More on the Christmas in Cambodia kerfuffle

This article is actually quite interesting, and gives both sides of the story. The underlying message: it’s he says/she says, with no hope of resolution. And the debate is so silly — was he in Cambodia or near Cambodia? — it’s obviously an exercise in nitpicking.

What certainly comes across here is that the SBVFT’s animosity, as most of us know, stems not from Kerry’s actions in Vietnam, but the sense that he betrayed his colleagues by turning against the war. The smart ones realized he never betrayed the; he was protesting against the war and its architects — not his fellow fighters.

There’s an interesting wrap-up:, a nonpartisan group that monitors the accuracy of campaign ads, points to the crew members who support Kerry and notes initial funding for the opposition campaign came mainly from a Republican booster in Houston.

But the group added that it can’t definitively say which set of veterans should be believed.

“At this point, 35 years later and half a world away, we see no way to resolve which of these versions of reality is closer to the truth,” the group concluded.

Peter D. Feaver, a political science professor at Duke University who has studied political attitudes of veterans and military members, said the Swift Boat campaign could cost Kerry some support among undecided voters.

But he suggested Democrats want the controversy to continue brewing because it keeps the focus on Kerry’s service in Vietnam and off his tenure in the U.S. Senate, where Republicans want the spotlight.

“The Democrats are very happy to keep that story alive,” Feaver said.

That’s the big irony here. Whether it was January or February or December when John Kerry was at (or near) Cambodia, repeating this story does one thing for most voters: it reminds them that Kerry served and is a decorated war hero. While it reinforces the Kerry-haters’ belief (foolish though it may be) that he’s a liar and a rogue, they thought that before the SBVFT came along. So as I’ve said from day one, it’s a net minus for bush. The only media who are picking up the SBVFT’s spin are the World Net Dailies and other wingnut media, whose readers already know Kerry is the Antichrist anyway.

A big tempest in a teapot, and the only one to emerge from it looking better is Kerry.

The Discussion: 4 Comments

was he in Cambodia or near Cambodia?

Isn’t this a question that was often asked by reporters of the location of the US Army and Air Force during the Viet Nam war?

Just substitue “he” with “they”.

August 15, 2004 @ 10:37 pm | Comment

The only media who are picking up the SBVFT’s spin are the World Net Dailies and other wingnut media

My, my. The LA Times, Boston Globe, and Houston Chronicle are going to be really upset that you’re calling them names.

August 18, 2004 @ 2:13 am | Comment

I just read the LA Times story — they make the SBVFP look mighty silly. The search still shows it’s Frontpage, Worldnet, Newsmax, Washington Times and Washington Dispatch — all to-the-right journals (to put it kindly). Real newspapers, like LAT and Boston Globe have now written about the controversy, but they are not carrying the message, and their articles genreally re-inforce the Kerry position. Read those two linked articles! Thanks for the tip; Kerry is winning on this one for now. It may explode, I don’t know. But for now, the major media are showing the SBVFT as they are — Republican-funded liars determined to destroy Kerry by the most scurrilous means.

August 18, 2004 @ 8:55 am | Comment

If only real life worked that way!

April 7, 2005 @ 3:42 am | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.