[FoRK] Salon on Bushs' (lack of) Service
J. Andrew Rogers
andrew at ceruleansystems.com
Thu Sep 9 14:11:15 PDT 2004
> Dude, I've been all over this big wide world and I know that everybody
> knows that the SBVT are bitter hardcases with a slime job to do. The
> message from the SBVT to the vets is that your service doesn't matter if
> you're not on the right side politically. Got your arm blown off? In a
> wheelchair for the rest of your life? Doesn't matter if you're not a
Maybe that's the case, maybe it isn't. I don't know, I wasn't there,
and I don't really care in either case. What you are asserting
"everybody knows" is by no means clear to everybody. Such things are
only "obvious" to most of us one way or another when run through a
political filter, and there is clearly disagreement on the issue. And
Kerry gave these folks a hell of a lot of fodder to work with in making
it an issue.
I'm not saying that Kerry was a disreputable soldier, and I'm not saying
the the SBVT folks are being dishonest. What I am saying is that there
is no obvious truth and that the SBVT folks played their hand
brilliantly in convincing veterans of their position -- this last part
is a fact no matter who is lying.
The argument that is playing out isn't whether or not Kerry served, but
whether or not his service was "honorable" as defined and interpreted by
the military community. It doesn't really even have much to do with
political ideology at the deepest levels, though it is heavily used to
leverage political position. Currently, opinion in that community has
swung strongly toward "not honorable" according to the polls as a result
of that ad. This is politics, not the determination of fact. It is a
hell of a thing to watch.
The National Guard story appears to be a hatchet job too the more I look
into it, so it goes both ways.
j. andrew rogers
More information about the FoRK