I'm Sick of People Saying KERRY Didn't fight back from the Swift Boat crap

It's a valid criticism to say the campaign didn't respond soon enough. They should have rebutted the criticism immediately, rather than wait two weeks.

But people are rewriting history, saying that Kerry "didn't fight back" at all. Lest they forget, Kerry personally went after them and the campaign DID respond. But the story continued to dominate the cable-news channels for weeks, even after they had started rebutting it, b/c that's what the 24-hour cable news cycle does. It amplifies all charges.

Take a look at some of these:

From August 20:

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0819.html

Over the last week or so, a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth has been attacking me. Of course, this group isn’t interested in the truth – and they’re not telling the truth. They didn’t even exist until I won the nomination for president.

But here’s what you really need to know about them. They’re funded by hundreds of thousands of dollars from a Republican contributor out of Texas. They’re a front for the Bush campaign. And the fact that the President won’t denounce what they’re up to tells you everything you need to know—he wants them to do his dirty work.

Thirty years ago, official Navy reports documented my service in Vietnam and awarded me the Silver Star, the Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts. Thirty years ago, this was the plain truth. It still is. And I still carry the shrapnel in my leg from a wound in Vietnam.

As firefighters you risk your lives everyday. You know what it’s like to see the truth in the moment. You’re proud of what you’ve done—and so am I.

Of course, the President keeps telling people he would never question my service to our country. Instead, he watches as a Republican-funded attack group does just that. Well, if he wants to have a debate about our service in Vietnam, here is my answer: “Bring it on.”

I’m not going to let anyone question my commitment to defending America—then, now, or ever. And I’m not going to let anyone attack the sacrifice and courage of the men who saw battle with me.

***

From September 2:

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0902.html

You all saw the anger and distortion of the Republican Convention. For the past week, they attacked my patriotism and my fitness to serve as Commander-in-chief. We’ll, here’s my answer. I will not have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq.

The Vice President called me unfit for office last night. Well, I'll leave it up to the voters to decide whether five deferments makes someone more qualified to defend this nation than two tours of duty.

Let me tell you what I think makes someone unfit for duty. Misleading our nation into war in Iraq makes you unfit to lead this nation. Doing nothing while this nation loses millions of jobs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting 45 million Americans go without healthcare makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting the Saudi Royal Family control our energy costs makes you unfit. Handing out billions of government contracts to Halliburton while you're still on their payroll makes you unfit. That's the record of George Bush and Dick Cheney. And that only scratches the surface. I believe it's time to move America in a new direction; I believe it's time to set a new course for America. And together, you, John Edwards and I will do that on November 2nd.


***

August 19: Kerry campaign releases ad countering the SBVT: "Rassman"

http://mfile.akamai.com/10211/wmv/johnkerry.download.akamai.com/10211/081904_rassmann_wmv_dsl.wvx

***

From Newsweek:

Kerry himself was itching to hit back at the Swift Boat vets. He had been warned by a McCain aide two years earlier to watch out for the mudslingers on the Republican right. "They'll make it look like you fought for the Viet Cong," said the McCain aide, recalling the dirty tricks played on his own boss in the 2000 primaries. Kerry was furious at former senator Bob Dole, who had gone on TV to say that not all the Swift Boat veterans could be Republican liars. Kerry called his old Senate colleague (and fellow Purple Heart recipient). "You can't say this kind of stuff," Kerry lit into Dole, "and by the way, Bob, I bled from every one of my wounds." Dole blathered that Kerry was a great friend and that he admired him, but he didn't take back what he had said. ("He's an attack dog rehabbed as a statesman, and then he allows himself to be wheeled out for this," growled Shrum, in the midst of a fulmination about "the Big Lie.")

Kerry wanted to blister the Swift Boat vets in a speech he was scheduled to give to the Veterans of Foreign Wars on Aug. 18. "We need to get these guys," he said. But at the last minute his handlers on the road were ordered by headquarters in Washington to restrain the candidate. Cahill and Shrum were worried that Kerry would seem too bitter and angry, the way he had appeared when he sarcastically thanked "Good Morning America's" Charlie Gibson, back in April, for doing the Republicans' dirty work.

Kerry's running mate, John Edwards, also wanted to take a swipe at the Swifties. Edwards was hardly an attacker in the Dole (or Cheney) tradition of vice presidential hit men; his whole persona and appeal were based on sunny optimism. But as early as Aug. 5, when the Swifties were just getting traction, Edwards wanted to push back, hard. McCain had just told the Associated Press that the Swift Boat ads were "dishonest and dishonorable... the same kind of deal that was pulled on me." Edwards wanted to begin a speech, "I join with Senator McCain in calling on the president to condemn this dishonest and dishonorable ad." But Kerry headquarters said no. Stephanie Cutter, the boss of the Kerry communications shop, explained that the campaign didn't need to give the Swift Boat vets any more attention than they were already getting.

