Redefining 'Swiftboating' and Rewriting History »
Posted By SonOfTheMask 1 year, 6 months ago in Arts & EntertainmentIf the words "swift" and "boat" must be combined and turned into a verb, then let us insist on its proper use...The word means, or should mean, the exposure of a fraudulent autobiography of one seeking political office or public influence.
Read Full Story at americanthinker.com »
218 Views Share Story 51 Comments Report
Submitted By:
SonOfTheMask
"I often wish that I could rid the world of the tyranny of facts. What are facts but compromises? A fact merely marks the point ...
Other Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 217 of 243 Comments (view all)
-
Neutral
SonOfTheMask1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA: "The Left is now redefining and, therefore, misusing the term swiftboating, and this misuse has become one of the many notable aspects of the 2008 presidential campaign. Democratic candidates and their partisans in the blogosphere use this word to mean smearing their candidates for public office with lies and innuendo."
That is a very accurate statment judging by numerous comments I see here on Propeller.
Reply-
Neutral
pc251 year, 6 months ago
-
Neutral
ETproductions1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The whole premise of this article is that John Kerry lied about his Vietnam service and that the Repug 527 behind the Swiftboating told the truth. Since that is a total reversal of the Naval records and of the testimony of the crew Kerry commanded, the article itself gives swiftboating the exact opposite definition from that most Americans understand it to be.
A new low for the New RepugniCon slander machine.
Reply -
Neutral
sotiris-k1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Last i checked Kerry didnt lose because of swiftboating. He 'lost' because of the cheating (astronomical probability to not be so)that took place in Ohio and most importantly because a segment of the US population has engaged in mental paralysis for the last 20yrs ignoring world trends, abandoning science and logic, embracing the most hypocritical version of religion man has ever created (betraying the true core of Christ's teachings 100x over) and celebrating short term cannibalism of society for profit as the neoamerican dream.
Anyone here who has the bloody audacity to claim that a jackass that avoided to serve for his country during war and has since sacrificed sons and husbands and treasure across the US to empower his oil sob friends worldwide stands above he who risked life, to the point to believe that swiftboating campaign of 2004 actually performed a service deserves the full misery history will remember GWB with and those traitors that enabled him. 2008 will turn it all!
Reply -
Neutral
jordan111 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I find it rather humorous that a political affiliation that has so ardently attempted to redefine our language would be submitting this. You know what I mean; Liberal, Patriotism, Rule of Law, Family Values.....& so on. Me thinks ya'll are projecting there, sport.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
SonOfTheMask1 year, 6 months ago
-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
At least Kerry saw combat in Vietnam, unlike Dick Cheney and GW Bush. I'll take Kerry's military record over GW Bush's and Dick Cheney's ANY day of the week.
Here is an investigation by Gerald Lechliter, a "registered Independent" and "retired Army colonel with active Marine enlisted service."
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/opinion/lec...
"The pay records released by the White House this past winter prove Bush received unauthorized fraudulent payments for inactive duty training. Bush failed to meet the statutory and regulatory fiscal year satisfactory participation requirement. Bush's superios in the National Guard failed to take required regulaotry actions when Bushed missed required training and failed to take his flight physical. Bush did not meet the requirements for satisfactory participation from 1972 to 1973."
Reply -
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/02...
"In 1972, George W. Bush walked away from the Texas Air National Guard. He skipped required weekend drill sessions, for more than a year, and did not take a mandatory annual physical exam, which resulted in his being grounded. According to his own discharge papers, there is no record that he did any training after May 1972. Indeed, there is no record that Bush performed any Guard service in Alabama at all. In 2000, a group of veterans offered a $3,500 reward for anyone who could confirm Bush's Alabama Guard service. Of the estimated 600 to 700 Guardsmen who were in Bush's unit, not a single person came forward.
In 1973 Bush returned to his Houston Guard unit, but in May of that year his commanders could not complete his annual officer effectiveness rating report because, they wrote, 'Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of the report.'
Reply -
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/02...
"Based on those records, as well as interviews with Texas Air National guardsmen, the Globe raised serious questions as to whether Bush ever reported for duty at all during 1973. Republicans clearly want to quarantine the issue of Bush's service and have it labeled as outside the bounds of acceptable public discourse."
