I believe that the issue with the Swift Boaters was not what Kerry did in Vietnam but what he did when he came home; that is Kerry became a vocal member of the anti-War movement, and what he possibly exaggerated were the stories he told Congress about the murder of Vietnamese Civilians by American Soldiers. Let’s call a spade a spade here. Kerry, son of privilege, who could easily have opted out of Military service, unlike the slacker George Bush or any number of Conservative politicans and pundits, actually did his Military duty and conducted himself honorably in the Military; you can be in disagreement about how Kerry conducted himself when he left the Military, you can resent the way that he leveraged his grandstanding Testimony during the anti-War movement into a Political career, but for god’s sake, don’t dishonor a man who chose to serve when so many others, Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney, George Bush, Pat Buchanan, and yes, Bill Clinton, refused to serve.

As for McCain not using his War record, with all due respect, nonsense, Of Course he has used it, how many times have his surrogates brought up his POW status? Do you really think that his representatives and supporters need to spell out that they think that his captivity has, if not qualified him to be President exactly, certainly proved that McCain DESERVES it. You say that McCain hasn’t used it to justify his judgement as President, yet in the next sentence you say that he has used it to say something about his character…don’t judgement and character go hand in hand? You say that “Every time voters see a Dem attack McCain while mentioning his war record, voters are reminded of McCain’s character and love of country…” Isn’t the unspoken point here, once again, that it is precisely because of his sacrifice, this love of country, that he deserves to be President?

Why can’t a fellow Military man like General Clark, shot 4xs in Vietnam, respond to a Question put to him by a reporter that he doesn’t think that being a POW proves anything about John McCain’s qualifications to be President. Clark was respectful of McCain’s service as was Jim Webb, a personal friend of McCain’s, BTW. Look, the fact is that McCain is not offering much new as far as policy goes, his same old-same old program of low taxes, deregulation, and the continued pursuit of the Bush policy of military aggression, is not exactly appealing to Americans tired of the failed Bush ideology that has left this country weakened Politically, and economically. All the Republicans have to make the case that the party in power for the last 8 years, the party that has caused all this mayhem, should be counterintuitively returned to power this election cycle is the politics of personal destruction and mountain out of molehill offensives.

This entanglement with Israel, furthered by the Bush administration, is troubling to say the least; why have we thrown in our lot so throughly with a Sovereign Nation? What exactly is our strategic Interest in defending Israel with no onus on them to settle with the source of unrest in the region, the Palestinians? As long as we continue this blatant bias toward a tiny nation of jews stuck in a sea of millions of Arabs, I see nothing but a continued quagmire for us, and a continued threat from Islamic terrorists.

Did I say you were rudely disruptive? I’m happy to have you disagree with me; gives me a chance to sharpen my arguments and examine my assumptions. I don’t think that disagreement is rude, and you have not been rude.

I enjoy the conversation, too.

the left and right disagree about the what constitutes the threat facing America.

Since the left and right perceive different threats, the left and right naturally recommend different strategies to meet the different threats.

You like Bacevich’ analysis b/c you and Bacevich perceive similar threats. I perceive a different threat. To me, Bacevich’ analysis is beyond laughable. If I perceived the same threat as you and Bacevich: I might also appreciate his analysis.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I suspect Barack’s campaign has drawn this lesson from the Swift Boat Vets, i.e.: attack your opponent’s strength.

Barack’s campaign may not realize the Swift Boat Vets had truth on their side. John Kerry tried to use a false and exaggerated war record to distinguish between his and Bush’ ability to preside over the Iraq War. The combined lies + attempt to use the lies to justify his judgement are what worked against Kerry.

I argue:
1) McCain has not lied about his war record.
2) McCain has not used his war record to try and justify his judgment as a possible President.

Instead, McCain has used his war record as evidence of his character and of his love of country.

Character, et al are aspects you want to see in a President, yet they do not justify a man’s candidacy. What McCain has done is very different from what Kerry did, and it’s difficult or impossible to effectively attack. Every time voters see a Dem attack McCain while mentioning his war record, voters are reminded of McCain’s character and love of country. I think what Obama’s surrogates are doing is a losing tactic. We shall see. I could be wrong. I’m no genius in this area.

It would be rare for a political professional to extemporaneously mention McCain’s military service without coordinating with the Obama campaign. We are now up to seven Dem military veterans who have attacked McCain while mentioning his military service. To me, the Obama campaign is clearly coordinating. I do not believe seven attacks are coincidence. The seven:

–Bill Gillespie, Dem. candidate for Senate in Georgia
–Tom Harkin
–Jay Rockefeller
–George McGovern
–Wesley Clark
–Rand Beers, former advisor to the Kerry campaign, current “informal advisor” to the Obama campaign
–Jim Webb