He was never vindicated for anything. He made statements to Congress about things he himself did not experience and he generally shit on the military. He couldn’t vindicate his behavior to those in the service who strongly objected to it. It was always that simple. He made the situation exponentially worse by wrapping himself in his military past. He did this to himself.
Well, in response to the draft, he joined a part of the military which had about the same odds of seeing any actual combat as the Boy Scouts. Legal? Yes. Morally equivalent to actual draft-dodging? Oh fuck yes. And then there was that report, which got some airtime. But the difference in reaction couldn’t have been greater. After the swift boat claims fell apart, Fox News and the right wing echo chamber kept on beating that horse right up to election day. Meanwhile, CBS, when it found out the report was a forgery (and that they had been duped) immediately posted a retraction and fired Dan Rather. This is the difference between right-wing journalism and honest journalism. No scandal is too fake for FOX News; real news outlets who have to consider their reputation (because they don’t have a gigantic fanbase of mouth-breathing sycophants who consider every other news channel somewhere to the left of Castro) make strides to correct their mistakes and care about whether what they report is true.
Right. And this was the big scandal surrounding his military actions.
OH WAIT NO IT WASN’T. The big scandal was that supposedly the grounds for his silver star were insultingly wrong. Actual reporting revealed that to be completely baseless.
He made statements to Congress because he was asked to do so. In essence, he was asked the question “What did you hear at the Winter Soldier testimony?” By implication, it is also fair to say he was asked if he believed it.
Hence, he was pointedly asked to give “hearsay” testimony and give his opinion, which he did. He can only be charged with lying about it if you know that the testimony he heard was false and that he knew it as well.
Have you such proof to offer us?
As for not shying away from his military record, why should he? He served honorably, was discharged honorably and decorated. Politically, that’s a bonus, has been for years and years. There was nothing dishonorable in his opposing the war. If anything, he and many like him were betrayed by the men who sent them on a fool’s errand.
Well, truth ought to matter here. Dubya WAS a draft dodger, service in the National Reserve was a well-known way of avoiding the draft at the time. John Kerry was a Swift Boat captain, one of the most hazardous duties in Vietnam … not something a coward does. Those were the facts of the matter.
I think the Republican swiftboating of Kerry was one of the low point in Republican ethics at that time, though there have been so many low points since that “Republican ethics” is fast approaching oxymoron status, if it isn’t there already.
That said, my ire about Swiftboating has mostly been aimed at the mainstream media, who were played like violins by Rove and his agents during the campaign. The mainstream media has fallen into the lazy, sloppy habit of using false equivalences to substitute for actual reporting to make themselves look objective. In any controversial story, the ending usually consists of a summary of the two positions on the controversy. Something like: “Republicans say John Kerry was a self-aggrandizing conniver during his service in Vietnam, that he exaggerated the extent of his injuries in combat to obtain a Purple Heart, while Democrats insist he was a war hero who served bravely under fire. It may never be possible to know the truth of the matter, but the debate rages on.”
The obvious truth of the matter was that John Kerry served honorably in Vietnam, in combat, while Dubya kept the skies over San Pedro Island free of all the nothing that was attacking it, because his father used his influence to get him a cushy post in the National Reserve. But the media didn’t bother to pound the TRUTH home, they were satisfied with their pat false equivalences. The mainstream media served their country very poorly during the Swiftboating campaign … and continue to do so, to this day.
In 2004, I was dismayed by the tactic. I said, at the time:
I’d call Swiftboating a low point in republican campaigning, but it’s not even the low point in that administration. Not when you have Terry Schiavo.
I’ll say “fuck no”. Someone who went underground, or to Canada or Sweden, to evade the draft did so knowing it was illegal, that exposing himself or even simply coming home meant going to prison. It was an act of courage as well as conscience. The National Guard dodge that Bush chose had no negative consequences to it, took no courage, and is hardly morally equivalent. Hell, even going AWOL and effectively deserting, as Bush did, had no negative consequences for a Fortunate Son, as we know.
That’s what started Rove and the “Useful Idiots” on the swiftboating lies campaign, the fact that Kerry’s service was honorable and courageous and that the candidate of the stereotypically pro-military party could not say the same. That characterizes his general approach to campaigning - go after your opponent’s strong points with whatever it takes, lies included, until he looks weaker than your guy on them. Enough people bought the lies, including even in this very forum, to make it effective.
Interesting thread. I have a few questions about Kerry:
-when he threw his Vietnam service medals over the fence (while at a protest march), were these medals actually his?
-he claimed to have spend a Christmas eve in Cambodian territory; has this been verified?
-he was reputed to have brought an 8 mm movie camera along on his swiftboat missions (and commanded a subordinate to film him); is this true? Are any of these films on Youtube?
The most comprehensive debunking site is here. Have at it.
As I recall it at the time, the truth was somewhere in between.
Kerry lied about a lot of things, and exagerated his own role and heroism etc., and this left him open to some legitimate criticism. Especially since he made his own heroism a central part of his campaign, at least in the early going.
A lot of the supposed “debunking” of the Swiftboat veterans’s claims amounted to little or nothing more than the media deciding that in the face of contradictory evidence and recollections they would choose Kerry’s version of events over that of the Swiftboat veterans.
That said, it does seem that some of the Swiftboat claims are less than fully credible, and they presumably overshot their mark, based on antipathy to Kerry’s politics and overreaction to his misstatements.
That’s how I remember it at the time, and I’ve not followed it since that time and assume that this still holds, but I’m not as conversant with the details as I was then.
What were his supposed lies and exaggerations?
I don’t think the Swiftboating campaign approaches the “John McCain has an illegitimate black child” push poll. Kerry ran in part on his service record. McCain didn’t run on his record of being an adopted parent.
Okay, should’ve said “morally equivalent or worse”. But the point stands - if Bush had straight-up dodged the draft, his chances of going to Vietnam or seeing any actual conflict would have been the same.
That was a thing republicans did?
Rove did, if not “Republicans”. Let’s set the Wayback Machine to 2000 and the South Carolina primary:
His adoptive daughter is from Bangladesh, IIRC.
I don’t recall precisely. (The Cambodia claim was one. And a lot of the claims about his various medals and awards had witnesses on both sides of the issue.)
I’m not up for a debate about Swiftboat details at this time. I thought you were interested in whether any “Republicans” felt there was anything to the Swiftboat claims. If not, then I apologize.
If you ask me, neither of these approach the “Mitt Romney paid no taxes” claim in the most recent election. Unlike both of these instances, the taxes claim was pushed at the highest levels of the Democratic Party.
Jon Huntsman Sr. is a Democrat?
*Nevermind.
Fair enough, and I appreciate your contribution. I didn’t mean to start a debate with you. I was just curious about the details.