Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (62284)	8/21/2004 12:51:28 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793895

This is why the second ad is so good. "It's not something that can be easily or successfully discredited,'' said one party strategist, who requested anonymity because he did not want to be seen as undermining Mr. Kerry's campaign. "It's guys talking about how they felt and you can't discredit someone's description of his own feelings.'' The Times is now admitting that one vet was on Kerry's boat, but they are stll trying to claim the others were somewhere else but with Kerry. is made up of veterans who served in Vietnam, but only one was on the river patrol boat that Mr. Kerry commanded. August 21, 2004 Kerry Is Filing a Complaint Against Swift Boat Group By GLEN JUSTICE and JIM RUTENBERG - NYT WASHINGTON, Aug. 20 - Stepping up a counteroffensive against a veterans group that is attacking his military record, the campaign of Senator John Kerry said on Friday that it was filing a complaint with the Federal Election Commission accusing the organization of violating campaign laws by coordinating its activities with the Bush campaign. Mr. Bush's campaign has denied any connection to the group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, and the White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, accused Mr. Kerry of "losing his cool" over the group's accusation that he lied to get his military decorations in Vietnam. That comment prompted a sharp response from the Kerry campaign. "Mr. McClellan needs to understand that John Kerry is not the type of leader who will sit and read 'My Pet Goat' to a group of second graders while America is under attack," said Stephanie Cutter, a campaign spokeswoman, referring to the president's actions on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. The exchange came on a day when the veterans group unveiled its second anti-Kerry advertisement, and demonstrated how the issue is monopolizing the presidential race. The group, which received some of its initial financing from Republicans with ties to Mr. Bush and his family, is made up of veterans who served in Vietnam, but only one was on the river patrol boat that Mr. Kerry commanded. Many of their claims have been called into question . "We hope the F.E.C. will shut down these ads that are run on behalf of the Bush campaign,'' said Michael Meehan, a Kerry spokesman. He said the campaign planned to file its complaint on Monday. Steve Schmidt, a spokesman for Mr. Bush, called the action frivolous and accused Mr. Kerry of his own violations involving Democratic-leaning groups like the Media Fund and America Coming Together, which have spent tens of millions of dollars to support Mr. Kerry and whose leaders have close ties with his campaign. The Bush campaign and the Republican Party have filed a complaint charging coordination between several groups and Mr. Kerry's campaign. John O'Neill, a leader of the Swift boat group, said the planned complaint was an assault on the free-speech rights of veterans and former prisoners of war. Though campaign finance laws allow advocacy groups to collect large contributions and run ads independently, they are not allowed to coordinate activities or fund-raising with the campaigns or parties. The Kerry complaint will be the second against the Swift boat group. A group of organizations that work to limit money in politics filed one earlier this month. The Federal Election Commission often takes months to resolve enforcement actions. The new commercial that the Swift boat group introduced on Friday features veterans who say that Mr. Kerry's antiwar statements in the early 1970's, when they were being held as prisoners of war by the Vietcong, aided their captors. "John Kerry gave the enemy for free what I and many of my comrades in the North Vietnam prison camps took torture to avoid saying,'' says Paul Galanti, identified on screen as a prisoner of war from January 1966 to February, 1973. Interspersed with their comments is Mr. Kerry's Senate testimony in 1971 recounting accusations of war crimes in Vietnam, involving soldiers who had "raped, cut off ears,'' and "razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan.'' Mr. Kerry's campaign argued that he was relating accusations made by others and that he had since described some of his past remarks as excessive. But some Democrats said privately they feared that this ad would have even more impact than the last, whose charges have not been substantiated. "It's not something that can be easily or successfully discredited,'' said one party strategist, who requested anonymity because he did not want to be seen as undermining Mr. Kerry's campaign. "It's guys talking about how they felt and you can't discredit someone's description of his own feelings.'' The spot will not run until Tuesday, when the group said it would begin broadcasting it in three states. The Democratic National Committee, meanwhile, is running a spot that features General Merrill A. McPeak, who was the Air Force chief of staff during the war in the Persian Gulf in 1991 and who had previously been supportive of Mr. Bush. "Four years ago, I endorsed George Bush for President, but this year I'm voting for John Kerry,'' Gen. McPeak says. "Nothing is more important to me than protecting America. John Kerry has the strength and common sense we need in a commander in chief.'' Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

