The fourth Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad

I have not seen it yet, but I read that the fourth Swift Boat ad is out, and shows John Kerry participating in an anti-war protest where he threw either his medals, or now he says, his ribbons, over a Capital fence.

This is fair game, just as much as showing John Kerry's testimony to the Senate in April 1971 is fair game. It doesn't hinge on people's memories of what happened in Viet Nam.

There also needs to be an ad showing John Kerry's meeting with the Sandinistas in 1986. That needs to be shown by someone, and the Swift Boat Vets might as well do it.

Our leftist buddies are insufferable

The left has totally lost their minds. They all need to be confined to padded rooms with dim light and soft music. They may need to have funny shirts with sleeves that are sewn up at the bottom, and which tie in the back. How can these people really think that all the action in the "streets of New York" will do anything but give them warm fuzzy feelings? The Reagan Democrats in Minneapolis aren't going to be impressed. They already don't like their home-grown Bozo's, much less the crowd that is partying in New York. The more that our leftist buddies show the rest of the country what big goofballs they are will only hurt John Kerry and the Democrats. These people are acting out the delusion that arose after the 2002 election that they would have won if they only had been more radical. The real problem was that voters saw through the sham centrism and knew these clowns for what they are: so far to the left that only the "U" (people like those at the University of Minnesota) and Hollywood would like them.

An attempt to "change the story"

The publication of the story about possible Israeli spying in the DoD was obviously leaked to try to change the story off from John Kerry and the Swift boat vets. The fact is that there had been an ongoing investigation for the last year into this issue. So why does this come out now and appear in the Washington Post? For obvious reasons, for the dual purpose of both trashing Israel and changing the story. Why don't we initiate a criminal investigation into the leak, as it may have interfered with an ongoing counter-espionage investigation? Was Terry McAuliffe secretly behind the leak? Perhaps it was Richard Ben-Veniste? (just kidding)

Admittedly, those on the right are getting carried away with the Swift boat controversy

John Kerry and his people are generally behaving abominably about the Swift boat controversy. They are going after the men, and trying to ruin their careers and lives. In other words, it is standard Clinton operating procedure.

The first victim was James Zumwalt, son of the admiral. The second, apparently, was someone who is danger of losing his job. These unspeakably slimey creatures (John Kerry's goons) are going after others. So much for their high-minded fair play.

The New Republic has gone from being a good read to being predictable and tiresome

I have subscribed to The New Republic (online) for the last two years, but I hesitate to renew my subscription. At first, the main negative was Peter Beinhart's regretably consistent performance on Hugh Hewitt's show, where he is a leftist guest. He regularly gets into shouting matches with Hugh Hewitt, and he is partly to fault, as Peter has been reduced to reading (or shouting) Democrat talking points (used to be faxed out, probably emailed, at this point).

I guess that is my biggest complaint: The New Republic is generally now just an outlet for John Kerry's current talking points, instead of being a forum for careful consideration of questions from all sides. I don't have a problem with legitimate discussion of issues from all points of view. I just don't have time to read the daily Democrat talking points (drafted by Bob Schrum and his buddies).

More on Jim Rassman: the definitive scoop

I had heard this perhaps 10 days ago from a prominent conservative radio talk show host, but since I didn't see it anywhere else, I put it on my "watch list". Now, we find that he was right. Jim Rassman fell in the river off John Kerry's boat, when John Kerry made a sharp turn, when the mine exploded under PCF-3. On top of that, John Kerry injured his arm, because he was looking aft, when he was jolted. The source for the story about Jim Rassman is John Kerry's eulogy for Thomas Belodeau, from the Congressional Record (Senate) for January 28, 1998. We can definitely say that Jim Rassman fell in the water from John Kerry's boat. Jim Rassman was eating a cookie that he had scarfed from someone else's "care package" from home, when John Kerry swung PCF-94 around and gunned the engine. John Kerry ran his boat as much as a mile upriver, and after realizing that he had lost Jim Rassman, turned back to pick him out of the water. Meanwhile, after PCF-3 was mined, the other three boats went to her aid. Larry Thurlow led the rescue while John Kerry took off up the river. PCF-94 was not mined. It remains to be seen if anyone but the Swift boats fired guns, or if there was return fire from the bank. Standard operating procedure was to blanket the bank with machine gun fire to suppress any opposition. We can't seem to tell the truth about this issue, 35 years away in time. I would be hard pressed to remember details, even about fairly major events, so it shouldn't be surprising.

It remains to be seen if John Kerry will be successful at changing the subject

The last thing that John Kerry needs is for us to look at his record as a senator. It was laughable to hear of how many intelligence committee meetings that he has missed in the last 3-4 years. The pictures of him with the same haircut as 1971, meeting with the Sandinistas in 1986 also might not look to good.

The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads are devastating, so John Kerry has to find a way to either stop them, or to blunt their effectiveness. The second ad is worse than the first, as you hear John Kerry giving a goofy pronunciation of Gengis Khan (Jingis Kahn?) while telling what are essentially lies about American troops in Viet Nam. That really is the source of the resentment by Swift boat vets, although his activities such as his films and what were viewed as reports inflating his role and his questionable Purple hearts.

