What can/should Kerry do to clear his name?

[Toots]

We know here at DU that the Swift boat LIARS were just that LIARS. We know Kerry has nothing to be ashamed of but I talk to many people who say they would have voted for Kerry but his military past. I ask what they mean and all I ever get is where there is that much smoke there must be some fire. They were very successful in clouding up the water just enough to raise some doubts. Kerry needs to do something if not for him but for the next por sap that tries to run for office and gets hit with the same treatment. He also needs to hold the Media to some accountability for promoting those bastards as news. Could he, should he, sue O'Neil and the rest of those political hacks.

[UdoKier]

1. It's too late to clear his name.

Not for the Swifty lies, but for throwing the last election. I don't trust that he ever wanted to win. I'm not sure that his ineptness in running his campaign was accidental.

Either way, I will not support another Kerry run in 2008, even if he gets the nomination. I might vote for him as the lesser of 2 evils, but I won't campaign for him in any fashion.

Sorrry.

[blm]

12. Question - Why did BushInc find it necessary to rig machine vote, slander,

distort records, create the SwiftvetLiars, and put their mediawhores into 24/7 overdrive if Kerry was such a bad candidate who was already under their direction to throw the campaign?

Couldn't Kerry just have easily thrown at least ONE debate? Instead he decisively won all three.

[UdoKier]

18. No, Bush decisively LOST all three.

How could Kerry help but win against that?

But it was very telling that in the 2nd debate, he was handed the chance to explain his $87 bil "flip-flop", and instead of explaining that there were two separate spending bills, (the first of which made loans to Iraq rather than aid paid for by the US taxpayer, which BUSH threatened to VETO,) he simply blew it off and said "I may have spoken poorly, but Bush was less than honest, blah blah blah."

That issue was a SLAM DUNK. He was being told by tons of supporters like me to CLARIFY that shit. It was NOT above people's heads, but he chose to leave the flip-flop meme out there. If he wanted to win, why did he hire perennial loser Bob Shrum?

To hell with him.

[blm]

26. Bush decisively lost all 3 to Gore, too, but that didn't stop the media

from spinning it favorably for him.

Kerry HAD to win SO decisively that not even the mediawhores could spin it for Bush as they were more than ready to do.


BTW...did you answer why Bush had to rig machines, create Swiftliars, and lie and cheat so much if Kerry was already taking a dive for his S&B buddy?

How come the S&B didn't stop Kerry from exposing BCCI and IranContra when it led to the closing down of BCCI which was their international conduit for their war-profiteering arm and, with more support from his party and the media could have led to impeachment of both Reagan and Poppy Bush?

[UdoKier]

30. And yet there was no impeachment, just pardons from Poppy

And Kerry wasn't the only person who worked to expose Iran-Contra.

I don't blame that disappointment on Kerry. But he has disappointed so many time in the last year I can't help but suspect either his loyalty or that he has no motivation whatsoever - and why should he? It's not his job that's being shipped overseas...

[blm]

37. Kerry started looking into IranContra and it was a year before

anyone else in Congress chipped in to help him. And then the senior Dems pushed him out of the committee because Poppy Bush didn't think he was being fair.

And if Kerry had more elected Democrats supporting him nationwide while he was working on BCCI and an honest press corps doing its job, both Reagan and ESPECIALLY Poppy Bush would have been impeached. Kerry was doing the job of ten lawmakers. Imagine if more had helped him, instead of worrying about the press calling them conspiracy theorist nuts like they did to Kerry.

Or just imagine if Kerry had a network of internet activists at the time. Hell, most folks so active in recent years haven't a clue how serious BCCI was or how it relates to everything that's going on in the world today with BushInc. Imagine if they did.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

48. I think you have some major personal issues. You seem bound and...

...determined to pin something on Kerry, but you have yet to come up with anything concrete.

Here's the deal...the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative Branches are under the control of the rightwing branch of the GOP.

The media is also under their control because major conservative corporations that support the GOP also own the media.

The military is also under their control as well as the intelligence community.

National, state, and local police forces are also under their control.

And to top it all off, they also control the voting process to include the voting machines.

Do you STILL want to ask questions about Kerry??

[UdoKier]

53. Everything you say is true.

But I am 100% certain that the democratic party is riddled with republican/government/military-industrial complex operatives. I'm not certain that Kerry is one, but I have suspicions, and no way to verify them.

You would be fair in suspecting me of being one of them for questioning Kerry. That's the sad state we are in, where we can't even trust our "allies".