...

Kerry wanted the truth to come out, but he wanted to get it out in his own careful, deliberate way. The former prosecutor wanted to marshal the evidence, to build a case that would hold up. But that took time, and in the world of bloggers and 24/7 talking heads on cable, every day spent fact checking was a day lost. One quick pre-emptive strike might have been to reassemble Kerry's old Swift Boat crew, his band of brothers, and send them out on the talk-show circuit. But it was August; they were mostly a bunch of grandfathers, scattered on family vacations. Kerry remembered that one of the Swift Boat commanders, Donald Droz, killed in Vietnam, had regularly written his wife. Maybe one of those letters detailed the battle in which Kerry had won a Bronze Star and his last Purple Heart (the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were claiming that no shots had been fired). The campaign scrambled to find the wife, but she explained that she had no letters about the incident; she had seen her husband in Hawaii soon after on RR, so there had been no need for letters. Kerry couldn't believe it. "Let me call her," he said. The whole process took four or five days, and the letters never turned up.

The Kerry campaign did work closely with the major dailies, feeding documents to The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Boston Globe to debunk the Swift Boat vets. The articles were mostly (though not entirely) supportive of Kerry, but it was too late. The old media may have been more responsible than the new media, but they were also largely irrelevant.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6420967/site/newsweek/

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6421295/site/newsweek/

***

Also released was an ad that said "George W. Bush is up to his old dirty tricks," featuring McCain at a 2000 primary debate saying, "that hurt George. That really hurt. You should be ashamed." It was pulled b/c McCain asked that it be pulled.

Sure he said some things to defend himself...but who saw it? You and me on the internet? I guarantee you none of the undecideds heard it..

Kerry wanted to respopnd, but Marybeth Cahill thought it would make a bigger story out of it, and that if left alone it would go away in a few days.

Biggest mistake of 2004. Now we're stuck with Fredo for 4 more years, or until he causes Nuclear Armaggedon, whichever comes first.

Cahill handled the matter exactly as the Dukakis campaign
would have handled it...partly because she was in that
campaign.

Cahill here illustrates my point that we should ban all
leading figures in losing Democratic presidential campaigns from significant
roles in future campaigns.

If you couldn't elect YOUR candidate, you have nothing whatsoever to
offer us. You should have the decency to go away.

And we should bring in the Clinton people to train future Democratic
campaigns in the one effective method they had...THE RAPID RESPONSE
TEAM. Kerry effectively didn't have one, or at least not a competent one.

I know people say I've been too tough on Kerry, but if his campaign
failed, we need to be completely unsentimental about it.

They won him the primary. But I agree with you 100%. Carville, Begala, and Lockhart know how to win elections, and this election was about defeating Bush. Those guys should've been on board and running the thing in March.

Though Sasso is now tarred as a loser for running both the Dukakis campaign in its final stages and working on Kerry's campaign this year, in fact he saved Dukakis from an even bigger loss and helped Kerry pull his campaign together. He was a much better organizer and strategist who would have run the campaign far better. Cahill could have stayed on as a manager, but shouldn't have been involved in strategy. And Shrum should have been relegated to ad-making (of course, Jim Margolis should never have been fired either - his ads in the primaries were better than Shrum's)

I thought he helped keep the candidate on message.

At least Kerry had the sense to bring in Clinton people in the last couple months.

I will never be able to understand why Kerry pulled that McCain ad. Never. Here you had a perfect example of bush maligning a real vet and McCain responding to bush angrily. A very telling & powerful ad. And, just because McCain asks for it to be removed, Kerry does, so McCain can backstab him at the RNC convention. Very foolish move.

Kerry promised us he wouldn't let republicans "define" him and that's exactly what they did. Kerry was ahead before those swift boat ads came out and his lead started to evaporate. His response should have been quicker and forceful, like a lawsuit for defamation of character. Republicans even had the US Navy going over Kerry's record to see if he "deserved" his medals. Turns out they certainly were earned , but that received little press.

I really liked Kerry too, but this was a major mistake. And if he has any thoughts of 2008, he better get on the ball and go after these guys legally or it will resurface again and again.

might make some people feel better.

The JK-JE campaign issued press releases, talked personally to reporters, and accepted as many TV/print media ops as humanly possible.

Congressional Dems hold weekly press conferences. Is it the Dems' fault that we hardly ever find out what was said during those meetings?