Since John Kerry is from the Jane Fonda wing of the Democratic party (the 1971 Jane Fonda), he is a bit out of the mainstream. In Texas, John Kerry is pretty much limited to the GLBT and Communist party vote, as Texas is filled with "Remember 9/11/2001" bumper stickers and churches.

Who is this guy, Jim Russell?

A guy has popped up claiming to have been at the action where John Kerry was given the Bronze Star. It turns out that he can't be found in the list of "Swift Boat" veterans. He may have been a Psy Ops officer. It turns out that Psy Ops on the rivers had a very bad reputation in the Swift boats. There is a note that John Kerry had recommended Psy Ops be tried (and this was touted as being part of his anti-war activism). Reportedly, the guys in boats reverted to playing loud James Brown and Rolling Stones music, instead.

Is this guy for real, or an imposter?

It's hard to know how all this will play out....

You would think that the events and discussion of the last week have bloodied John Kerry. Defending and spinning his Viet Nam stories and resume are the last thing he wants to be doing. Glenn Reynolds was fantasizing about how John Kerry might have conducted his campaign in an "alternate universe". When I read Glenn's story, it seemed like John Kerry would have done better with Glenn's strategy than the strategy that he and his people actually used. The flow with Glenn's strategy is that Kerry's lefty buddies wouldn't have accepted such an approach. The strategy was Clintonian in its triangulation:

If Kerry had an Iraq policy that made sense, perhaps he could be making hay out of this. In fact, I want to offer a clipping from a parallel universe, one much like our own except for a different John Kerry campaign strategy:

EAST HAMPTON, NY (IP) -- Democratic Presidential nomineee John Kerry laughs when told that most voters don't realize that he served in Vietnam, winning three purple hearts, a bronze star, and a silver star.

"Why should they? That's several wars ago," Kerry laughs. "Old stuff. I'd much rather people be talking about my detailed plan to rebuild Iraq, using an oil trust mechanism that would give the Iraqi people a stake in reconstruction. That's why I focused on that in my acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention. What was I going to do, rehash events from 35 years ago?"...

Read the whole story

Some people are determined to stop any fact-checking of Senator Kerry's Viet Nam stories

In today's Minneapolis Star Tribune, a hit piece was run on the editorial page, targetting Scott Johnson and John Hindracker, the two principle contributors to the Power Line blog. Their sins were that they were fact-checking Senator Kerry's stories about Viet Nam. Outside of the Star Tribune, people recognize that Senator Kerry's "Christmas in Cambodia" story about Christmas 1968, while a compelling story, is false.

The Kerry campaign has tacitly admitted this, just as they have stopped featuring David Alston in Kerry campaign appearances. At the DNC, David Alston was a prominently featured speaker for Senator Kerry. Upon closer examination, it appeared that at most, David Alston served with John Kerry for a week, and that in March 1969, not earlier.

David Alston had been wounded at the same time as the previous commander of PCF-94, Lt. Ted Peck. Lt. Peck was apparently knocked out of the war, and David Alston was convelescing from his wound for at least a month. He may have returned to PCF-94 and served with Senator Kerry for as much as a week, but this can't conclusively be shown to be true.

In any case, Senator Kerry and his surrogates are determined to smear anyone who might dare to check Senator Kerry's stories. An not just his stories, as they have savagely attacked those participating in the second Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad, including POW's. The key feature of the second ad is that Senator Kerry's words and played, with his picture from his Senate testimony from 1971, where he accused his comrades-at-arms of being war criminals. It turns out that the meeting in Detroit where 150 so-called Viet Nam veterans spoke of seeing war crimes, many of those who spoke never served, but were just Viet Nam anti-war protestors.

If you want to be on the leading edge of the John Kerry service in Viet Nam story...

If you want the latest scoop and analysis, I highly recommend Beldarblog to you. I can believe that because his writing and analysis is so good, that his readership has "spiked". I have seen that phenomenon in the last 10 days, as I have focused on John Kerry's Viet Nam service and the fact checking process that is taking place. I have seen this phenomenon that potential readers will be drawn to your writing by Google and other search engines. A secondary factor is from your comments on other blogger's writing. There is a place for a URL, and if you put your blog URL there, a few people will click on it, out of curiousity. That is why I have URL's on my signatures on email and comments.

The Naval Reserve officer who was besmirching his shipmates and fellow combatants

The more that the facts are checked about Senator Kerry's service in Viet Nam (and his activities when he came back), the more disgusted I become. I have started to think that he didn't base his political career on story-telling, but on low-key demagoguery.

The crazy thing is that the post Viet Nam demagoguery is on the public record, starting with his "testimony" for the Senate committee in April 1971. We now strongly suspect, as most servicemen did in 1971, that he was lying to the committee. He was creating a story that would advance is radical leftwing political agenda, and which would enrage ordinary patriotic Americans.

I have a hard time reconciling what he did in 1971 to 1972 with him supposedly being an patriotic American. What is even more mind-boggling was that he was still an officer in the Naval Reserve when he was doing all this.

