I saw the infamous Swiftboat Ad here in Wisconsin on TV (Green Bay market) last night.
So it's still alive.
I remember the following story from a prominent trial lawyer, when serving a a guest speaker before a moot court class.
He was asked by a student to sum up his approach in handling a major case in a few words.
He replied to the effect that:
When his case was strong on the facts, he'd hammer away on the facts,
When his case was strong on the law, he'd hammer away on the law.
When a student had a follow-up question to the effect of what approach he would take if his case wasn't strong on the facts nor the law, he replied
Then he'd hammer away at the table, which he said meant he'd attack the opposing counsel's witnesses.
That seems to be the approach of both Kerry and the liberal media in this case.
Lets look at the facts about Kerry's stories about his Viet Nam experiences.
In testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations committee in 1971, Kerry alledged that American forces had engaged in widespread atrocities and that he himself had personally been involved in such atrocities. He has subsequently backed off from that statement.
Latter, Kerry stated he had thrown his medals over the White House fence as a show of opposition to the Viet Nam war. His story has repeatedly changed on this statement.
Further, as a Senator, Kerry alledged that he took a CIA 'man' to Cambodia on Christmas in 1968. There is absolutely NO evidence to support this statement of Kerry's, and considerable information to refute this astatement.
As to the other matters of contention between Kerry and those former swift boat officers and crew who have disagreed with Kerry's allegations about his service while I Viet Nam, I confess to not knowing the truth.
However, I do know, based upon the three uncontroverted examples I provided, Kerry's statements about his Viet Nam service have serious credibility problems.
Ad hominem attacks will NOT resolve the matter.
Kerry (and his running mate) made Kerry's Viet Nam service the centerpoint of his campaign in their speeches to the DNC.
So, if Kerry repeatedly lied about his service in Viet Nam, and it wasn't as heroic as he has alledged (please note that the film shown of his service in Viet Nam was subsequently 'enhanced' with shots of bullets striking the water), they we have a candidate who not only isn't 'heroic,' but is a serial liar.
