commander to avoid the draft, and then not joining the ROTC as promised?? You don’t recall Clinton writing a letter describing how he “loathed the military”?? Oh! You mean when Clinton was running against Bush _pere_. Then why did you mention Bob Dole? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/570 "2004-08-23T23:37:04Z")
I suggest, friend **Snakespirit** , that you are well advised to reconsider the tone, and to some degree the substance, of your most recent post. Our correspondent from the Flat Place with Corn combines the charisma of Orville Redenbacher with the comprehensive knowledge of Prof. Irwin Corey (“The Worlds Foremost Authority”). His Bullshit Quotient is actually less than mine own (I checked twice). His tolerance, insight and intelligence are well known here. Your own _bone fides_ remain to be established. But if **Spav** tells you an ant is going to haul a bale of hay into your living room, you’d best move the coffee table. It is entirely possible that you intended no personal implications (despite the pointed use of the word “alleged”.) After you clarify that, I will be happy to profer an apology for my misunderstanding. Should that not be forthcoming, you and I will be dancing in the Pit toot damn sweet. ---
**Author:** ![GLWasteful](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f05b48/32.png) [@GLWasteful](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GLWasteful)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/571 "2004-08-23T23:37:22Z")
> [@Yossarian22](#): > > It is amazing that much of the current debate regarding the candidates for presidency involves what happened in Vietnam many years ago, particularly when there are issues regarding the economy, civil liberties, healthcare, the Iraq war and national security that are so pressing and important. This election may define the course that this country takes in the future, and we (joe public) are so easily duped into debating the merits of often baseless and slanderous claims about each candidate’s past. We have more important things to debate than the military records of each candidate! A lot is at stake! > [@Snakespirit](#): > > I mentioned this about a page ago. Not many are listening. I guess it’s more fun to shoot doves than to de-feather and clean them. Well, I know that **I** am keeping my eyes on the prize. But too many people have already assumed that the Swifties might just be onto something to allow their bullshit to stand. > [@](#): > > Maybe I never noticed how dirty politics is before… but I’m disgusted in 2004! I’m surprised that it’s taken you this long. Maybe that makes me a hard-hearted callous sumbitch. Hell, I imagine that I **am** a hard-hearted callous sumbitch, but I’ve watched political wars for too long to expect this year to be any different. ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/572 "2004-08-23T23:42:24Z")
**Snakespirit** , all I can tell you is that I was there and saw it – it was in a segment on ambush training for ROTC cadets. If that isn’t doctrine, formal or informal, I don’t know what doctrine is. What I also remember is that there was a brigadier general not 10 feet from me when the instructing sergeant started waiving a machete around and speaking glowingly about the beneficial morale effect of heads on pikes. It’s a small point. I can’t tell you that I saw it happen or know it happened in Vietnam, only that it was taught to almost infantry platoon leaders only weeks before the First Division, or elements of it, shipped. Take it for what it’s worth. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2004, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/573 "2004-08-23T23:57:48Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > What’s wrong with being personally opposed to these types of ads, but realizing that it would be unconstitutional to ban them? You might doubt Bush’s sincerity here, but his position is rock solid. If by “rock solid” you mean craven, cowardly, hypocritical, situationally expedient, and/or full of shit, then I agree. If, however, you make note of Bush’s statement that “I believe individual freedom to participate in elections should be expanded, not diminished,” it becomes apparent that his criticism was not limited to the constitutionality of the provisions, but went as well to the desirability. I’m sure any number of other, similar quotes will be forthcoming from those with the requisite Google skills. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2004, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/574 "2004-08-24T00:14:13Z")
> [@ZombiesAteMyBrain](#): > > If Bush has really denounced the ‘swifties’ does that mean that Razorsharp, Sam, and their other supporters in this thread will now also denounce them - and in doing so, admit that they might just have been wrong? I’m not sure what your premise is here? Are you saying all 63 Swiftboat Vets are wrong or that they shouldn’t make a mud-slinging ad? Your cite was misleading. Not only did Reuters short-stop a quote they deliberately went on to rewrite the meaning: Reuters: \*\*The president said he wants to stop “all of them. That means that ad and every other ad.” \*\*He was referring to a commercial by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, who have claimed Kerry lied about his record. What he said: **"That means that ad and every other ad. I don’t believe we ought to have 527s. I think they’re bad for the system," Bush said on Monday in Crawford, Texas. “I frankly thought we’d gotten rid of it when I signed McCain-Feingold” campaign finance reform.