Kerry supporters assume that the Swift Boat Veterans charges are false

There is a great divide in the country: between supporters of John Kerry who are angry about the Swift Boat Veterans' charges and assume they aren't true and those who are opposed to John Kerry, who assume that they are true. The latest advertisement will be harder to deal with, in that much of the ad is John Kerry speaking in 1971.

When I was in the Navy in 1971, and I heard John Kerry's testimony in the Senate, I was angered. We were still fighting in Viet Nam. My brother was recently returned from 17 months in the North of Viet Nam, fighting as a Marine. Here was this guy who was an anti-war protestor, who was running around with Jane Fonda, and he was saying things about our people that were totally unsupported by any proof. All we had was his word, and it turns out that he had no direct experience. His goal was to sabotage our war against the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese, and he eventually succeeded.

Now, all we have is John Kerry's word, and it turns out that when we try to fact check him, his compelling stories often don't stand up to scrutiny. The Swift Boat Veterans stand up and complain about his exaggerations of his role in combat and total fiction like the "Christmas in Cambodia", and John Kerry's reaction is to try and smear them, and get their book banned by booksellers. He might be able to influence brick and mortar booksellers, but the book is a number one best seller with Amazon.com.

John Kerry is a total schmuck. He and is minions can't stand being fact-checked, so they react to try to discredit and ruin anyone who would oppose them.

Did the New York Times coordinate with the Kerry Campaign?

With all the concern about 527 organizations, and the requirement for them to be independent of presidential campaigns, we might ask if the other loophole in campaign finance reform, the "mainstream press" (the print and broadcast arm of the Democratic Party), has been coordinating with the Kerry Campaign. We have to give pause when we consider our lefty buddies at the New York Times. True to form, they have an "article" that is carrying John Kerry's water in the mainstream media's war against the Swift boat vets.

Is it legal for the NYT to coordinate? I read in the last few days about Democrat talking points being distributed to their surrogates, and apparently, to so-called news outlets. If this were happening on the Republican side, there would be a deafening roar of complaints. When it happens with John Kerry and the Democrats (a possible name for his rock band?), it is what is expected to happen. After all, the left's top priority is to win, whether they have to lie, cheat, steal, or whatever.

The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth seems to be gaining traction

Given the Kerry campaign's response, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's ad and John O'Neil's book, Unfit for Command, seem to be gaining traction in the political race. I just heard someone characterize the book as being "not a whack job", which is what the Democrats seem to be saying.

I would be curious to know what people think about this. Liberal blogs such as Oxblog are taking the Kerry party line on this: it is an unfair smear. Apparently, we are not allowed to fact check John Kerry's stories. His whole campaign and political career, before that, are based on his compelling stories. Now, we find out that at the very least, some of them vary from the truth to paint John Kerry as playing a more prominent role than he actually played. For example, research the incident when Jim Rassman fell off John Kerry's PCF-94, when John Kerry gunned his boat and did a sharp turn, when a mine went off under PCF-3, severely damaging the boat.

The other boats stayed and rescued the crew of PCF-3, while John Kerry left and came back to pick up Jim Rassman, who had fallen off his boat.

The Washington Post has found a hole in a critic's story

Now that the Washington Post found an inconsistency between the record and one of John Kerry's Swift Boat critics, they figure that they have deflated the story. That is no more true than because we have found numerous holes in John Kerry's story that the Mainstream Media (part of the John Kerry Campaign, which conveniently, does not count towards money expended on his campaign) will discount his Viet Nam story.

The Mainstream Media has the wagons circled, and are determined to ignore any flaws in John Kerry's Viet Nam story. The media is treating this as if it is simply a smear job, and won't look at the substance of the issue.

My thesis is that John Kerry consciously built a political career on his ability to tell compelling stories. During his tour in Viet Nam, he was starting to build his portfolio. He took his 8mm movies, restaging events so that he could build useful footage for later use. He also kept his journal. His action reports were another place that he recorded what he wanted to be his story, for posterity. His commendations were written using John Kerry's action reports.

There is some dispute about the accuracy of his reports, and the charge is that he embellished his reports to make them read better than what actually happened.

John Kerry's biographer, Douglas Brinkley, has been criticized for taking John Kerry's input, and using that, rather than independently researching the topic, and fact-checking John Kerry's story. If John Kerry changes his story, then Douglas Brinkley has to revise the so-called "historical record". That has happened with respect to the "Christmas in Cambodia" story, a fancifal account of John Kerry's "exploits" over Christmas of 1968. The version where "President Nixon" had ordered them there and then denied their presence is particularly entertaining.

The problem is, John Kerry's service in Viet Nam will continue to be fact-checked, and it is beyond the control of the mainstream press to stop it. John Kerry is fumbling to try and save his candidacy over a host of missteps, and this is just one more. He will have more problems, as there are too many story embellishments with which he will have to cope.

I always wondered what happened to William Davenport

One of the Operations Specialists on the Roosevelt was OSSN (later OS3) William Davenport. He was a yound black guy, and I always thought that he was a really good OS. Admittedly, he had some disdain for authority, but not so much as to be a problem. The previous CIC Officer liked Davenport, and encouraged him to learn as much as he could.

