SwiftVets.com

[Tilly]

It was repeated on many of the Sunday talk shows that 1) McCain's service record was similarly attacked and 2) Max Cleland's service record was attacked.

Not true.

While there was a counter attack on McCain in 2000, it did not involve his military service.

And, Max Cleland's service record was also not attacked. He lost on his voting record.

At least, that's how I remember it.

[tvaughan]

Cleeland's story is one the DNC's urban myths that is repeated over and over.

"Look what they did to Max Cleeland."

Max Cleeland was savaged. But he was savaged for his voting record, not his military record. After 9/11, people were not in the mood for that sort of thing. Max Cleeland was an INCUMBANT, and he was kicked out of oiffice.

The DNC has told the story of how Cleeland, a wounded Vietnam vet, was attacked for his lack of patriotism. While some may infer being weak on defense is unpatriotic, they are a small minority.

The DNC myth is that the GOP came out and called Cleeland an American hating fraud, and smeared his vietnam experience.

THIS NEVER HAPPENED. Cleeland was definitely ripped for his record, but his Vietnam experience was never a topic for anyone other than the Cleeland campaign itself (sound familiar?)

This sort of thing works very well with the party faithful. I'm sure all have noticed than when Kerry is questioned for his poor defense record, the reaction is often, if not always, "How dar you challenge my patriotism".

The following is worth repeating:

At no time has the GOP questioned the patriotism of either Max Cleeland or John Kerry. I don't know of anyone else who has either

(Some would say that the SBVFT is attacking Kerry's "patriotism" but that is missing the point.)

Being a veteran does not excuse a voting record that is repeatedly weak on defense. If you can defend that record, fine. But being a vet doesn't make it disappear.

It's worth noting that none of this is particularly relevant with the SBVFT except in the similarities of the DNC record.

SBVFT is not questioning the voting record of John Kerry. They are simply telling their story as they remember it and not how John Kerry has reported over the last 30 years.
_________________
Talking point #1: Sign 180
Talking point #2: Sign 180
Talking point #3: Sign 180

[The Cyber Menace]

Wasn't there some attacking of McCain's military by some of the same people now involved with the SBVT?

I think I recall seeing somewhere on a google search that one of these veterans led the charge on an accusation that McCain must have revealed US military secrets while a POW in Vietnam. Otherwise, they would have killed him.

So, the charge that there are some similarities between McCain 2000 and Kerry 2004 may have somemerit.

However, whereas much of what happened to McCain was part of a stealth campaign to do whatever they could to stop his primary season momentum, what the SBVT are now engaging in as a full frontal assault unafraid of the best of what anyone can publicly throw at them.

This has always been a public effort by the SBVT, and they are even daring anyone defending Kerry to come out and dispute their claims of Kerry's cowardice and lies in relation to his entire Vietnam experience. The conservative media has been on board, and the charges have been so effective in actively calling Kerry out that now it has become the number one focus of attention at this point in the campaign season.

This certainly wasn't the case with McCain in 2000.

I mean, even Bob Dole has come on board. This is not an underground movement. It is challenging Kerry to defend himself publicly. And, thus far, he's only done so with personal attacks on the Swiftees and on Bush.

So far, it's mission accomplished for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

[rb325th]

So the DNC says! The DNC and Kerry Campaign keep repeating that this is being done by(those shadowy people with no name) the same people who attacked John McCain and backed by the Bush/Cheney Campaign.
The DNC has offered no evidence of any collusion between Bush/Cheney and SBVFT, because they have none.
To state that such and such gave X amount to SBVFT and is a Republican from Texas (we all know how all Texans are membere of the Bush/Cheney Campaign ) means that President Bush is behind these Ads and SBVFT.
The "circumstanial" evidence is so lame it begs to the intelligence of those the DNC is attempting to convince, that would be all of us Americans who were not on a Swift Boat in Vietnam.
It is just the deflection and denial without offering of proof that is standard operating procedures of the DNC and Kerry.
_________________
U.S. Army 1983-1995, 11C1P/11H2P NBTDT