Index of /sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles

Since first running this story on Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, so much has happened, it's difficult to keep up with it all. No doubt once I'm finished with this column, there will soon be more shocking developments. Here's what I think about the ads, the liberal media's reaction to them, and (most importantly) what a pussy John Kerry looks like.

Some of the Swiftvets' past praise of Kerry's service is now coming back to haunt them. They should have known going into this that the "mainstream" media (firmly in the Kerry camp) would do all they could to IGNORE the most damaging portions of the ads (and focus only on the contradictions). As I've said before, all the Swiftvets needed to do was run Kerry's own testimony in front of the senate (which is what they're doing now). Going overboard and talking about Kerry's service could backfire (actually, it did have an effect on Kerry's poll numbers, and it's thrown him off his game). Kerry's so busy attacking the Swiftvets, he doesn't have time to brag about his plan to end the Iraq war through aggressive grovelling (and his lying about the economy has come to a grinding halt).

Two weeks ago Kerry's limp-wristed team tried to "disprove" what the Swiftvets were saying by smearing one of their members. They pointed to several posts made by Jerome Corsi at Free Republic (which they say proved that he was a "bigot"). Again, never take the left's word at face value. Most of the things Corsi said ("The pope is senile," "The Catholic church is run by pedophiles who cover up for other pedophiles," and "Islam is the religion of peace, but only if you put women in burquas and kill infidels") is absolutely true. What is wrong with these statements? The pope IS senile. The Catholic church IS run by pedophiles. And (real) Muslims DO put women into burquas and kill infidels. The only thing Corsi said that I disagree with was that Chelsea Clinton is fat and ugly (or something to that effect). Yes, I made fun of Chelsea's looks in my Dog Face Horsey Face Awards, but the truth is she has turned out to be quite moderately not unattractive (see, I can admit when I'm wrong).

Today the Kerry team filed a complaint with the FEC. Well boo-fucking-hoo! What a crybaby. The democrats have been running millions of dollars of attack ads against Bush (using their surrogates such as the Media Fund - which is run by Kerry's former campaign manager). They've had MoveOn.org calling Bush "Hitler," they've had Michael Moore's bullshit movie (which received virtually no critical analysis in the press, but was thoroughly debunked on the internet), and now that it's happening to them, Kerry cries like a fucking baby (with colic, I might add). Some "war hero."

Does anyone else see the irony of a man who has adopted Michael Moore's movie as the basis for his campaign claiming that Bush is using his "surrogates" to do his dirty work? Remember the "Bush just sat there for seven minutes" bullshit? A truly objective press would have revealed that Kerry "just sat there" for FORTY minutes. And if Kerry wants to go after the Swiftvets, he can run counter-ads or sue them for libel. Instead, he's crying to the FEC (which I believe the Bush campaign did earlier in the year, and got a big fat goose egg). Good luck, Senator.

Another thing that Kerry can't deny is the photograph he has used in his own ads, talking about his so-called "Band of brothers" who served with him in Vietnam. He claims that they all "support" his candidacy. You can see the photo at the Swiftvets site. Point your cursor over it, and you'll see how all of Kerry's "supporters" (except for two) disappear. This is what influences the general public (not complex explanations of who did what to win which medal). And, when the first Swiftvet ad came out, the DNC and their media puppets immedately said that the Swiftvets against Kerry never served with him. Really? Then why has Kerry been showing that same photo in his ads? I'm looking for the truth. But I'd also like some consistency out of the media and the Democrats (for once).

This week it was revealed that Larry Thurlow (one of the Swiftvets who claimed Kerry never came under fire when he pulled Rassmann out of the Bay Hap River), HIMSELF received a Bronze Star (for coming under fire, in the same incident). I have to admit, his explanation does sound reasonable (that he was under the impression that he received the star for preventing a ship from going under after it hit a mine, and that the action report was written by liar John F. Kerry). Is it true? How could I possibly know?