I liked William Davenport, because he was interested in wargaming, and because he "watched out for me" (a youngish Ensign, former enlisted man). He would always be ready (as I remember, anyway) to pass on "the craft" to me. Doing our job, underway, and during flight ops, you needed to really know your job.

I thought that William Davenport had a flair for wargame design. He was interested in gaming modern (circa 1976-1977) naval warfare. I had played his game that used aircraft, missiles, sensors, and ships, and thought it was good.

I never had any particular flair for game design, even though I played at it. I was primarily working on WWII land warfare with tanks and guns and WWI and WWI naval warfare (primarily surface warfare). I admired anyone who had original ideas about game design.

The last time I saw William Davenport was when we decommissioned the Roosevelt, in Norfolk. He seemed to be at the point of running afoul of authority, during the process, and I thought it was unfortunate.

27 Years later, I can't remember a lot of names or details

I know that memory is spotty, and sometimes things we think are true are just that: we think they are true, but the memory is incorrect. If we either tell ourselves something long enough or hear it enough, we start to build an artificial memory. Where we can check records, we find that we were mistaken about aspects of a story.

For example, I had thought that the Roosevelt collision was in February, but it was in January 1977. It makes sense, as we were in port for six weeks. The rest of the cruise as scheduled was such that the January date has to be correct.

There could be legitimate differences of memory about John Kerry's service in Viet Nam, among even those who served on the same Swift boat with him. I suspect that the Cambodia story is something that he had built up in his mind as being true, when in fact, he spent Christmas 1968 50 miles away, and never in fact, got into Cambodia. Still, it made a good story.

Thinking about John Kerry in Viet Nam made me think of the USS Franklin D Roosevel (CV-42)

More and more, it sounds like John Kerry has consciously embellished his service in Viet Nam. The whole business is disgusting, although I understand why some people's gut reaction is to defend him, as they are treating this like the attacks on President Bush's Texas Air National Guard service.

The topic of naval service brought back memories of my service, especially my cruise on the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt (CV-42). I was on board for the "Rosie's" last "Med Cruise" in 1976 to 1977. I was a professional ship driver. At sea, I would stand a bridge watch and then go up the next level to the flag bridge and stand a CIC Surface Watch Officer stint.

On the night of January 11, 1977 (I am assuming that the date I found on the Internet is correct), I was JOOD (Junior Officer of the Deck) in a three-man team of officers. Our OOD was a LCDR who was said to have had merchant marine service. The JOOW (Junior Officer of the Watch) was a friend who was also "in CIC" (Rory).

In a typical watch, I would be given "the conn", under the supervision of the OOD. The JOOW would talk with the CIC Surface Watch talker and would plot radar contacts in grease pencil, on the radar scope on the bridge. He would do maneuvering board graphical solutions for course and speed, and closest approach distance. I had done the same thing, when I had stood JOOW, in the first part of the cruise, and during our workup period in the summer of 1976.

Upstairs, in the Surface Watch, an enlisted man (an Operations Specialist: OS) would also be plotting radar contacts on the scope. A more senior OS would be doing larger scale graphical solutions. For example, on a large piece of plexiglass, an OS would be plotting the contacts, as reported by the guy on the scope.

There were usually about 10 enlisted guys on the Surface Watch team. They would rotate during their shift (about 8 hours, although at this point I can't be sure). We would "dog" the watches around meal time, at least for the officers.

For the "Eve" watch, the Surface Watch officer was a new guy, a LTJG who had been in CIC for about a month. He had been standing bridge watches, but was new to the surface watch. We usually started with a short period of doubling with an experienced officer, and then you were left to "sink or swim". It was not so demanding that it could not be readily learned, by doing the work with an experienced enlisted watch team.

As we came up to 10pm, were were headed south towards the Straits of Messina, having left Naples earlier in the day. Normally, when we got close to narrow seas, we go to "Special Sea and Anchor Detail". Ideally, you would have "crack" sailors on watch, as there was greater risk.

On this night, given the late hour, the Airdale LCDR, in CIC, who made up the watch bill, had decided to let the Eve watch team in CIC Surface Watch handle the "Special Sea and Anchor Detail". On the bridge, our best young OOD was there for the SSAD, but his JOOD was an NFO LT and the JOOW was from the Engineering Department. They were both new to bridge watches.

During Special Sea and Anchor Detail, the Captain and XO were on the bridge. The CIC Surface Watch had an OS1 on the bridge, talking with the radar navigation team in CIC. I had been designated the Radar Navigation Officer for Special Sea and Anchor Detail. On this night, I was supervising an NFO LT who was new to CIC.

When we went to SSAD, the officers who had the watch relieved us on the bridge. I went below to the CIC (just under the flightdeck). The CIC Officer, and Airdale CDR was sitting at a radar scope, and listening as well (I believe). We had our SSAD enlisted mean as lookouts on the brige and forward, on the catwalks.

