I have blogged more today on the Swift Vets than in the entire time the story has been out there.
I wonder if other people are having the same reaction — Kerry has now gone on the attack, which has placed the issue foremost in our minds. Having grown increasingly skeptical of the media over the past few years, seeing the hit piece on page 1 of the New York Times timed with Kerry’s attack has led me to believe there must be something to the story.
I originally did not care much for the Swift Vets’ ad. In fact, I thought the group would peter out and I wanted to steer clear because I thought it would wind up like the state troopers and Bill — angry GOP’ers trying to tar and feather a good guy — at least that is the way the media portrayed them and the way they are beginning to portray the Swifties.
So, now with the media in full defense and denial mode and the blogosphere at war, my interest has been raised and I now think the story is worth investigating. The more the Swifties respond, the more credible they become. There is no “bubba factor” like there was with the state troopers.
Having said all of that, let’s look at the AP headlines running across my Yahoo homepage as of the time of this post:
* Militia Offers to Cede Control of Shrine
* Kerry Ads Underscore His Vietnam Service
* After Five Golds, Phelps Bows Out of Relay
* 3 Palestinian Activists Face U.S. Charges
* FDA to Issue New Antidepressant Warnings
* On Tape, Abducted Reporter Says He’s OK
* 9/11 Commission Formally Disbands
* Courtney Love Pleads Innocent to Assault
* Judge OKs United Amended Financing Plan
What is missing?
Well, we have “Kerry Ads Underscore His Vietnam Service” and nothing directly talking about the Swifties. The story in question actually does mention the new ad, but mainly focuses on Kerry’s ad and his attack against the Bush backing Swifties. And, when directly commenting on the Swifty ad, the story only hints at what the ad is about.
Undeterred, the anti-Kerry group that provoked the furor distributed a second commercial to the news media and said it would begin airing next week in Nevada and New Mexico. The ad intersperses clips of a youthful Kerry talking about war atrocities during an appearance before Congress in 1971 with images of veterans condemning his testimony.
Now, if this was an anti-Bush ad, and Bush had been the one “talking about war atrocities,” don’t you think there would be a word before “atrocities”? How about “alleged” atrocities?