BTW, none of the facts you cited have any bearing on Kerry's sincerity or lack thereof.

It's like Mike Malloy said the other day "I wake up every day dreading to turn on the news and see that Dennis Kucinich has taken a position at Halliburton.

If democratic politicians like Biden with the bankruptcy bill or Hillary with IWR would stop screwing democrat voters over so often, and stop caving in to the Repugs on EVERYTHING, maybe we could trust them a bit more.

[libhill]

2. Maybe

He should change his story, tell everyone that he was in the National Guard and went a.w.o.l. Then he can be accepted as a real hero, just like Shrub. As opposed to being just a garden variety combat veteran who was actually wounded and decorated. How unimpressive.

[undeterred]

3. He doesn't need to do anything to clear his name

People who want to know the truth already know it, and those that don't want to know the truth wont believe it anyway.

[rateyes]

4. Anyone who would vote against Kerry because of his

military past, and pull a lever for BUSH despite his military past, is an idiot. That's a load of crap.

[UdoKier]

7. It's not his military past that bugs me.

It's his utter failure to address it, as well as his pathetic handling of the "flip-flop" accusations.

He was innocent on both counts, but just ignored the charges.

I will vote against his nomination because he's a bonesman who threw an election for a fellow bonesman.

[rateyes]

14. Will say that I don't think he threw the election on purpose,

but, he should have signed his 108 before the election, and thus put the ball in W's court to sign his. As it is, Bush will never release all his records. He lost out on an opportunity, and because of it, regardless of the number of times he runs will never become president. I hope and pray Iowa and New Hampshire Democrats put somebody else in the lead next time the Presidential primaries come around.

[UdoKier]

33. In reality, I doubt that too.

I suspect it's being in a very comfortable position and having too little passion about issues that will really only affect the little people. it's just a job to him.

I just spout that shit about Skull & Bones to vent. It's probably irrelevant (but who knows?)

[sandnsea]

19. Rove Shill

I need to make you a badge. If you want to send me your address, I will, and mail it to you. You can wear it proudly.

"I'm a Rove Shill That Helped Bush Win!"

[UdoKier]

21. Bullcrap. I supported his campaign in all its ineptness.

In the long run it was Kerry himself who gave Rove everything he wanted on a silver platter, not me.

Don't you think democrats running for office should be professionals, and have some image control and spin ability?

[sandnsea]

23. Bullcrap

I was around last year. I remember all the chicken littles who spent more time flapping their yaps over every little thing than fighting back. Spin and image control includes every single Democrat. Until every single Democrat understands that, we'll never win.

[UdoKier]

29. My comments from last year...

November 1

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2570413

October 8

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2469916

September 30

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2435500

September 29

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2429904


Blindly accepting a piss-poor performance from a candidate that borders on betrayal is not being a good democrat. With the exception of URGING people to URGE Kerry to address the $87 bil, I refrained from criticism of him and his cowardly vote for the IWR from his nomination to his defeat. But now that the election is over, I certainly would like to be sure that he doesn't con his way into another nomination.

Was there fraud in this election? Sure there was - we knew there would be, and we knew Kerry would have do do that much better to go over the top. As unpopular as Bush was, he could have, if he had wanted to.

[sandnsea]

31. "With the exception of"

You and every other so-called supportive Democrat. I'd just as soon you'd stayed home and shut up.

If you seriously believe that one comment on a vote, and one attack by a bunch of liars can lose an election, then the truth is that your shitty attitude towards Democrats wasn't very effective in persuading your family and friends.

[UdoKier]

34. The "flip-flop" meme was a HUGE factor in his defeat.

And the $87 bil was the linchpin for the meme. Explaining it as I detailed (and a whole lot of other people as well) would have not only proven him to consistent, and not a flip-flopper, it would have exposed Bush's flip-flop as well.

This is not the GOP (thank God). If you are suggesting that it is a party whose candidates should only listen to mediocre advisers and ignore the grassroots, then you're right, maybe I should have no part of it.

[sandnsea]

38. Oh right

Two years later, we're FINALLY getting some on the left (some) to list Bush's remarks that the IWR was NOT a vote for war. FINALLY, some understand that quoting him and that vote correctly is essential to explaining his lies. Last year, the left wasn't willing to do that. They insisted that Kerry's vote was a vote for war, which made holding Bush accountable for anything to do with the war next to impossible. And if they do it again, on the DSM, we're going to get the same result.

Regardless, it doen't matter what YOU thought and that's the problem with the "grassroots". When a campaign chooses a strategy, it's the grassroots job to execute it. I heard two responses to the $87 billion. One was that there were two bills to be voted on, the other was that he misspoke. How hard is it to repeat that?