There were 40mph winds, as I recall, but the night was clear. I heard later, that due to the high winds, they either pulled in the lookouts on the catwalks, or at least let them duck. I suspect that they were pulled in, because of safety concerns.

Because of the winds, the seas were rough. That caused excessive "sea return" on the main radar (SPS-10). There was also a "pathfinder radar" on the bridge that we used as a backup, to try and pickup vessels that might get in close.

Rumour had it that the XO was leaning with his back against the pathfinder radar, and it might have not been in use, or at least was blocked.

When we turned over the watch to the SSAD, we had one active contact that was close by. We gave contacts code letters. This one was "Alpha-Delta" (AD). AD was overtaking us on our starboard side, as he had a knot or two greater speed than we did.

We later heard that the JOOW who was on the SSAD crumpled up Rory's maneuvering board paper and tossed it and wiped the scope clean. Then, he asked the OS on the radar to give him "the picture".

The guy on the radar in the Surface Watch was not one of our "crack sailors". It turns out that he had lost track of AD. So, the JOOW and the rest of the bridge watch didn't know that AD was there or what his track was (We would talk this way, even though, conventionally, ships are referred to as "her").

In the run in towards Messina, the navigational track included a big starboard turn, to line us up with the main track down the straits. That was a fatal move, due to a conjunction of circumstances.

At some point, the SPS-10 radar had its sensitivity reduced, to try and reduce clutter from the heavy seas. That caused AD to be not seen. Still, the pathfinder radar and lookouts should have protected us. It didn't. My parents were watching TV, in Michigan, and heard the report that the Roosevelt had been in a collision.

We heard that it was a Liberian freighter. The Internet says that it was the Oceanus.

Thankfully, on one on either ship was hurt or went in the water. Guys sleeping in "their racks" forward were knocked on the deck. At worst, though, there were only bruises.

It ruined our captain's "whole day" (and ruined his career), as well as the XO, Navigator, and others.

We turned around and headed back to Naples, as there were repair facilities there. We ended tied to a pier for six weeks.

More about David Alston and John Kerry

More people are researching this story now, so that we know more details. Apparently, David Alston returned to PCF-94 for about a week, right before John Kerry left the boat. That was in March. PCF-94's previous commander, Lt. Ted Peck and David Alston were both wounded in an action on January 29, 1969. Lt(jg) John Kerry replaced Ted Peck in command, as John Kerry's crew for PCF-44 were all rotated home. It was a convenient swap, as Ted Peck was not going to return. David Alston was convalescing for just over a month, recovering from his head wound. During the time he was gone, Fred Short took his place as gunner. Fred Short was present for the action in which John Kerry was awarded his Silver Star (February 28, 1969). Fred Short was on board from February 18 (his birthday) until about March 4. David Alston apparently returned about then. The Special Forces Lieutenant rescued by John Kerry, in the action on March 13, 1969, was named Jim Rassman. I had seen a similar but different name "Jim Rasmussen". Apparently, Rassman is the correct spelling. They sound similar, but Rasmussen is incorrect. John Kerry was wounded, for a third time, in the action on March 13, and that allowed him to leave PCF-94 and Viet Nam. John Kerry had reportedly told the enlisted men who served under him that he was going to be the next "JFK", emulating President Kennedy's career in the Navy and politics.

John Kerry's deal with David Alston goes back two years

Ed Morissey is really on top of this story. It turns out that the joint lie by David Alston and John Kerry goes back two years. They have been conspiring to "steal" part of Lt. Peck's service on PCF-94 to make John Kerry look better.

This stuff is really shamefull. What do you suppose is the chance that any of this will make it into the mainstream? (how do say slim to none?)

The mainstream press desperately wants the stories about John Kerry's Viet Nam service to go away

The mainstream print media, in particular, desperately wants the stories about John Kerry's Viet Nam service to go away. Only a few small opinion pieces have made it into print, and no news stories are covering this topic.

It is only in the blogosphere that we are learning the truth. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth broke the dam, and then we had the Cambodia story, and we learn more about Jim Rasmussen and David Alston (he never served with Kerry).

The mainstream press is treating this as a smear campaign, so they feel justified in ignoring the story. The question is: what will break the dam? The Cambodia story is damaging, as is the truth about David Alston never serving with Kerry (but saying that he did in public).

Where there's smoke, there's fire. We found that out with President Clinton. The bad news is that the press showed with President Clinton that they can ignore a story, and it will eventually die out. Gary Aldrich's book was sort of like that. In retrospect, we would expect that most, if not all he wrote, even the speculative part, is true. I expect that we will eventually learn the truty about John Kerry. It just might not be until after the election.

We keep having to "do the wrong thing" in Iraq

Because of internal Iraqi politics, we have to keep doing things like negotiate with Muqtada al-Sadr when we should have crushed him and his militia. Partly, because of turnover of sovereignty to the interim government, we have to do such things. The bottom line is that it postpones a return to peace and stability, by allowing fundamentalists from both the Sunni and the Shiite wings of Islam, as well as Saddam supporters, to stop our attacks any time they want to negotiating.

That can't be a good thing.

