For The Dems, Silence Is Golden
By Monte Kuligowski (09/03/04)
The major media ignored the existence of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth for as long as they possibly could, but holding their collective breath didn’t make them go away. The Swift Vets held a press conference way back in May of this year, but none of the major networks came. Because the media were wearing partisan glasses and didn’t see a story to report, the vets turned to private donations to get their message out.
When the media finally did get around to reporting, the focus was not on the claims of the vets, but on the legitimacy of the group itself. Ironically, the same media that refused to air their story later complained that the group was being funded by a wealthy Republican who votes for Bush.
Remarkably, the eye-witness testimonies of the vets were not investigated and reported by the media. Of the 254 vets who have attested to John Kerry’s unsuitability for the presidency, the media found only two major stories to report on. Both stories, incidentally, would seem to help the Kerry ticket. The first to make the headlines was the story of Swift Vet, George Elliott, who allegedly recanted his position, only to return to it again. The second was the story where military records tend to prove that shots were being fired during a heroic Kerry moment even though Swift Vet, Larry Thurlow, says Kerry didn’t act until the shooting stopped. But even if you conclude, for the sake of argument, that one vet is ambivalent and the other was mistaken, what about the other 252 eye-witness testimonies? What does this rather large group of veterans have to say about Kerry? Does it matter?
If they are just a legion of liars, certainly this will become apparent. If they are honorable men, with real concerns about a potential Kerry presidency, that will instead emerge. But if their voices are suppressed, the public will only know what the Kerry campaign and the Democrat-controlled media think of them.
Senator Kerry’s response to the Swift Vets was interesting. Rather than addressing their specific claims, he immediately threatened to sue any broadcast station that would air the dreaded “attack ads.” The Kerry campaign, with the major media’s assistance, ingeniously switched the burden from Kerry to Bush. One would expect that the burden would be on Kerry to release his military/medical records to disprove the veterans’ claims. Instead, the burden of denouncing the false and mean attack ads was transferred to Bush.
I’m sure the Bush advisors have some calculated reasons for the president’s taking the high road and criticizing the message of the Swift Vets, but what they are is beyond me.
It seems that the underlying issue is simply a matter of free speech. If any one group has earned the right to speak out, it is a group of decorated veterans who have risked their lives for their country. If John Kerry earned the right to make his military service the centerpiece of his campaign by virtue of serving four months in Vietnam, haven’t these vets earned the right to question Kerry’s motives and betrayal of his country? If Kerry earned the right to protest the war by smearing his comrades, haven’t these vets earned the right to protest Kerry?
And, if it is politically correct for Bush to denounce the veterans, shouldn’t Kerry denounce the fire breathing Michael Moore? I’ve never heard reports of Bush accusing Kerry of allowing Mr. Moore to do his “dirty work.” And I’ve never heard reports of Kerry denouncing the shameful conspiracy theories and extremely lengthy attack ads – seen in theaters everywhere.
The differences between the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and real bona fide attack groups, like MoveOn.org, etc., should be apparent to all; but apparently they’re not.
The most obvious difference is that the Swift Vets served with John Kerry in Vietnam. Although most of the vets weren’t on the same boat as Kerry, this much reported piece of information is a red herring. They were in the same coastal division, serving together. They had contact with Kerry. They knew Kerry. They saw Kerry. They are eye-witnesses to their specific claims regarding Kerry.
Real attack and smear groups, like those attacking Bush, do not have members who claim to know the president. They haven’t served with the president. They haven’t had contact with him. They don’t know him. They aren’t eye-witnesses to anything. The not-so-distant media frenzy over the president’s service in the National Guard wasn’t initiated by 250 fellow guardsmen – or any, for that matter – who had served with President Bush. That full-blown media crusade began with a leak from the Democratic Party, which incidentally went nowhere. At that time, the burden was on Bush to release his military records, which he did. There was no pressure on his political opponents to denounce the attack reporting of the anti-Bush media.
One of the only similarities between the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the
Democratic front groups is that the former is supported by rich Republicans, while the others are supported by rich Democrats. But shame on the media for making the funding of the Swift Vets an issue after they refused to report their story. And shame on the Democrats for attempting to silence their enemies rather than answering their very real and important concerns about Senator Kerry.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Monte Kuligowski
