SwiftVets.com

[Anker-Klanker]

I think it might be time to get back to basics...

If you think about John Kerry's career, it really breaks down into 5 parts:
1) his infamous 4 months in Vietnam
2) his infamous activities after he returned from Vietnam
3) a short stint as a public prosecuter (did you catch the fact on his own web site that as a fresh-out-of-college new lawyer, he single-handedly prosecuted a leading mob figure? Sound like familiar boasting patterns?)
4) a stint as a Lieutenant Governor, where he apparently didn't do anything since he doesn't brag about anything he did in that period on his web site)
5) his many years in the Senate where he apparently did nothing but cast one of 100 votes (when he was present), and most of those votes were to appease his liberal constiuency, and where most conservatives think and are correct that his voting record was absymal.

Now think about it. Why did the Dems make such a big thing about his service before, during and after the convention? The far left constituency would have preferred Hillary Clinton as their candidate (wonder what kind of service record they will trot out for her in 2008?). Bill Clinton certainly did not serve. John Edwards did not serve. So service certainly is not a big factor to them.

I suspect that the Dems chose to highlight Kerry's service for two reasons:
1) they wanted to appeal to the more moderate, closer-to-center voters (the liberals were "in-the-bag"), and
2) they sure didn't want his Senate record and voting record to be on center stage, and they d___ sure didn't want his activities after he returned to be on center stage (and probably thought that if they could serve him up as a "hero" it would cancel or equal his VVAW activities).

Then the SBVTs came along, and spoiled the whole "plan" - upset the old proverbial apple cart.

So, the mad-as-heck professional campaigners probably decided to resurrect the smoke-screen of Bush's TANG service. Why? Actually, it might be considered kind of smart (considering the raw clay they have to deal with):
1) distract attention from the SWVT campaign for truth (which was threatening to become really devastating; it hurt him, but not as much as it could have.)
2) continue to avoid having to deal with his Senate record, or VVAW activities.

I believe that GWB is a big boy, and that his campaign managers are very competent, and they can to be trusted to deal with everything NOT having to do with the Kerry's service record, and VVAW activities. Almost all the posts to these forums in the last couple of weeks have dealt with everything BUT Kerry's service; i.e., we're distracting ourselves from the one area where this group can do the most good, and where, I think, the Kerry handlers most do not want attention (well, except for his Senate record, but nobody seems to be able, or interested, in talking about that).

Just some thoughts that I hope will elicit some discussion about what is best to be doing in the next critical few weeks, instead of just reacting to the latest DEM outrages....

[Montana]

Good points Anker-Klanker (good nautical name by the way)

Two other thoughts during Kerry´s senate period:

1. Kerry went down to Nicaragua and supported (and was
photographed) with Sandinista dictator Daniel Ortega...siding
with the dictator. Ortega later flew to the Soviet Union to clinch
a multi-million dollar deal with the communists. (and there´s
more to this story).

2. Kerry´s role in the investigation of live POW/MIA´s
in Vietnam (along with McCain). (There´s a lot to this
story that the public does not know about, with most of
it reflecting poorly (an understatement) on Kerry). The normalization
of trade with Vietnam was driving this issue, with many
lucrative contracts going to various people, including Kerry´s
relative (Forbes).

Both nrs 1 and 2 can easily be accessed via any search engine
by the press and private individuals.

Montana