The Swift Boat Veterans violated FEC campaign finance laws and as part of their conciliation agreement, agreed to pay a fine of $299,500, cease all operations, and donate the remainder of their funds to veterans injured in the Iraq war.
http://eqs.nictusa.com/eqsdocs/000058ED.pdf
"On December 2006, the FEC accepted the signed conciliation agreement and civial penalty submitted by the Wfit Boat Veterans and POWs for Truth in settlement of violations of 2 U.S.C. 433, 434, 441a(f), and 441b(a), provisions of the FEC Act of 1971, as amended."
Reply -
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Besides, several Republicans, like John McCain, defended Kerry's record:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/2004080...
"The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which gets most of its funding from Texas Republican activists, launched a TV spot in three battleground states yesterday repeatedly charging Kerry with lying about his Vietnam service.
'I think the ad is dishonest and dishonorable,' John McCain told the AP. 'None of these individuals served on the boat (Kerry) commanded. Many of his crew have testified to his courage under fire. I think John Kerry served honorably in Vietnam. It was the same kind of deal that was pulled on me [in 2000].'"
Even the Bush administration came to Kerry's defense:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=...
"The Bush campaign never has and will never question John Kerry's service in Vietnam."
Reply
-
-
Neutral
SonOfTheMask1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA: "In 2004 the Swift Vets made them pay a little for that otherwise free pass by setting a small part of the record straight. This is the meaning of swiftboating, and we should demand more of it. All we have to lose are the dishonest autobiographies from our self-serving political class."
Now that rings true!! Thank you, Mr. Wickham, for a nice commentary and I'll be adding this book to my "must read" list.
Reply -
Neutral
stephen-johnson1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If there was ever a case of "swiftboating", it was Dan Rather trying to use a forged document to sink a sitting president during an election year.
John O'Neill founded the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth for one reason - he and over 200 of his fellow sailors didn't want John Kerry to be Commander in Chief. Period.
Reply-
Neutral
CRYMTYPHON1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are exactly right.
Keeping Kerry from being president was what it was about.
They had hated him for years speaking against the war.
It was not about the truth. It was about politics. It was political advertising, from haters, to those willing to believe the words of hate.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
hamy1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No. Those veterans were used by a political machine to smear a candidate without facts. It is you who is rewriting history.
And Dan Rather didn't smear the president. He didn't need to. The president has done a pretty good job defining himself as the worst president in history. Dan Rather merely reported the information he had. Same as Bush did with the unsubstantiated evidence that got us into this invasion. So, if Rather is guilty, so is Bush. They committed the same crime.
Reply-
Neutral
stephen-johnson1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"No. Those veterans were used by a political machine to smear a candidate without facts."
Are we to believe that over 200 veterans allowed themselves to be duped by a "political machine?" That they had no legitimate grievance against Kerry - a man who likened US troops in Viet Nam to the "hordes of Genghis Khan?" Who wrote this book -
that had on its cover a tasteless parody of soldiers raising the flag on Iwo Jima?
"And Dan Rather didn't smear the president. He didn't need to."
Then why was he demoted, then terminated?
You're doing a good job of rewriting history yourself.
Reply -
Neutral
SonOfTheMask1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
hamy, what is your specific response to these points brought up in the article?
-Kerry's dubious "wounds" and purple hearts
-his night under attack in Cambodia that could not have happened,
-the "heroic" rescue on the Bay Hap River that had little in common with the account of Kerry's colleagues or the physical evidence,
-Kerry's highly publicized and false claims of wide-spread genocide perpetrated by American soldiers in Vietnam,
-the usefulness of his 1971 Senate testimony to the North Vietnamese as a device to demoralize American POWs.
And that's before the whole "did he/didn't he" throw his medals away issue. I want to hear what you have to say on those specific points and why you think that Senator Kerry still refuses to divulge all his records on this matter.
Reply -
Neutral
pc251 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you mean this information......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i87cZ3Og6ts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSwSDvgw5Uc&feat...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ps9j22G9HLE&feat...
Reply -
Neutral
RedRiverJ1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media/jan-june06...
FTA:Rather's reputation suffered after a "60 Minutes" story about President Bush's Vietnam-era service in the National Guard. That story relied on documents that ultimately could not be authenticated.
FTA
Why is Rather leaving CBS?