I swear that the whole Kerry house of cards is on the brink of tumbling

The lastest thing that threatens to bring down the Kerry house of cards is a story about David Alston, who has stood up with John Kerry on numerous occasions. What we are finding out is that David Alston was wounded and not on PCF-94 while John Kerry was in command.

I have just read an analysis that characterized David Alston's story as being fraudulent. If he really never served with John Kerry, and the others in the so-called "Band of Brothers" know it and haven't said anything, it is a bomb waiting to explode.

We have to put this in the category of a "developing story", but it is just one more case where the Kerry story doesn't prove to be true, once it is investigated. It seems even the core basis for his using his Viet Nam service in the campaign is at least in part, questionable.

I comment I sent to David Adesnik of OxBlog

I sent this to David Adesnik, who is a contributor to OxBlog. He made some comments that I thought needed to be answered. I have been a reader of Oxblog, as the blog is well-regarded in certain circles. On bad days, I have problems even getting to OxBlog from Mozilla, so I do not always take the time to bring up IE6 to read what they have to say. As I could see that they are so far to the left that reading them is often tiresome, I have tended to not bother. When I read David's latest comment, however, I couldn't resist replying.

Senator Kerry's candidacy is based on his resume and the stories he tells. The Cambodia story (and it is apparently just a story) says something about Senator Kerry's character. Much of his adult life seems to have been spent telling stories that were calculated to grab attention. The Cambodia story seems to be very similar to Senator Kerry's testimony to the Senate committee in 1971. It was a gripping story that had no basis in fact.

The only reason that Kerry has focused on Viet Nam is because Jim Rasmussen landed from a flying saucer into Iowa. The new story line of Kerry as hero rescued his campaign from a quick death.

Only Kerry doubters notice that Rasmussen can't seem to get his story straight.

I'm sure that the book is very inconvenient, as it tarnishes the story line of Senator Kerry as war hero.

So far, it is only in the blogosphere that this whole deal has any legs. The mainstream media (barring the Fox News Channel, and they are very wary) is avoiding this whole issue, except to bemoan the SBVT's existence.

I would not call Glenn Reynolds a right-winger, as he describes himself as a liberal blogger. The guy really carrying water on this issue is Ed Morissey, in the Twin Cities. He seems to be getting the credit he deserves, with his readership being above 25,000/day.

This whole Swift boat thing has legs

The whole business of Senator Kerry's service in Viet Nam, and his stories about that service are starting to receive scrutiny, now that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have spoken out. The new book, Unfit for Command, is practically begging for a liabel suit. The authors and critics can only wish that Senator Kerry would sue, as it would open up his service to scrutiny and discussion in a court of law. It would also pave the way for discovery.

If Senator Kerry is smart, he will not sue. Beldarblog has the whole thing nailed. I found his discussion quite educational.

Scrutiny of John Kerry's service in Viet Nam has legs

I would not have expected it, but all the scrutiny of John Kerry's service in Viet Nam is starting to have legs. The piece that broke things open was story about John Kerry having spent the Christmas of 1968 in Cambodia, when there is ample evidence that it was a tall tale.

Being caught in that lie has opened up the field for the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" allegations. There is a dialog, and Jim Rasmussen, the Special Forces soldier whom John Kerry rescued has a piece in the Wall Street Journal editorial page defending John Kerry. It turns out that there is even controversy as to where Jim Rasmussen was when he fell into the river. Was he on another boat or was he on John Kerry's boat? You would think that this would be easy to resolve, but it is apparently not.

Jim Rasmussen is a key figure, because the whole Viet Nam thing only came up after he surfaced in the Iowa primary. Except for that, we wouldn't be talking about Viet Nam now. Perhaps, John Kerry wouldn't even be the nominee.

John Kerry is still running on his resume

John Kerry seems to still be running on his resume. Not only that, but his resume has been selectively edited. Besides that, he stretched the truth, until it was unrecognizable. I imagine that the "Christmas in Cambodia" story was a big hit with the Michael Moore and Jane Fonda set, but there is the minor difficulty that it wasn't true.

How much else of John Kerry's story is not true? Besides that, what did he for 20 years in the Senate? He seems to be not saying. Either he didn't do anything or he is ashamed of what he did do.

How can John Kerry be so stupid?

I had not heard the story told be John Kerry, in the Senate, about how he had spent Christmas of 1968 in Cambodia, and heard President Nixon on the radio denying anyone was there. Not only was Christmas of 1968 before Nixon was president, but there is other descriptions by John Kerry of how he spent Christmas of 1968 in another town, 50 miles from the Cambodian border. The border was being patrolled, and if John Kerry had tried to go to Cambodia, he would have been arrested and been tried for a crime.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, John Kerry must not have had good SAT and LSAT scores and undergraduate grades, because he had to settle for a lower tier law school. We already know that President Bush had higher grades then John Kerry did. So much for John Kerry's supposedly intellectual superiority over President Bush! The Cambodian lie only underscores John Kerry's substandard mental processes.