Our Pravda has too much control. The fact that Katie Couric's name is being tossed out as a possible replacement for Dan Rather should send up flares: our MSM is a joke... a joke on us, perpetrated by corporate pirates.

service.

it was the media who protect him on that. the way they reported it was that cbs was lying and it implied the entire thing was made up when all it was about was that they were not able to authenticate just one of the documents even though the contents of it were confirmed to be true by many.

as for the swift boat crap the media had the facts but they reported it in a way to make it like it was just two sides of a story regardless of what the facts show.

I would have had a bus parked outside of CNN here in NY and Kerry surrogates would have been pounding on the door (or the glass - its a fishbowl) to get on CNN every time they had the Swifties on or ran their ad free (to talk about it). Day One, in their faces, calling them liars. "Turn the boat into the shore" and start firing.

After all the talk about Max Cleland, they had to know this was coming AND that it could be effective. MB Cahill has admitted in so many words that she doesn't understand how cable news and the internet have impact.

who were in the midst of contract negotiations. All this weeping about 9/11, yet you can't even pay them? Come on. A city where 3,000 died and it gets less Homeland Security funds than Wyoming? Kerry should have exposed these phonies for what they are. Alot of us here thought Kerry would come during the RNC convention. Think thats another move he didn't make, that cost him.

to fight back in politics is like sleeping with someone, and leaving them unsatisfied, coming back two weeks later, and attempting to make it right. The moment passes. Any and all responses must be immediate, and must be denials.

"in politics, a week is an eternity."

no response whatsoever.

The bell could not be unrung after two weeks of nonstop attacks. As far as many voters were concerned, Kerry didn't fight it so the charges must have been true.

Perception is everything in politics.

Swiftliars started with gibberish and bs about Kerry's medals.
These people were not going away.
Giving the Swifts some credibility, by a slow response, was a mistake.
Yet, at the same time, many people, want to forget about
the Viet Nam war.

He should have ran ads with his 71 testimony, and shown where the Swiftliars were taking it our of context and out right lying. I especially thought it interesting that in the Swiftliars ad showing Kerry repeating what OTHERS TOLD HIM they had done, the liars left out the words about electrodes being attached to genitals.

Being that this was right after the Abu Ghraib debacle, they didn't want the public to get the notion that maybe what Kerry was saying really happened in Viet Nam because it is happening now in Iraq.

It was such an opportunity missed, to get his powerful testimony out there and also to tie it to what was happening now in Iraq.

However I dont think it would have done him any harm to go aggressively after that scum sucking leach O Neil.

Almost everything the Swift 'buck' vets said was debunked on the interent within an hour, why couldent Kerry tone down the language and put the counter information to the public?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

what hurt was the fear mongering with the fake terror alerts combined with the news of russian school hostages and the bin laden video and other crap.

white women are the swing voters who can make a difference. polls showed the bases of both parties voted as they did before. Clinton won white women in his elections. Gore got the same percentage as bush (which could account for closeness of the race) and Kerry lost them.

Kerry actually did gain them after the debates, but lost then when the bin laden video came out. they got scared and voted for whoever is viewed as more hawkish. Bush's "strength" comes mostly from the fact that he is from a party that is viewed as the hawkish party.

it wasn't just the video in itself but the right wing coordination of using it to attack kerry through the media. if anyone watched the final episode of bill moyers you know what i'm talking about. all that crap about how bin laden wanted kerry to win and other shit.

Kerry's lack of immediate and pointed response to the Swift Boat liars helped to substantiate the impression of him that was being fomented by the Republicans.

I heard it from people who were wavering. "If he can't defend himself against a bunch of guys lying about his war record, how's he going to defend the country."

I agree with you that the debates helped and the Bin Laden video hurt but if these swing voters hadn't had doubts about Kerry to begin with, the Bin Laden video wouldn't have been the fatal blow that it was.

Kerry's a good man but not responding with overwhelming force to these bastards was a major mistake on the part of Kerry's advisors and there is no way that he escapes blame himself for convincing him to sit back while his reputation was destroyed.

if not for Cahill & Shrum. Kerry is a helluva fighter. I hope those lying SBVT's burn in hell. Reading those speeches after we lost is so bittersweet. He would have been an incredible Commander-in-Chief. I'm proud of what I did for the campaign and for John Kerry. :nopity:

and I wanted to go off on her for running a "disorganized" and "chaotic" campaign. I shouted at the TV from the SB liars to the campaign's decision to write off the south and focus more on domestic issues. She look so devestated and defensive. :evilfrown:

Why would they not fight back HARD and FAST? Politics is a show, and they should've known to immediately respond to the swifties, why didn't they?

1. they were naive
2. They were blatantly incompetent
3. They were doing the right thing for the wrong people.

*shrugs* take your pick

Then they have no business running a presidential campaign. Kerry's definately a smarter man than I am, if I can see this, why couldn't he?

maybe they HAVE to be controlled by the "handlers", or face getting frozen out by the support network of the party?