To: LindyBill who wrote (62284)	8/21/2004 12:54:01 AM
From: gamesmistress	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793895

The Which Blair Project II Roger Simon, rogerlsimon.com It's time for bloggers to watch our backs. I'm not kidding. If the Jayson Blair Scandal resulted in a wholesale reshuffling at The New York Times, where will the Kerry/Swift Boat Vets Scandal lead? One of the most important elections of modern times hangs in the balance and we are in the middle of it. Who'd a thunk it? Certainly not me. But consider this: the Blair Affair was about some extreme neurotic making up stories in a newspaper and getting away with it. Pathetic, but oddly excusable if you think about the nightmare of trying to get a giant paper to bed every night. The partisan obscurantist reaction to the Kerry/Swift Boat affair is completely different because it is deliberate. The mask is off the "impartiality" of the mainstream media as never before. The meetings in the editorial rooms of NYT, WaPo and LAT are not hard to imagine, the coded discussions. A war is on, ladies and gentlemen, and as with most semi-normal people involved in a war, I don't feel particularly comfortable in it - and not, obviously in this case, because I might get shot. I have friends and colleagues at those institutions. I wish them to remain so. But that cannot stop me from telling the truth. They are wrong. Their avoidance of this story was unconscionable. Their treatment of it now... as if the messenger were more important than the message... is worse. If it turns out the Swift Boat Veterans were right in many of their accusations... and there probably will be more, stronger ones, to come... and Kerry does get elected anyway because the truth was blunted... that same truth will come out eventually and we all (on every side of the tetrahedon-like political spectrum)will pay for it.

To: LindyBill who wrote (62284)	8/21/2004 1:09:30 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 793895

Kerry Might Pay Price for Failing to Strike Back Quickly By ADAM NAGOURNEY I read just this far, and started laughing. The ironies of this headline are many and profound. No one in the media, and I mean no one, has spun harder for Kerry, or made him feel more protected by the media, than Adam Nagourney of the New York Times. Wanna know who to blame, Adam? Look in a mirror!

To: LindyBill who wrote (62284)	8/21/2004 2:32:43 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793895

Kerry's "advisers" are in left field...Just 3 comments from this article...there are many such that are there to be made... 1) the first ad was $154,000....the 2nd one won't officially air until Monday. 2) He fails to mention that the "mainstream" media didn't even try to get information on the SBVFT...they weren't very hungry, it would appear. 3) If the rulebook says don't help someone sell their book, then WHY did the mainstream break their necks trying to be the first ones to get to interview any authors of the bash-bush books....i.e. John Dean, Al Franken, Wes Clark, Richard Clarke, Bill Clinton, Hillary, etc etc etc etc.... And I notice that he didn't even mention George Soros and his merry band of "buy a Presidency" men... >>>>In initially holding back, Mr. Kerry's advisers noted that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth had spent a relatively small amount of money on the advertisements, about $500,000. What they apparently failed to calculate was the extent that advertisements featuring other Vietnam veterans, speaking coolly and directly to the camera, would become the subject of television news shows. That was all the more so because the advertisements and the book were released in August, a slow month when news outlets are hungry for any kind of news.<<<<<<<<<< >>>>>A senior Democrat political consultant who is close to the Kerry campaign said: "I think the campaign was slow to respond to this. And with some justification. The rulebook says don't help somebody sell their book. But on this one, it just seemed to take on a life of its own."<<<<<<