** [FOXNEWS](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,129729,00.html) It’s clear that President Bush’s position on the Swift Boat ad is directed at all 527 organizations. Your acerbic comment toward Sam Stone (Razorsharp Sam) lacks a proffered rejection of group like [Moveon.org](http://Moveon.org). This is a heavily funded group dedicated to making attack ads against President Bush. They do not represent a specific interest group. The Swiftboat Vets represent their own issue. They may be funded by Republican contributions but their message does not change with each new focus group. Contrary to Senator Kerry’s frontal assault on the Swiftboat Vets, President Bush has spent little or no time addressing groups like [moveon.org](http://moveon.org). I can’t speak for him but I suspect he accepts it as part of our freedom of speech. In contrast, Senator Kerry’s lawyers attempted to silence this freedom with legal action against TV stations that ran the Swiftboat ads. ## If you don’t like these commercials that is certainly an understandable response. To expect only \*\*your \*\*group to use soft money in a mud-slinging context is hypocritical on your part. “I don’t think we should have 527’s, I don’t know how more clear I can be on this” - President Bush 8/23/2004 ---
**Author:** ![ZombiesAteMyBrain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b4bc9f/32.png) [@ZombiesAteMyBrain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZombiesAteMyBrain)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2004, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/575 "2004-08-24T01:09:56Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > If you don’t like these commercials that is certainly an understandable response. To expect only \*\*your \*\*group to use soft money in a mud-slinging context is hypocritical on your part. I don’t have a ‘group’, ducky. I am a mere Brit who is watching all this in amazement from the outside. As I said before, personal attacks in elections may be the norm in the USA, but we don’t have that sort of thing here. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2004, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/576 "2004-08-24T01:11:38Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Our correspondent from the Flat Place with Corn … Since this is, after all, The Straight Dope, I feel compelled to point out that Far Northeast Iowa is anything but flat. And I’m not sure it’s a big corn producing region being a little too hilly. It’s not the Rockies or the Sierra Nevada, but it’s definitely not flat. ---
**Author:** ![Atticus\_Finch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ec9cab/32.png) [@Atticus\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atticus_Finch)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2004, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/577 "2004-08-24T01:24:19Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Your acerbic comment toward Sam Stone (Razorsharp Sam)… That’s not an insult towards Sam. Note the comma in the original use - there’s two different posters involved, **Razorsharp** and **Sam Stone**. > [@](#): > > If you don’t like these commercials that is certainly an understandable response. To expect only **your** group to use soft money in a mud-slinging context is hypocritical on your part. The important thing is that there be no mud-slinging and no personal attacks at all, whether by 527s or by the campaigns themselves. That’s my premise and I guess it’s **Zombies’** too. I don’t see anyone calling for mud-slinging only by one side - if you’ve got some example of this, I’d like to see it. ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2004, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/578 "2004-08-24T01:27:47Z")
snip… Contrary to Senator Kerry’s frontal assault on the Swiftboat Vets, President Bush has spent little or no time addressing groups like [moveon.org](http://moveon.org). I can’t speak for him but I suspect he accepts it as part of our freedom of speech. In contrast, Senator Kerry’s lawyers attempted to silence this freedom with legal action against TV stations that ran the Swiftboat ads. snip… Can you point me to a Moveon ad that was filled with blatent lies like the SVFT ad was please? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2004, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/579 "2004-08-24T01:29:23Z")
> [@ZombiesAteMyBrain](#): > > I don’t have a ‘group’, ducky. I am a mere Brit who is watching all this in amazement from the outside. As I said before, personal attacks in elections may be the norm in the USA, but we don’t have that sort of thing here. Come now, m-lady, even I’ve watch British politicians on TV go at it like soccer fans. And there’s no such thing as a “mere Brit” when it comes to soccer and politics. And yes you have a group, it’s the anti-Bush group. It’s interesting that you are aware of the Swiftboat ads. Kerry broke the first rule of campaigning and that’s not to hand an issue a set of legs, You can’t buy that kind of publicity but you can certainly spend money trying to counter it. 12 pages and counting. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2004, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262/580 "2004-08-24T01:41:11Z")
> [@Reeder](#): > > snip… > Contrary to Senator Kerry’s frontal assault on the Swiftboat Vets, President Bush has spent little or no time addressing groups like [moveon.org](http://moveon.org). I can’t speak for him but I suspect he accepts it as part of our freedom of speech. In contrast, Senator Kerry’s lawyers attempted to silence this freedom with legal action against TV stations that ran the Swiftboat ads. > > snip… > > Can you point me to a Moveon ad that was filled with blatent lies like the SVFT ad was please? Your question infers the Swiftboat Vets are liars. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262.md?page=28) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/john-kerry-and-vietnam/258262.md?page=30)