Things are tanking because it looks like John Kerry will win

In a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy, as the economy goes in the tank because it looks like John Kerry and the Democrats will win, it also increases the likelihood of it, as well. Business and the stock market are certainly reacting. One way that business has reacted is to be reluctant to hire new workers, because the expectation that all these anti-growth, anti-business measures will be put in place. The Democrats have pledged to roll back the tax cuts. There has been a lot of hedging, so it is unclear exactly where things stand, but that was the rhetoric, not very long ago. John Edwards is a trial lawyer, and it is his, and his buddies' attacks on business that have hurt the economy. We can laugh at the Democrat rhetoric about healthcare, because they are the cause of the skyrocketing cost of care and health insurance. They are the reason that people can no longer afford health care. It is because of subsidizing trial lawyers. The only way that we can avert this calamity, if it is avertable, is to be registered to vote, to vote against the Democrats, and for their opponents, who for now are the Republicans. There is really no viable alternative. No only do we need to vote, but we need to help inform our friends and family as to the truth. We need to counteract the Democrat lies, and hope that enough people will vote against these characters.

A soldier in Iraq

I was just reading the blog of a soldier in fighting in Iraq. He writes pretty much "stream of consciousness", but you really get the flavor of what it is like to be fighting the "bad guys". Apparently, they were fighting some Al Qaeda soldiers in Mosul, recently. It was an ambush, but they stood and fought them to a stop. The soldier was told that they were Al Qaeda from Iran. In this day long battle, CNN reported that 12 of the enemy were killed, which seemed to be way too low a number, considering the volume of fire against the enemy. In this situation, you are required to be brave. Compared to this, John Kerry was at an ice cream social.

Speaking of outages, we just went through another one, although this one was not COVAD's fault

Late in July, we had to endure a four day outage by COVAD. Right now, my broadband provider, who bridges the last mile (or four) using fixed wireless, is stuck with a contract with COVAD until December (presumably, the end of the year). I did some searching, using a dial-up connection, during our last outage, and found that COVAD has a history of bad outages in different regional areas. They USED to have a decent reputation, but they seem to have some systemic problems. Are they not doing maintenance? Are they stretched to the limit, so that anything that goes wrong, goes wrong in a big way? You have to wonder if they are going to crater before too long. They have lost an admittedly small customer, as soon as my broadband provider can be free of their current contract. This can't be an isolated phenomenon. They may be experiencing what is happening with our formerly favorite RBOC: Qwest. They seem to be in a death spiral, and maybe COVAD is, as well, and have just been somewhat successful in keeping it quiet. This time, the outage was caused by a denial of service attack by a DOS program. Our ISP finally switched IP addresses to cure the problem. I thought that I might have another outage, but I was able to solve it by rebooting. AIM seems to really reduce reliability. There is a processing hit, just being connected, and then there are these mysterious incidents where I lose the ability to receive email or connect to web sites. The only recourse is to reboot.

Google's Gmail seems to be having big problems, today

So far today, I have not been able to access Gmail, at all. that is bothersome because that is my primary communication path for my current IT job search. It is also bothersome because I have switched my email address for my blogs to my Gmail email. I just found the answer to a question for one of my readers, and wanted to respond, but can't, due to the Gmail outage.

John Kerry and the "Swift Boat Veterans"

In the last several days, we found out the details of the war crimes that John Kerry had said he had committed, in his Senate testimony in 1971. The "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" are not new. We have heard about them for as many as 6 months. John Kerry lives in a glass house. He has been pummeling President Bush with stones, and when it comes time for some return fire, he can't handle the scrutiny. Can the international court in The Hague prosecute Senator Kerry for the war crimes that he said he committed in Viet Nam? I thought that there is no statute of limitations for war crimes. We have tried men for crimes committed in World War II as many as 40 or 50 years later. With the book about this whole business at number one on Amazon.com, based on orders prior to publication next week, this story is not going to die. If nothing else, it will make Regnary some more money. The Democrat smear machine went into overdrive, when Gary Aldrich's book, Unlimited Access came out, but it didn't stop it from being a best seller and, eventually, widely available. It put Regnary on the map, and this book could well enhance their position. It is not so bizarre that John McCain is angry about this whole business. First, it reminds him of the South Carolina primary election, where we found out the holes in his story and the flaws in his personality. Second, I keep expecting John McCain to become a Democrat, so reading of his defense of John Kerry is no surprise.

The elections in Missouri

The elections that took place on this Tuesday in Missouri are noteworthy for two things: the incumbant governor was ousted in the primary and they voters of Missouri ratified a ban on gay marriages. The majority of the Missouri voters for this election were Democrats. Given that there was a much smaller Republican turnout, it means that most Democrat voters were against gay marriage. Election turnout was high, by recent standards: 42.8% of the electorate. The combination of a hot primary race for governor and the gay marriage ban were thought to be the reason. The gubernatorial contest was interesting, but a liberal elitist Democrat governor lost. We can only hope that other liberal, snob elitists might see similar results. I continue to place my trust in the wisdom judgment of ordinary people, rather the elites who want to tell us what to do and think.

