The Swift Boat Vets story is turning into a fascinating Rorsharch test, not only for the electorate but for the media. It's as though the story is being reported in two parallel universes.
In one Universe, the story is all over the blogosphere, talk radio, right-wing pundits and now Fox News. The emphasis is on the points raised by the Swift Boat Vets, whether they are indeed factual (Beldar, Hugh Hewitt, Just One Minute and Instapundit have been relentless in researching the various detailed claims and counterclaims swirling about), and if so how Kerry will respond. These groups are not interested in exploring the financing of Swift Boat Vets for Truth, nor its connections to Republican mouthpieces like media consultant Merrie Spaeth. Meanwhile, the Bush White House sits back and watches it all unfold, limiting its criticism to the role and conduct of 527 groups in general.
In the Universe next door are the Kerry campaign and left-wing pundits and media watchdogs, whose talking points paint the Swift Boat Vets as a phony front for a smear campaign, and the book authors as partisan hacks, not to be taken seriously. The Kerry people are aiming the threat of lawsuits at TV stations in markets where the Swift Boat ad is scheduled to be aired. This Universe is also inhabited by mainstream media, who relentlessly ran down every available lead on Bush's missing months of service in the Alabama National Guard. However, they now seem to be less interested in the particulars of the Swift Boat Vets and their claims. To the extent that they do report on the story, the narrative follows one of four tracks: John McCain's denunciation of the Swifties; the nature of dirty tricks in campaigns; what Viet Nam vets think about this (opinion is divided over Kerry's service but no attempt is made to quantify the pro and con); and how long it's going to take before we put the Viet Nam war behind us. A recent Nightline report managed to cover all four tracks, while sidestepping any attempt to ask Kerry to refute the charges that he lied about significant aspects of his Viet Nam service. Nor is there any call by the media for Kerry to release all of his military records, something he has not done to date.
The whole situation is a bizzaro-world replay of the uproar over "Fahrenheit 9/11" in June. Then as well, we had the scurrilous charges against a political leader, attended by bitter controversy. One side objected to the showing of what they considered to be an unfair and partisan screed, while the other side invoked free speech and encouraged everyone to see it, consider the facts presented and draw their own conclusions. The Democrats claimed that Moore was not affiliated with their candidate, but enthusiastically promoted his film and treated him as a conquering hero at their convention.
Now of course, the shoe is on the other foot, but with a few differences. Michael Moore was a darling of Big Media and a bete noir of the Right. Whereas Moore was fawned over, the Swifties are as welcome by the mainstream media as a fart in church. Whereas last time the pundits of the right (and a few from the left like Chistopher Hitchens) attempted to counter the Moore love-fest, often with point-by-point rebuttals of the narrative presented in the film, this time around the mainstream media are diligently digging into the background and financing of the Swiftvets and forthrightly questioning their agenda - all the while avoiding examining the factual basis of their arguments, as laid out on their website and in the advance chapter from O'Neill's book.
I first posted about Swift Boat Veterans for Truth following their initial press conference in May. At first, they received almost no attention, but that post has to date received more hits than anything else on this blog, mostly as a result of Web searches. After the release of the Swiftvets TV ad, interest surged on the Internet, and is starting to be reflected in the mainstream media outlets. The dust has yet to settle on this, and it may be some time before it does. But a few points seem to be established beyond dispute at this time:
- Swift Vets leader and author John O'Neill is a long-time antagonist of John Kerry, dating back to the Nixon era. O'Neill succeeded Kerry as Captain of his Swift Boat, but did not serve with him. He later confronted Kerry over his charges of atrocities committed by US troops in Viet Nam.
- O'Neill's co-author and friend, John Corsi, has been identified as making denigrating statements in online chat rooms about the Catholic Church and Muslims, as well as questioning whether Kerry is in fact Jewish rather than Catholic. Corsi has ended up publicly apologizing for these remarks, attempting to pass them off as "jokes".
- Out of the 19 Coastal Division 11 Swift Boat officers depicted with Kerry in the "band of brothers" photo frequently shown by his campaign, only one actually supports Kerry and is working for his campaign. Two are deceased, four are neutral and 12 consider Kerry unfit to be Commander in Chief.
- Of the 250-plus Swift Boat Vets opposing Kerry, only one, Steve Gardner, actually served on his Swift Boat under him. However, the Swift Boat Vets group does include all officers under whom Kerry served.
- John Kerry now admits he did not spend Christmas on a secret mission inside Cambodia in 1968, even though according to his 1986 Senate testimony, the event is "seared" in his memory. He now claims he was in fact only "near" Cambodia at that time, though he claims to have been inside Cambodia at other times.
And there's much more to come, as O'Neill's book has as yet not even hit the stands. It would be very easy for Kerry to refute the Swiftvets' charges, by signing the necessary paperwork to release his complete military records. Don't expect that to happen, though. But it will also not be possible for the Kerry campaign or the mainstream media to ignore the story. So the public will read the book, consider the charges regarding Kerry's record, then consider the financing, motives, and credibility of Swift Boat Vets for Truth, and render its collective judgment.
But in the final analysis, this scandal will, for the most part, not change very many minds. People who intend to vote for Kerry will not take the Swiftvets seriously, writing them off as a Republican smear operation. People who are opposed to Kerry will seize every argument and charge advanced by the Swifties to reinforce their belief that Kerry is not presidential material. However, in an election this close, even a small percentage of votes in critical swing states could make a difference. This is the scenario that must be keeping the Kerry campaign awake at night.
UPDATE: Alternet has one of the best and most balanced articles I have read about the Swift Boat Vets controversy, by John Gonzales of the Dallas Observer.
ANOTHER UPDATE: The New York Times and the Washington Post are both registering surprise that this story won't go away and seems to be hitting home with so many people. Beldar chides them for not asking the basic "Five Ws and an H" that are the staple of any Journalism 101 course.
Recent Comments