Another incident (which if true, would SINK the Kerry campaign) is related to the Bronze Star story above. Kerry bragged in the closing moments of his convention speech that after an explosion (and while under fire), Jim Rassmann was knocked overboard. According to Kerry, five boats fled the scene (including his, which is purpotedly what CAUSED Rassmann to be thrown overboard in the first place). Then, like the true Rambo he is, Kerry was the only man who came back. He then plucked Rassmann out of the water and saved his life. If Kerry's version of this story is true, then he is a "war hero" to some extent (or at least WAS one until he stabbed his fellow soldiers in the back by turning against them).

However, the Swiftvets claim (and it has been confirmed to a limited degree) that NONE OF THE BOATS fled the area (EXCEPT Kerry's). Then, Kerry turned back around to pick up Rassmann. With another boat just seconds away, Kerry was first to reach his fellow soldier and pluck him out of the water. According to Swiftvets, even if Kerry hadn't pulled Rassmann out of the river, someone else would have. This incident is the focal point for Kerry's entire campaign. Even if it's true, he's still unfit to lead this country (based upon the issues alone). However, if it's false, he SHOULD be laughed out of town in disgrace. I'm going to go with my instincts and say that Kerry lied about this one. I could be wrong (and if I am, I'll admit it). But this fits Kerry's pattern of projectionism like a glove. If Kerry was the only one to run away, it would be just like him to say that everyone else ran away.

What really turns my stomach is that Kerry is now making threats that if Bush doesn't stop the Swiftvets ads (although he can't) he (I'm assuming he means his minions at the Media Fund, although he's not supposed to admit it) is going to "bring up questions about Bush's national guard service." Oooooh. How scary... John Kerry is going to bring up what he (and Terry McAuliffe, MorOn.org, Michael Moore, and every other liberal democrat) already talked about non-stop this past February. This "story" was practically run on a continuous loop for a month (up until the Abu Ghraib photos surfaced, then they became the new Willy Hornton).

So what CAN Kerry do? Other than file lawsuits and cry, he can't do a goddamn thing. Why? BECAUSE THE DEMOCRAPS HAVE ALREADY THROWN EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN AT BUSH. Bush has been called an "Election stealer," "Hitler," "The real terrorist," "A Nazi," a "Miserable failure," and hundreds of other unflattering (and downright shameful) things. Unless they've got photographs of George Bush creating Osama bin Laden out of spare parts in his basement, there is NOTHING they can do that they haven't already done. They politicized the war on terror (in early 2002, when Hillary held up the "Bush Knew" headline like the cunt she is). They have demoralized our troops, debased this great country, and have gleefully joined in the chorus of "America Sucks" with our enemies. Fucking traitors. So "Bring it on" dumbfucks!

Again, I've never been convinced that what all of the Swiftvets are saying is 100% true. But at this point, I don't care. The last straw was today when Kerry's legal team told the publisher of "Unfit for Command" to pull the book. Here we have a member of the U.S. Senate, who doesn't have the balls to stand up to criticism, openly calling for limitations on free speech. This isn't "censorship," but it is shameful that an elected official would act like such a coward. If what's in the book isn't true, he can file a lawsuit against John O'Neill. Instead, Kerry calls on the publisher to limit what you or I should be able to read. Just for that, I have purchased TWO copies of "Unfit for Command." I honestly had no intention of buying the book, but I don't take this shit lightly.

Don't bother going to Barnes and Noble. They didn't have the book. Whether they didn't want to stock it, they sold out already, or they didn't think it would sell, their clerks were thoroughly unhelpful, and I'm done with them. I'm tired of socially retarded clerks giving shitty customer service. If you're going to buy the book, get it through Amazon. I've never had a female Amazon.com clerk (with a Three Stooges Moe haircut, no makeup, and Indian beads around her neck) make a snide comment about what people read. Why? Because Amazon doesn't have clerks (in case you haven't noticed).

Finally, I STILL haven't seen a Swiftvets ad on television (other than pieces of it during the news). On the other hand, I've seen that goddamn Media Fund ad about 20 times (no exaggeration). So, I'm doing something I never thought I'd do - I'm contributing money to Swiftvets. I WANT THEIR NEW AD TO BE SEEN BY EVERY UNDECIDED VOTER IN AMERICA. That is all. Oh, and Senator Kerry - you might want to cut back on the Androgel. You're starting to lose it.