SwiftVets.com

[Wolfgang]

From the daily NewsHour e-mail:

Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) today vigorously defended his Vietnam war record against allegations a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth made accusing Kerry of engineering the injuries which led to the medals he won for his wartime service. Jim Lehrer gets perspectives on the controversy over Kerry’s war record from John O’Neill, co-founder of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, and Tom Oliphant, a Boston Globe columnist who covered Kerry during his postwar protests in Washington.

[Wolfgang]

If you miss it on TV, it should be available later tonight (Thursday night) at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/video/index.html or simply http://www.pbs.org/newshour/.

Their reports are almost always available in both video and transcript form at no charge.

Also, O'Neill's interlocutor tonight, Tom Oliphant, is a honorable man, though I suspect it'll seem to many of us that he's from a different planet tonight.

It's amazing and fascinating to me how choosing to trust Kerry or choosing to trust the Swift Vets (the choice the evidence prima facie requires, in my view) leads to a sort of domino effect that can lead people very sincerely to embrace such wholly contrary opinions of the whole political situation. Oliphant likely sees the dominos falling in the other direction, but he's an honest gentleman (I believe).

This should be an excellent discussion.

[deserturtle]

I am recording the Newshour and watching Hannity and Colmes. Any other programs I should be aware of?
_________________
The door to the room of success swings on the hinges of the opposition.

[Norman Rogers]

I just watched the segment.

O'Neil destroyed Oliphant.

O'Neil was the same guy we've seen time and time again -- measured, calm, yet forceful. He has the ring of truth.

Oliphant tried a couple of strategies:

1. The Swiftvets stories don't meet "journalistic standards" (or really?), because they didn't come out 35 years ago -- and everything in the official record is consistant with what Kerry is saying.

O'Neil responded by saying Kerry wrote the official record and it's wrong. Then O'Neil dropped his zinger:

"You couldn't find a jury in this country who could read this book ("Unfit for Command") and not convict John Kerry. Oliphant was speechless.

Oliphant came across as REALLY smarmy and supercilious. O'Neill was O'Neill.

2. Oliphant also tried to use the meme that the WAPO floated this am -- that the official record contradicts Thurlow about hostile fire. O'Neill hammered home that Kerry wrote the record and that IT TOOK AN HOUR AND A HALF TO RESCUE THE 3 BOAT, DURING WHICH TIME NO HOSTILE FIRE WAS RECEIVED. This was new information to me -- and it's devastating.

3. Oliphant tried to brand all the Kerry lied stories as "Tabloid Journalism", but Lehrer himself squelched him on that -- Lehrer" "It's not in the tabloids now -- it's on this show!"

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

THANK YOU for the report! I got all choked up, reading it, but thanks anyway.
_________________
~ Echo Juliet ~
Altering course to starboard - On Fire, Keep Clear
Navy woman, Navy wife, Navy mother

[Norman Rogers]

Here's what so important about O'Neill's remarks this evening:

I had never gotten a sense of the duration of the rescue of PCF-3. Now O'Neill puts it at an hour and a half. What's important about this is that it puts the lie to Kerry's claims (and the "official accounts in the commendations") that these men and these boats were receiving hostile fire.

An Hour and a Half!!!! And NO CASUALTIES! And NO BULLET DAMAGE TO ANY BOAT?

There was no hostile fire. This puts the lie to Kerry. And none of his crewman nor even Rassman can contradict this.

Indeed, this is the question I would put to Rassmann: How long after Kerry retrieved you from the river did the little flotilla leave the scene, PCF-3 in tow?

My sense of the timeline is that Kerry came back within five minutes or so and picked up Rassmann. That leaves another hour and twentyfive minutes (or so) that they were hanging around rescuing the 3 boat and towing it back for repairs.

So, let's test Mr. Rassman's recollections. Let's get whomever interviews him next to ask him about these timeframes. So far, all Rassman has claimed is that he was being sniped at WHILE HE WAS IN THE WATER. Let's ask him what happened while he was drying off -- FOR THE NEXT HOUR AND TWENTYFIVE MINUTES! Was there hostile fire then?

[Beatrice1000]

[Wolfgang]

Oliphant does often come off as a bit effeminate and ivory-towerish, and he's certainly a big Kerry fan (he's the liberal proponent when Mark Shields is unavailable for the Friday night political commentary with one conservative [usually David Brooks] and one liberal).

So, as I suggested, he did come across as being from another planet, I suspect (just got home--haven't seen the video yet), but I think he's an honest and honorable man. Not a shouter or or nasty SOB-type.

Which is why O'Neill won the day (I'm presuming, based on your comments): Oliphant is one who wants to win on substance, not trickery or shouting demagoguery.

But the substance this time counts against him--so he lost the argument, just as he should have.

[integritycounts]

"yes. its called the Daily Press.... " LOLOLOL what an idiot. O'Neill was nice to him too....and he was still squirming in his seat

[Wolfgang]

Agreed on that "daily press" comment.

I thought it was actually even more true than he meant, though: the mainstream liberal media are Kerry's main defender's in this, no doubt about that, as tonight's/tomorrow morning's NYT article (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/20/politics/campaign/20swift.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=) makes all too clear.

Good long article, every single point dizzyingly full of (subtle, snide, and condescending) spin. It's like reading an "objective" news piece written by Johnny Cochran about OJ: lot's of interesting facts, even more interesting stuff left out, everything written just so to tell the story the journalist wanted to tell to begin with.