I have no idea...just thinking out loud.

I know the campaign tried to take the "high road" and put off mudslinging as long as possible. That doesn't work with the Republicans. Isn't it funny how the party of "values" has so many people who blatently ignore values? But, I agree with an earlier post, Cahill & Shrum couldn't get an extremely qualified candidate elected - their hands in Democratic candidates should be over. After four more years of W wrecking everything, 2008 should be a piece of cake.

For now, everyone focus and help out the candidates over the next two years.... :puffpiece: We got other Democrats to get elected!!!

that was a very dramatic scene, and a bold act, despite the ridicule from the media.

I'd love to see a candidate "not handled."

Someone who would come out & speak truth to power...I think a lot of voters would approve of some plain talking, rather than sound bytes.

from what I understand he wanted to respond right away, but his "advisors" were against it. Remember all that judo crap?

Senator Kerry did not fight back against them soon enough. That is the problem.

I wrote his campaign an email about this during the general election, and I told them that many Americans believe two things:

1. If a person doesn't adequately respond to allegations against them, then those allegations must be true.

2. If a candidate for President won't defend themselves, how will they defend the country?

The Swiftboat liers got their message out early, and people believed it, even after their lies were debunked.

I have a friend at work who to this day, tells me that John Kerry was a coward, a sissy, and didn't serve honorably in Vietnam. She has John O'Neill's book. I sent her an analysis conducted by Media Matters for America, which debunked their lies, and she still believes the Swifties.

Now, I really don't have much to say to her, and I have determined that this is an issue that we can't discuss, because I get too heated at her for drinking the Swiftie cool aid.

I could understand backing off if McCain asked him to initially, but once McCain started appearing with Bush at campaign stops, then Kerry should have brought those commercials back. Instead of letting McCain lend his credibility to Bush, Kerry should have exposed him as the hypocrite he really is.

"They didn’t even exist until I won the nomination for president."

That's a baldfaced LIE. What the fuck?

The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth was organized only after Kerry had wrapped up the nomination in March. When do you say the group began?

'"Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" is a group formed March 23 after Kerry wrapped up the Democratic nomination.'...

http://www.factcheck.org/article231.html

They've been around in some incarnation for 20 years. Aren't they a tool from the Nixon administration, used against Kerry since then? The same group of people is behind the smearing of McCain by Bush in the 2000 primaries.

Kerry is right that this specific group was just formed for this election. And you are right that these same anti-Kerry vets have been around for ages.

This time around, their "message" was uhhh managed and funded a little better than its been in the past. And they even got a book deal out of it.

/sarcasm

/sarcasm

they were running around the net, bookstore signings, and on cspan giving full voice to their accusations. that was months before they hit the big time. kerry and his campaign knew about it long before he fought back in late august yet his campaign did nothing to prepare for it going over big time and his campaign appeared stunned when the swifties got their tv ads cranked up.

kerry et al underestimated the swift boat debacle and it cost him the election.

denial ain't just a river in egypt. kerry and his people fucked up. no blame shifting to media madness or a far right wing conspiracy is acceptable. its time to fess up. its kerry's own fault he did not have a sufficient counterattack prepared in late july early august.

he knew they were coming for him and he had nothing but his dick in his hand when they got there.

Gads, he's magnificent when he pissed. How was that not hitting Bush hard enough in that midnight speech. I loved that speech. You can always tell when he's fired up. Suddenly he speaks in short, coherent sentences. :loveya:

What the hell, as far as Cahill and Shrum ordering the handlers to restrain the candidate. Who was working for who there? Dang. So what if Kerry appeared angry. It might have been a good thing. I never saw the Good Morning America clip. Any good?

Next time (and I want one, even if others don't) I want to see the REAL Kerry on the campaign trail. No restraining the candidate. Let him act on his gut instincts. They would have been the best, I think.

ad setting the record straight? You don't counter a vicious ad campaign with a press release. He emboldened them with his weak response.

Too often that was the Kerry response. Press releases don't reach as many voters as a sustained effort in ads and on talk shows. A weak response is no better than a non-response, if it doesn't change any minds.

for turning a non-story into a story.

I can hear it now - "Why would Kerry overreact the way he did? He gave what had been a bunch of nobodies a platform they never would have had if he had just ignored them. He turned a one day story into something much bigger. The press would have lost interest pretty quickly if he hadn't blown this up into a major story. He should never have allowed these guys to distract him, pull him off his game and get drawn into a pissing match with them." Blah blah blah.

He was damned if he did and damned if he didn't.

in that whole fiasco was the campaign in control of the media cycle. That is why it is fair to blame the Kerry Campaign. they dropped the ball big time and let it snowball.
William Donohue