KEN AULETTA, Columnist, The New Yorker: His contract was up at the end of this year, and they couldn't negotiate a new one. I mean, he basically was pushed out. He wanted to stay. He probably shouldn't have wanted to stay, since they had given a clear signal for a period of time they wanted him to go.
He lost his credibility...........
Reply -
Neutral
injest1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hamy
"No. Those veterans were used by a political machine to smear a candidate without facts. It is you who is rewriting history."
Hamy your claiming that the 1971 WSI never happened?
That John Kerry never testified before congress?
That Al Hubbard actually was an Air Force officer and served in Vietnam and was injured in Vietnam was true?
Reply -
anioklyComment removed: Spammer
-
-
Neutral
Grrr1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.factcheck.org/republican-funded_grou...
Ad features vets who claim Kerry "lied" to get Vietnam medals. But other witnesses disagree -- and so do Navy records.
Summary
A group funded by the biggest Republican campaign donor in Texas began running an attack ad Aug. 5 in which former Swift Boat veterans claim Kerry lied to get one of his two decorations for bravery and two of his three purple hearts.
But the veterans who accuse Kerry are contradicted by Kerry's former crewmen, and by Navy records.
Reply-
Neutral
Grrr1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
cont'd
One of the accusers says he was on another boat "a few yards" away during the incident which won Kerry the Bronze Star, but the former Army lieutenant whom Kerry plucked from the water that day backs Kerry's account. In an Aug. 10 opinion piece in the conservative Wall Street Journal, Rassmann (a Republican himself) wrote that the ad was "launched by people without decency" who are "lying" and "should hang their heads in shame."
And on Aug. 19, Navy records came to light also contradicting the accusers. One of the veterans who says Kerry wasn't under fire was himself awarded a Bronze Star for aiding others "in the face of enemy fire" during the same incident.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
CactusAnnie1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I have a lot of admiration for these courageous men, the so called "swift boaters". They dared to stand up and tell the truth, set the record straight, although it would have been more comfortable for all of them to sit back and keep quiet.
These wonderful citizens dared be honest in the face of the very powerful, "big-money", political propaganda machine.
I salute them and am grateful for their integrity in coming forward with the truth. They knew the repercussions and withstood the vicious attacks of the power hungry, unscrupulous lot they were coming up against.
Men of honor are abhorred by the puppet-masters.
Reply-
Neutral
UnusualSuspect1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I have no admiration or respect for anyone who deliberately tries to smear another when not knowing, or distorting, the facts. This goes for those against Kerry, and those against Bush.
The original swiftboaters certainly didn't "dare to be honest"; all they wanted to do was smear someone, facts or no facts, and help that person lose an election, plain and simple.
That doesn't show integrity...that shows cowardice...
Reply -
-
Neutral
cushi1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sit on your cactus, Annie! They are a bunch of lying cowards who deliberately sought to destroy the reputation and honorable service of a war hero. They suck and so do you for siding with them when you know they are a bunch of perverters of the truth!
Reply -
baddad59Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Neutral
MajJohn1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This was one of the best articles I've read in a long time and made my day. Kerry was a hero only in the sense that one is a hero when he gets through basic training and buys a blue scarf in the PX. You know a hero by what others say about you. It was fortunate that he was able to pluck someone out of the water but the guy might have not ended up there if Kerry's boat hadn't boogied from the area and then returned after the shooting stopped. And his "wounds", we heard from those who treated him, and they even wondered why he bothered to go on sick call for mere scratches. So he could put himself in for the purple heart(that's what you did back then, especially if you ha no scruples)) in order to go home.
Reply -
-
mackiemesserComment removed: Retracted by user18 Replies
-
Neutral
Howtogo1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It was an interesting article. The term "swiftboat" does seem to apply to trying to stop someone from obtaining a position, by undercutting them. The explanation of what "switfboating" is in the article probably is more accurate however. Dan Rather a Marine! No way in hell could he have sold that with real Marines everywhere! As for John Kerry, he is a lot like O.J. Simpson in style. O.J. Is still looking for the killer of his wife and Goldman on golf courses in Florida! Kerry is still trying to disprove what the "swiftboat" vets said about him (nothing disproved yet)!
Reply -
Neutral
CRYMTYPHON1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The ease with which this country will allow slander and vomit to be tossed onto decorated soldiers is a sign that left and right, and center are unworthy of those who fight.
John McCain is a hero. Anyone of the left or right who plays with his record, can face a host of angry dead American soldiers when they finaly die in their cozy civilian beds.