John Kerry and the Vietnam War veterans

I suspect that John Kerry will have an easy time painting the book and ads from Viet Nam War veterans as being lunatic fringe. The general tone out of NewsMax is such that it reads like the wilder stories about President Clinton that we were reading in 1995. 9 years down the road from 1995, you have to wonder if some of those stories might have been true. After John Kerry spent the last week making sure that everyone who hadn't already known knew that he was in the Viet Nam War. He spent four whole months in the Mekong Delta. I still get angry when I hear John Kerry touting his resume, when I think about my younger brother, as a young Marine, spending 17 months in the northern part of Viet Nam. He was near places like Khe Sanh and Landing Zone Vandegrift. We probably won't know the impact of this book and ad campaign until November, although we may see some poll results sooner. I just suspect that the Democrat slime machine will go into full attack mode and try to block the book and ads. They also will certainly try to impugn the motives and credibility of those doing the criticizing. You can put that in the bank.

I find it distressing that otherwise thoughtful people like Michael Totten have gone "crazy" about President Bush

I had thought that Michael Totten was someone who was worth reading, as though I might disagree with him, he still could logically argue points in such as way as to be worth reading. Lately, since he and his wife returned from traveling in Tunisia, he seems to have gone over the edge. He is now imputing the worst possible motives to President Bush and his administration over defense against terrorism. Michael Totten is a liberal from the Pacific Northwest, so to a certain extent, you might expect that he would have an edge. The one thing that has been a feature, though, until now, has been that he has been strong on defending against terrorism. Now, he seems to have lost his bearings, so that he seems to think that nothing that this administration does is reasonable or understandable. I am ready to give up on Michael Totten. I may periodically check to see if he has come to his senses, but I am finding the present trend to be too tiresome to spend much time reading what he has to say.

I learned something new, this afternoon

While watching Britt Hume's "Special Report", I heard Britt say that he and John Kerry knew each other when they were five years old. Britt said that John Kerry's speech at the convention was the best that he had heard him give. Somewhat related is that Jeff Birnbaum said that his wife thought that John Kerry had "sad eyes" when he delivered his speech. I can believe that it would be easy to take criticisms personally, and I can believe that it is taking a toll. Can you imagine how President Bush must feel? Much of what is said about him is outrageous and inappropriate to say about anyone. A feature of the left is that they run roughshod over their opponents, and could care less about the human cost.

What John Kerry must fear

I am beyond criticizing John Kerry. He is what he is: a millionaire who only feels comfortable among his peers. In many ways, he is still the young man who got the yen for high political office from his brush with John F. Kennedy. It was a natural, what with John Kerry's initials also being JFK. What John Kerry must fear is that what he has said over the last 30 years being replayed for viewing by the American public. He has had the benefit of a limited audience for that time. He could perform for the true believers, and needn't be concerned that a larger audience would pay attention. There is reason to believe that starting as soon as this month, Bush campaign ads might start the very retrospective that might not be flattering to John Kerry. People are starting to notice, finally.

The entertainment value of Alan Keyes running for the senate in Illinois would be great

I have to admit that Alan Keyes would not be a serious candidate for the senate, but he still would be entertaining. At one point, people thought he was a suitable candidate, but we have found through hard experience that he is too much of a loose cannon (like Theresa Heinz Kerry). I wouldn't discount the possibility that he would in fact be the Republican candidate in Illinois. After all, who else could they run? Mike Ditka would have been another entertaining candidate, but his wife was not ready for the public scrutiny that they would have received. That was a big factor in Colin Powell's wife veto in 2000, in his consideration of the Vice-Presidency. I hope that the Armed Prophet is right, and he runs.

The guys in the Bozo suits

I apologize for this, but given the current state of our national security and the ongoing war on terror, John Kerry and John Edwards come across at best, as midgets. The worst impression is that they are dressed in Bozo suits. Their opinions and ideas are irrelevant to what is happening. The last thing we want to do is to put these clowns in charge of the country and the nation's defense. The present crowd are not perfect, but the "other guys" are empty suits. All they know how to do is to tell us what they think we want to hear. The convention was all about going through the motions to reassure their troops that they were trying to position themselves to win over normal people, not just the radical left. That is why we conveniently ignored 1984 to 2004, and John Kerry's career in the Senate, and focused, instead, on his four months in Viet Nam. I'm sure that all the Viet Nam anti-war protestors who have matured and were at the convention were just "thrilled" by all the warmongering bluster. How many of his base did he alienate? Perhaps none, as they so want to win, they think that letting him get away with this sort of talk because they think this is the way to do it.

This seems significant: the DFL mayor of St. Paul supports President Bush

The only place that I have seen this is the KSTP website: DFL Mayor Randy Kelly, of St. Paul, supports the election of President Bush. He will not change parties, but I can't imagine that the DFL (the Minnesota Democratic party) will be happy. Randy Kelly's predecessor, Norm Coleman, is now a Republican Senator from Minnesota, so maybe there is something in the water in St. Paul. He was also a former DFLer. As we go further from the Democratic convention, it will be interesting to see what other fallout there is. We might see all sorts of realigments, with center-left Republicans and center-right Democrats trading places.