Dem Daily Taking on the Swift Liars

[kerrygoddess]

We've got 3 posts on the Dem Daily taking on the latest assault from the Swift Liars... if any one has time to spread these around it would be appreciated (maybe over on Kos)...

The Truth About Thomas Lipscomb: Conservative Propagandist, Destroyer of Veterans
June 5th, 2006 @ 12:02 pm

Thomas Lipscomb heads up the swift lie assault on John Kerry today on RealClearPolitcs. Lipscomb’s claim is that the NY Times had “embarrassingly poor coverage of Kerry in the face of the Swift Boat Veterans’ for Truth charges in the 2004 election.” I must say I agree with Mr. Lipscomb, but not for the same reasons.

The NY Times did do a piss poor job of covering the truth about the swift boat lies. That fact has now been well documented by Eric Boehlert in his new book “Lapdogs” (see posts here and here).

So here’s a little taste of the truth about Thomas Lipscomb: Thomas Lipscomb is a Conservative Propagandist and a Destroyer of Veterans…

The Right-wing Blogosphere’s (and Lipscomb’s own) Wildly Exaggerated Claim that Lipscomb Was Nominated for a Pulitzer for his “Kerry” Reporting…

Thomas Lipscomb is an independent investigative reporter who was nominated for a Pulitzer for his reporting on Kerry during the 2004 elections. He is a senior fellow at the Annenberg Center for the Digital Future (USC).

Funny thing about that claim that Lipscomb was nominated for a Pulitzer — Pulitzer.org provides lists of all nominees and winners on their website - Lipscomb’s name is NO WHERE TO BE FOUND in 2004 or 2005.

If Thomas Lipscomb would lie about being nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, ask yourself this question… “What else would he lie about?” Here’s the answer - John Kerry’s military service.

MORE & LINKS - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3196

Swift Boat Attacks on Kerry Dismissed As Urban Legends
June 5th, 2006 @ 10:52 am

With Pamela discussing the Swift Boat Lies once again, a couple of thoughts came to mind. As she notes, many right wing bloggers are continuing to bring this up, repeating the same lies which have repeatedly been disputed. This remains important for a number of reasons. There’s the principle Pamela discusses of standing up against such unfounded attacks on men who served their country. On a political level putting an end to these lies would serve a useful purpose as they distract from the real message. During the 2004 campaign George Bush was able to avoid defending his record by having John Kerry on the defensive for these and other lies.

An unfortunate legacy of the 2004 campaign is that for many people the first thing they think of is the Swift Boat Lies, even when they recognize that they attacks were untrue. This plays into the GOP line that Democrats have no ideas. If we had a clean campaign, instead of constantly hearing of these dishonest attacks, voters would hear about John Kerry’s plans for a strong defense against terrorism. They’d recall Kerry’s plans to reduce health care costs and help small business.

When conservatives continue their attacks, this is all part of a larger plan. Their goal is not just to attack John Kerry, but to distract the voters with the failings of their policies and keep them from hearing the real solutions offered by Democrats.

MORE & LINKS - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3195

John Kerry Takes Up the Swift Boat Charges
June 5th, 2006 @ 10:00 am

The Minneapolis Star Tribune weighed in on John Kerry’s renewed fight against the Swift Liars with an editorial on Saturday, saying, “We’re glad Kerry is undertaking this effort.”

Last Thursday, when John Kerry was in Los Angeles he sat down with a group of bloggers for an intimate chat about the issues of the past and the present. Among the subjects that came up was the recent NY Times piece about Kerry fighting back against the Swift Liars or as SteveAudio put it, the “Swift Boat Bastards from hell.”

Editorial: Kerry takes up the Swift Boat charges
He deserves this opportunity to set the public record straight.

MORE & LINKS - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3194

[beachmom]

1. Thanks for those most excellent posts

I'll be honest that I find creating Kos diaries tedious, and I can't even make them look pretty with the amount of time I have. But if someone creates a diary, I will rec and comment. Also, I will remember these posts as counterarguments as I think this issue will continue to come up. Absolutely disgusting that that guy's article comes up on top when one searches for John Kerry on Google.

[TayTay]

2. KG, the LA Times editorial that just nailed the lying SOBs is still online

Read this. It's still one of the most awesome putdowns of the Liars that I have ever seen.
*******************

These Charges are False...
Los Angeles Times | Editorial

Tuesday 25 August 2004

It's one thing for the presidential campaign to get nasty but quite another for it to engage in fabrication.

The technique President Bush is using against John F. Kerry was perfected by his father against Michael Dukakis in 1988, though its roots go back at least to Sen. Joseph McCarthy. It is: Bring a charge, however bogus. Make the charge simple: Dukakis "vetoed the Pledge of Allegiance"; Bill Clinton "raised taxes 128 times"; "there are Communists in the State Department." But make sure the supporting details are complicated and blurry enough to prevent easy refutation.

Then sit back and let the media do your work for you. Journalists have to report the charges, usually feel obliged to report the rebuttal, and often even attempt an analysis or assessment. But the canons of the profession prevent most journalists from saying outright: These charges are false. As a result, the voters are left with a general sense that there is some controversy over Dukakis' patriotism or Kerry's service in Vietnam. And they have been distracted from thinking about real issues (like the war going on now) by these laboratory concoctions.

It must be infuriating to the victims of this process to be given conflicting advice about how to deal with it from the same campaign press corps that keeps it going. The press has been telling Kerry: (a) Don't let charges sit around unanswered; and (b) stick to your issues: Don't let the other guy choose the turf.

At the moment, Kerry is being punished by the media for taking advice (b) and failing to take advice (a). There was plenty of talk on TV about what Kerry's failure to strike back said about whether he had the backbone for the job of president — and even when he did strike back, he was accused of not doing it soon enough. But what does Bush's acquiescence in the use of this issue say about whether he has the simple decency for the job of president?

[karynnj]

3. Really great posts!