It's just like this stupid stupid stupid Dean flap. If the GRASSROOTS would shut the fuck up about it, it would never have been an issue. Same with those TWO, count them, TWO, monstrous mistakes that garnered Kerry 49% of the vote. The Republicans laugh that shit off. Why do our grassroots, with the overgrown backbones, go in full out panic over every little thing?

[UdoKier]

39. Because that issue was not a "little thing"

But I've already explained that.

As for the IWR vote. thousands of people went to the streets to plead with people like Kerry & Hillary Clinton to vote NO, but they ignored their constituents and their consciences and voted to GIVE BUSH A BLANK CHECK to go to war, it's a pretty fine distinction, whether you choose to admit it or not.

And they made that vote knowing full well (as we all did) that the intel was not there to show there were any WMD in Iraq), which NEUTERS the democrats now from criticizing Bush on his WMD lies. They had access to the intel, they knew it was bogus and they voted for that shit anyway. Don't come and tell me that I knew that the intel was rigged but that the Congress of the United States didn't. Puh-lease.

[sandnsea]

45. YES it was

The $87 billion remark was an incredibly teeny thing. Bush says dumber things every day of the week. You saw what could be done when everybody came together against Sinclair. That's all we had to do against the swifties, mass outrage. Shut it down.

Keep going with that line on the IWR. The basis of the DSM is that Bush was planning a war when he said he wasn't. How the hell does that square with the IWR being a vote for war? And if Congress wasn't lied to by Bush, then where's any case for impeachment based on lies?

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. I am so sick and tired of this.

[MemphisTiger]

5. He needs to keep his guard up

I was lurking on the FR site and they were talking about the Swifties returning for his Senate re-election.

[Cleita]

6. He ought to make a point of exposing these "Vets" as tools

of the White House and the right wing think tanks that they came out of. There is a lot of evidence out there as to whom these creeps really are exactly.

[Bleacher Creature]

8. Easy -- here's how (though it does involve some science)

It can be done in a few easy steps:

1) Invent and build a time machine.
2) Travel back to July and August of 2004.
3) Fight back against the smears -- beyond sending Max Cleland to the Bush ranch.

Simple!!!

[gordianot]

9. Approach his political agenda with the same passion of the early 70's.

Be the same John Kerry who walked into the Senate Committee. I remember when he debated O'Neil and cut O'Neil to pieces, a lot cheaper than going to Court.

[earth mom]

46. I agree-Kerry needs to kick some ass!

I support Kerry 100% though I wavered for a while after the STOLEN election because he didn't fight the bastards who stole it. Kerry's won me back totally but I think he needs to throw all caution to the wind and let those S.O.B.s have it. If he does, there is no way he can lose. People who didn't like him previously, WILL respect him for it, no doubt about it.

[meow2u3]

10. Sue the bastards for libel!

They knew exactly what they were saying and doing: that everything was an outright lie because the Swiftie Liars had a grudge against Kerry for telling the truth about them.

[whistle]

11. Can't do anything, has to live with it and move forward doing...

...the best he can. Politics is a dirty business and American politics is among the dirtiest.

[lisa58]

13. He should sue for libel and slander....

and take the swiftboat liars property away from them and buy armor for our troops!

[liberal N proud]

15. Those who used that excuse were doing it just for that reason

a lame excuse so they wouldn't have to say they were a ditto head.

[sandnsea]

16. When Dems stop being the Swifties shills

And stop repeating this shit.

[lonestarnot]

20. Exactly! Sure a dem posted this? Sounds like a swiftie to me...

[UdoKier]

22. Nobody's repeating Swifty shit.

I got Kerry's video. I knew their charges were crap. I defended Kerry to friends and family.

So why the hell did he refuse to defend himself?

[rateyes]

25. Exactly! I mean, in the first debate, when he had * on the

ropes--he had a perfect opportunity to twist the knife. Didn't do it.

[sandnsea]

27. More Swiftie shit

People like you saying that he wasn't defending himself hurt more than the Swiftie shit did. Do you know we were ahead in the polls until the shit that Kerry wasn't defending himself started circulating?

The defense was "They have stooped so low that they are denigrating a war veteran. It is shocking." Period. Is that what you did?

