SwiftVets.com

[Third]

townhall.com


Who Will Answer Bill Maher's Good Question?
Jay Bryant


August 30, 2004

Friday night, Bill Maher had John O'Neill on his HBO television program. O'Neill, of course, is the principal author of Unfit for Command, the book version of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign to challenge John Kerry's military record.

The interview itself was almost unbearably anger-provoking, as Maher snidely attempted to skewer O'Neill over and over again, while a studio audience laughed and applauded the host's every word. At least, unlike Chris "Motormouth" Matthews, he didn't interrupt O'Neill's every sentence.

In the face of this hostility, O'Neill was calm and respectful, not giving an inch, but always unflappably reasoned. I can only suppose he manages to stifle the urge to trade invective with a wiseacre like Maher by basking in the secure knowledge that he and his compatriots among the Swift Boat Veterans are an astonishing political success, the surest measure of which is the hateful reaction they have provoked among the Kerry-worshipping news media.

In the process of the interview, Maher asked at least (and perhaps only) one interesting question: if all that O'Neill says is true, why is it that other Swift Boat veterans are backing Kerry?

O'Neill didn't rise to the bait, and contented himself with pointing out that Kerry has in fact the support of fewer than twenty Swift Boat veterans, whereas well over 200 had signed up with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

But it is a good question, nonetheless, much better than Maher imagines, because it leads - or at least should lead - to some follow-up questions that, so far as I know, no news organization has undertaken.

The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are, collectively, individually and wrongly pilloried by the media as stooges for the Bush campaign and the Republican Party. One Swiftee was found to be a Bush volunteer, and this was played as damning evidence. One of the group's larger contributors is from Texas and has met Karl Rove, and this was taken to mean Rove instructed the man to send the money to the Swiftees. Attorney Ben Ginsberg was discovered to be a legal advisor to both the Swiftees' 527 Committee and the Bush campaign, which although perfectly legal and no different from Democrat lawyers advising both Kerry-backing 527's and official party and campaign organizations, was taken to be some sort of collusion.

All these charges come out in the same way. The Kerry campaign does the research and feeds the story to the media. The media immediately rushes it into print with no further research, and thus it becomes a meme, Richard Dawkins' excellent word for the cultural analog to a gene, a self-replicating idea.

But what about the other side of the equation - the side Maher's question raises, but no one (least of all Maher) bothers to research or investigate?

Why indeed are some Swift Boat veterans backing Kerry? Especially, as is often cited as proof of their superior credentials, those closest to Kerry.

Let's consider, for example, the case of Jim Rassmann. In a Wall Street Journal article responding to the first Swift Boat Veterans TV commercial, Rassmann identifies himself as "a retired police officer with a passion for orchids." He says, "Nobody asked me to join John's campaign. Why would they? I am a Republican, and for more than 30 years I have largely voted for Republicans. I volunteered for his campaign...."

Maybe so, but there ought at least to be a follow-up question or two. Rassmann, as you probably know, is the man John Kerry pulled out of the Bay Hap River in Vietnam, saving his life and earning the Bronze Star. So why wouldn't somebody in Kerry's campaign ask Rassmann to join them? Just because he's a registered Republican? If I were a Kerry strategist, Rassmann's Republican background (If true. Has anybody checked?) sure as heck wouldn't have stopped me from asking, because the bang for the buck would be even greater, and if owing your life to somebody doesn't override political affiliation, what does?

Rassmann famously showed up, in the recent words of Fred Barnes, which I quote to show how completely the story is accepted, "unannounced for an emotional reunion two days before the [Iowa] caucuses." Okay, it was certainly unannounced BY the campaign. But was it truly unannounced TO the campaign? That's the impression given to the public - that Rassmann just walked in to the meeting unbidden. I'll go on record right now as saying it sounds too cute for me, but has any news organization ever investigated?

Moreover, is Rassmann still a campaign volunteer? Since he's retired, he presumably has enough to live on, and buy a few orchids, but is he being compensated in any other way? Who has asked? Anybody?

And what of the rest of the small coterie of Swift Boaters who are supporting Kerry? It is insisted on by the Kerry side that they were the sailors closest to him, the ones on his boat. That's another way of saying that they would be the ones first sought out by the campaign, those most eagerly subject to persuasion. What form did this persuasion take? Has anyone in the media done any due diligence here?

Kerry's wife is a billionairess, whose financial tentacles reach a vast array of business, charitable, ideological and other organizations. Has anyone attempted to find out if any of Kerry's vets have been compensated by any of them?

Hey, the answer to Maher's question may well be "because they love the guy."

Or maybe not. And it would be nice to think that some news gathering enterprise would be interested enough to check it out.


Veteran GOP media consultant Jay Bryant's regular columns are available at www.theoptimate.com, and his commentaries may be heard on NPR's 'All Things Considered.'

©2004 Jay Bryant

Contact Jay Bryant | Read Bryant's biography

townhall.com

QUICK LINKS: HOME | NEWS | OPINION | MEETUP | C-LOG | ISSUES

[/quote]

[ScottyDog]

I think Rassmen may well motivated by the 5 star dining at the Five Star Hotels the Kerry camp have been staying at during their campaign.

From the looks of him, he has been eating at the pig trough of the Kerry Campaign for some time.

I read an article on one of the online blogs that said he was being flown around the country and staying at the finest hotels.

Seriously, I think you pose a question that bears investigation but the real target is Kerry not his band of brothers.

[sevry]

[The bandit]

Six weeks before Rassmann surfaced Kerry's web site had placed an announcent for help or leads in locating him. No one found Rassmann in the following weeks, and it is just a coincidence he contacted the campaign 2 days before IA caucus?

I don't think so!
_________________

[Dane]

Perhaps I´m being a bit snotty now but did Kerry really "save Rassman´s life"? OK, he pulled him out of the water to help him board a high gunwale craft. I´ve pulled people into PBs. Admittedly we were doing swim call at the time. But they were not under fire, Rassman shucked his ruck and rifle and was apparently treading water OK. No sharks in the water. So he was helped aboard. What´s the big deal?

Dane

[Tide]

Am I the only one who finds it despicable beyond belief for Kerry to have included Rassmann in one of his campaign ads? To me it is not even of secondary importance whether Rassmann volunteered to do it or whether he was coaxed, persuaded or goaded into making the appearance. My point is that the message Kerry sends is like "I saved your life and and now I can exploit you for rank political purposes!"

I find that dishonorable, cheap, offensive and beneath dignity. True heroes just don't brag about their heroism and take advantage of those whose lives they save. Kerry's only proper reply to Rassman, if he indeed volunteered, would have been to thank him for the offer but to firmly decline.