John Murtha; hero. soldier. decorated. And doesn't give a rip what you think about his left-wing smile.
John Kerry is a decorated combat veteran and anyone, whether they are a chicken-hawk draftdodger like the writer of this article, or even a fellow soldier like the swiftboaters, dishonor what service is about, by spreading this type of slanderous fluff.
Americans know advertising. We know what we see on TV. We saw a really repulsive ad campaign to discredit a soldier.
For better, for worse, that is what 'swift-boating' is and will remain now.
Reply -
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: Retracted by user10 Replies
-
Neutral
ProudBlueTexan1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"The Left is now redefining and, therefore, misusing the term swiftboating, and this misuse has become one of the many notable aspects of the 2008 presidential campaign."
Jesus!!!! Lolololololol!!!!! This is the most outrageous sentence I've read in my entire life. Neocons outdid themselves with this one statement. Hooooeeee.... makes me prouder than ever to be on the Left.
Man o man................
Reply -
-
Neutral
markoller1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
John Kerry lost by about 59 million votes to 62 million votes, and he had an excellent chance of winning early in the election. One thing is certain, anyone could have beaten George W. Bush except John Kerry. I would rather vote for Aldrich Ames than John Kerry. Now that I know the truth about the 9/11 terrorism, I have to admit that John Kerry is still an improvement on Bush, Cheney and the neocons.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
wildman65571 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am too young to have served in Vietnam. However, I do know some thing about how military decorations are awarded, especially the Silver Star. You don't just walk into your commander's office and say, "Oh gee, I rescued a bunch of people today and you ought to give me a Silver Star."
No, an investigation is launched at the recommendation of your commander. The investigation consists of, at the very least, a statement by any officers involved about what happened and whether they have any counter evidence. Therefore the swift boaters either where not involved, lied then or lied now. If they were not involved, then they are liars for claiming they know something they don't. If they lied then or now then they are also liars.
So do you want to believe those liars? Or better, the 100% of the enlisted men who were actually there and supported Kerry. The swift boaters may have served with honor in Vietnam but they have put shame upon themselves in the last election
Reply-
Neutral
SonOfTheMask1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This guy would beg to differ with you, wildman6557:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Craig/roberts1.htm
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
wildman65571 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I read the article again and he did mention attacking into an ambush... Sorry, the first read was quick...
If you can find an enlisted man who was a witness and supported the swift boaters, I will believe you. Otherwise, the article merely gives an explanation of how what the swift boaters said happened, could have happened. Do you have an enlisted eye witness??
Reply-
baddad59Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Neutral
truthiness1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am going to have to disagree with this definition of swiftboating and agree slightly more with the left (although, frankly I dislike making verbs out of nouns relevant to historical event)
swiftboating: the retelling of a political opponents version of their biography in an attempt to defame them with out the ability to provide corroborating evidence. AKA: slander
Reply -
-
Neutral
wildman65571 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hmmm, no one was able to find an enlisted man who supported the swift boaters. Sounds like the swift boaters and their supporters are liars.
See:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/24/politics/camp...
Reply -
Neutral
NoWayMan1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the writer of this article is three steps behind the times. and its ridiculous for him to say what he thinks swiftboating should mean, because its simply not up to him how words take shape and meaning in the popular culture. its up to popular culture.
swiftboating has definitely become part of the american lexicon, and it is synonomous with the GOP and their smearing of candidates by using lies and innuendo.
that's what swiftboating means now, and that's just the way it is.
so when we all see lies and innuendos coming from the right in an attempt to discredit a candidate from the left, we all now say that the right is doing some swiftboating.
funny how that has come back to bite the GOP in the arse.
Reply -
-
anioklyComment removed: Spammer
-
-
-
Neutral
thoughtforsale1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Interesting article! 'Swiftboating´ is not a new and also no exclusively American phenomenon. It always depends on a countries history, of which parts of his personal life a politician wants to make a bit more profit or what episodes he would like to erase. After World War II, it was important for every German politician to show a credible distance to the NS-regime. He somehow had to have an "alibi", why he wasn´t and couldn´t even have been envolved. This also was the origin of some "black holes" in some person´s curriculum vitae and made it even possible to attack a chancelor (K. G. Kiesinger).
Reply -
HanymanComment removed: Retracted by user
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.