[lonestarnot]

17. Clear his name my ass! He's a hero.

[1956]

28. That's right!

Folx,
There's been a lot of buzz that something is brewing, and I believe with the release of his records, and all, something must really be up! Those of you who are naysayers of Kerry, must realize this man is STILL under a huge amount of pressure from the critics that were once behind him that demand more action and followup. Thankfully, Kerry has a huge amount of supporters that will follow him wherever he goes, even if it's in hiding! With the Kids First thing, etc., I believe he is trying to further his cause, while still working the senate floor. My God, I'm exhausted just thinking what his schedule must be like!!! ANyway, he is still "getting his ducks in a row", or at least that was posted a month or so ago, and being a former prosecutor, of course he is making sure everything gels. I'm sure he will not try to nail Bush and co., without a plan/guarantee for victory. Under no circumstances, by the way, did he just throw in the towel. I think on Nov. 2nd, he was given false info, and then since then has also possibly been given threats perhaps on his family. Imagine for a moment what that must be like, and no, it's not farfetched when you understand the kind of mafiosos are working in the BUsh Admin. Kerry should stand tall, knowing he's a hero, and by the way, I had read that one of his campaign people told him not to contest SB liars, so I believe there were too many cooks in the campaign kitchen. The one thing he should do, is get new campaign managers-period! That is, of course if he really does run again-but nothing will change-rethuglicans will always be in control, unless we can fix those damned machines and the devils that run them!!!!!!!!!!!!

[lonestarnot]

42. Kill those machines before they kill us!

We need to sit outside the polls and have every dem vote recorded before or after they vote, compare the tally with end result.

[AlGore-08.com]

24. Suing is the last thing he should do

There's no precedent for it. There's no way he could sue and not take a hit - - the perception would be that others have had their name dragged through the mud (the Clintons, Gore, Kerrey, Cleland, Hart, McCain, the list is literally endless) and they didn't sue. And most of those folks were smeared much worse than Kerry was in the Swift Boats book. So if Kerry sued, it would be very easy to portray him as a great big whiny baby doing the potty dance.

And if he sued - - do you really think that the media would cover the suit in a professional, objective manner? Even factoring out politics - - look at some of the celebrity cases that have gone to trial in the past twenty years or so (OJ Simpson, Robert Blake, Michael Jackson... ) There would literally be months of the media obsessing over every piece of evidence or pseudo-evidence, and talking endlessly about whether it "proved" Kerry's case or "proved" the Swiftie's case. So you'd have several months of morons like Wolf Blitzer speculating that Kerry was not slandered, and how damaging this trial would prove to Kerry's political future.

Then factor the politics back in. Do you really think that the RNC would not be blast faxing everything the defense said or inferred out to the media? Imagine if Kerry's lawyers made some major mistake - - or worse, did something that looked or even was unethical. That would be the story - - Kerry cheats!

Proving the case is far from a given. Would Kerry have to prove that the Swifties intentionally lied about what happened, rather than just being wrong? The second would be fairly easy to prove. The first could be very difficult to prove. And of course, you have to realize that regardless of the facts, or the skills of Kerry's lawyers, he could still lose. It happens all the time.

And finally, Kerry winning his case would not change the minds of millions of Americans. Not just Faux viewer, but people whose initial reaction to everything is cynicism. I would bet you a cookie that the same person who said they wouldn't vote for Kerry because of his war record would not believe the verdict. Look at OJ Simpson - - he was acquitted, but millions of people still think he's guilty. "Where there's smoke, there's fire"...

[karynnj]

51. Possibly working with someone like Douglas Brinkley

to take on one of the two parts of the SBVT. The leaders of the SBVT are split between two factions: Admiral Hoffman, who created and led the market time operation that Kerry was part of and the O'Neil/Corsi people who are related to his anti-war activities. Brinley's Tour of Duty book was his and Kerry had no editorial control. It was treated by the media as a partisan source when it was the work of a well known historian. In some of the TV interviews, Brinkley indicated that he actually went lightly with what he knew about Hoffman and said that he had blood on his hands. Hoffman and other officers in Kerry's line of command gave his awards and excellent reports (which were on Kerry's web site and which Kerry and his surrogates talked about).

From what was said in a Washington Post story mainly on Hoffman was that he organized this part of the liars because he was upset that his operation was portrayed in a negative way. What is interesting is that the worse quotes about Hoffman come from people other than Kerry. Hoffman and the others probably see this as a fight for history. Tour of Duty was the first book that looked intensively at any part of this operation. Incidentally, Bob Kerrey was even less flattering to Hoffman, who was involved in the orders that resulted in the incident where civilians were killed.

