What I don't understand is, while Republican cronies are busy focusing on Kerry's Viet Nam records (conveniently leaving out Bush's pampered lack
of), why are Kerry's people not attacking Bush on all the other fronts in which his policies are a disaster? Here's one, the environment:
This administration, in catering to industries that put America's health and natural heritage at risk, threatens to do more damage to our
environmental protections than any other in U.S. history. Here is NRDC's account of what the Bush administration has done and is doing on
(not some biased campaign website)
Isn't the very environment in which we breathe MORE IMPORTANT than things Kerry may or may not have said some 35 yrs ago?
Or, faith based initiatives:
Faith-based policies initiated by President Bush when he served as Texas governor have had adverse consequences for state residents and would serve as
bad models for the nation, a Texas public policy group charged.
Five years into the faith-based initiative in Texas, the program is unregulated, prone to favoritism and co-mingling of funds, and dangerous to the
people it's supposed to serve, representatives of the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund told reporters at a Capitol Hill news conference.
Bush's initiative forced people in need into sectarian programs in which they had to engage in religious activities as a condition of receiving
essential services, Smoot charged. The program also resulted in preferential treatment for religious providers in government contracting, she said.
Can anybody argue that the line between church and state is more blurred now than it has EVER BEEN?
But if we must discuss this SBVfT BS, then we must:
Financing for the organization derives in large part from a Texas fat cat who’s an old, close pal of Karl Rove. The White House, needless to say,
disavows any connection, stating that Mr. Bush never has and never will say anything to dishonor Mr. Kerry’s service.
You’re doubtless also aware that since waking up to the knife at his jugular, Mr. Kerry has called on the publisher of Unfit for Command (Regnery,
home to Laura Ingraham and William F. Buckley Jr.) to pull the book from the shelves, and on the F.E.C. to look into Bush links to the TV
commercials—chances of which are as likely as Ho Chi Minh City changing its name back to Saigon. Mr. Kerry has also accused Mr. Bush of having the
SBVfT "do his dirty work for him," and demanded that the President denounce the group’s activities. Mr. Bush predictably has declined to cooperate,
artfully saying that he wants all soft-money "527 Committee" ads off the air, not just those of SBVfT—a prescription that would hurt Democrats far
more than Republicans. So that’s not going to happen, either. A spokesman for Mr. Bush, meanwhile, has suggested that Mr. Kerry’s unpunctual lather
may be a sign of mental unbalance—precisely what another spokesman hinted about John McCain when he exploded over Bush-supporting ads questioning his
patriotism during the 2000 South Carolina primary. In between hugging Commander-in-Chief Bush and being bussed on the forehead by him, Mr. McCain
himself has likened the SBVfT’s campaign to what was done to him when he ran for President (so has Vietnam triple-amputee Max Cleland, who was
defeated for re-election to the Senate from Georgia under similar circumstances). Mr. McCain branded the SBVfT charges "dishonest and dishonorable"
and echoed Mr. Kerry’s recommendation to Mr. Bush—to zero effect.
Finally, if you read The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe or the Los Angeles Times (unlike, oh, 99 percent or so of the voting
public), you’re cognizant, too, that exhaustive investigation of official U.S. Naval records fails to substantiate a single one of the SBVfT’s major
charges. Instead, the commendations and "after-action reports" in Pentagon archives contradict them—sometimes in words written by those presently
doing the accusing. Ten of the 11 men who sailed in the two boats Mr. Kerry commanded also back their former skipper. The eleventh, a laid-off "home
inspection field manager" named Steven Michael Gardner, is an SBVfT member who accuses Mr. Kerry of repeatedly shying from engaging the enemy. "He
wouldn’t go in there and search," Mr. Gardner told The Boston Globe in March. "That is why I have a negative viewpoint of John Kerry."
What amounts to cowardice in wartime is a damning charge. But there’s one little catch. By Mr. Gardner’s own admission, then-Lt. Kerry threatened to
court-martial him for machine-gunning a sampan from which he thought fire was coming. When the shooting stopped, Mr. Kerry—who’d been in the wheel
house when Mr. Gardner, then others opened up without order—personally inspected the flimsy native craft. No weapons were found, just a woman and the
body of a little boy. "[Mr. Kerry was] screaming at the top of his lungs," Mr. Gardner told The Globe. "‘What the hell do you think you’re
Green Beret Lt. Jim Rassman didn’t think he was being fired at when a mine explosion blew him off Mr. Kerry’s Swift boat; he knew the splashes all
around him were being made by real ammo. "I was sure I was going to die," he said. Then, above him, a long right arm reached out to pull him to
safety; it belonged to John Kerry, who’d been thrown against the wheel house by the blast, which wounded Mr. Kerry’s left arm, according to the
citation that accompanied his Bronze Star. Said Mr. Rassmann: "He saved my life."
Not according to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. They say no one was firing anywhere near Lts. Rassmann and Kerry that day.