This sorry group lied about Kerry's war record - A long magazine article that recounts this operation as a whole would show these officers for what they were. (Although in some way this has already been done because Brinkley's book remains the best piece of scholarship on this operation.)

[Toots]

52. I disagree

You may possibly be correct in all you say but I am of the mind that a person defends themself when attacked in such a brutal fashion. It shows so much weakness IMHO that the person is no longer someone I would support. I think if he went to court it would show he was serious about defense both for the country and for himself. He may not win over some of the naysayers but he will not lose followers such as myself. I think if he were to sue and win a lot of folks would pay closer attention the next smear campaign by the GOP. I am more concerned about the future than the past and if we let them get away with the LIES it will never end and in fact get even more sophisticated. There comes a time every so often when we have to stand up and say BS we will not put up with this shit any more. He has the opportunity and the time now to set the record straight and I for one will be quite disappointed if he does not make the effort.

[longship]

32. The posts on this page...

are precisely why we don't need John Kerry running for President again.

Kerry may be the greatest, most qualified, most highly principled person for the job. But if he refuses to stand up, take principled positions, and fight the lies and the liars he will never win the White House.

Kerry was a feckless dolt in 2004. He should have won the election in a walk. His total mishandling of the issues, beginning with his support of the illegal Iraqi invasion, were his downfall.

I cannot and will not support a Kerry nomination in 2008. He's just too weak. I will not support any candidate for the nomination who supports the Iraqi war or who doesn't come right out and say we need to withdraw as soon as possible.

[1956]

43. Geez,you just don't get it, do you!

THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It doesn't matter what you do right-if it's stolen-it's stolen!!

[longship]

44. I totally get it.

Yes, it was stolen by gaming the system, by turning a mere 1% of the votes, maybe less than that.

But, consider another possible outcome. The Dem candidate fights the Repugs and their lie machine. He takes down the liars. He also says that the Iraq invasion was wrong! And that he supported it only because he was lied to by the administration. He presents a *consistent*, hard campaign with Iraq at the forefront. We know that even in the fall of 2004, Iraq was a liability for Bush.

Now here's the important question. How many votes swinging to the Dems would have been sufficient to make it impossible for the Repugs to have stolen the election? If Kerry took only an additional 1% it might have been enough to swing things to a point where either the Repugs couldn't game the system, or that they couldn't game the system without being caught with their fingers in the pie. I would venture a supposition that if they had swung a small percentage in Ohio alone, that might have been enough.

We already know that we're in a situation where the outcome of the system is extremely sensitive to minute changes in the input--the butterfly effect. In a very close election like this, it's the small things that can matter.

Kerry could have taken on Swift Boat Vets, but he chose not to.
Kerry could have opposed Bush on Iraq, but he chose not to.
Kerry could have taken on the RW media machine, but he chose not to.
Kerry could have made an issue of Bush violating debate rules, but he chose not to.
Kerry could have challenged the shenanigans in Ohio, but he chose not to.

At every opportunity to stand up and fight for the White House, Kerry knuckled under.

Would I vote for him again, if he's nominated? I sure would. But I will not support him for the nomination.

[kskiska]

35. Ted Koppel even went to Vietnam

and spoke to eyewitnesses of various disputed events, and the locals' responses backed up Kerry's version. Aside from airing the program, this did not make the news. The media was the enabler in the smear job.

[LuPeRcALiO]

36. releasing his military and academic records was a good move.

Beyond that, and answering gotcha questions as he does in every interview, I don't see much that he can do.

Libel lawsuits always make the plaintiffs look like poor sports, whether they win or lose, and there's no telling how this one would go.

[NoPasaran]

40. I don't think Kerry's name NEEDS clearing

Although if he were ever to find himself face to face with that John O'Neill scumbag I sure wouldn't mind him punching his fucking lights out.

[Protagoras]

41. Become Barbara Boxer

Seriously...she's doing what he should have been doing all along.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

47. Why do YOU think Kerry's name needs clearing?

[LittleClarkie]

49. If the 180 didn't do it

nothing will. Fuck em.

[DemonFighterLives]

50. I don't like how Kerry turned out

I just had to eat crow again today after he was supposed to mention the Downing Street Memo. All quiet on the western front. At least Kennedy brought it up.

Kerry could have fought harder against B*sh IMHO.

[killbotfactory]

54. Nothing

The republican slime machine is done with him and the base believed every lie they told and will to their dieing day.

[GetTheRightVote]

55. Fight like he is still that soldier, I would vote for him again

I believe he would make a good president, we can not do worst then * that is for sure, but he would do well, atleast he loves his country and her people.

:kick: