The CBS News poll has John Kerry clinging to a one-point lead over George W. Bush. Kerry's current 46-45 advantage comes less than a month after his post-convention numbers, which witnessed a more comfortable 48-43 Kerry lead. By including Nader in the mix for all poll respondents, the survey perhaps underestimates Kerry's lead since most voters will not have an option to vote for Nader on their ballots in November. Still, Bush's momentum is undeniable.

A few reasons stand out for Bush's surge. First, Kerry's remark that he would fight a more "sensitive" war on terror may have won him votes in Berkeley, Amherst, and Madison, but almost nowhere else. Second, Bush has adeptly exploited Kerry's ambiguity on the war in Iraq, particularly his clumsy explanation that he would still support the war knowing what he knows now--which seemed to conflict with some of his campaign rhetoric. Most important, the campaign of John O'Neill and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (buy the book here) has clearly damaged Kerry. After Kerry made his Vietnam service the centerpiece of the convention (remember his corny line "I'm John Kerry, and I'm reporting for duty"?), the two candidates were deadlocked among veterans at 46-46. Now Bush leads decisively among vets, 55-37. In other words, the entire message of the Democratic National Convention has been negated in a matter of weeks.

Does anyone actually buy that SBVT B.S.?

The "liberal media" have a great story on this sham group. Check out today's New York Times for the real story on this ad. If you prefer to live in your electorial la la land, you better not read. As Orwell said, Ignorance is Bliss.

DB:
How can you call these veterans a "sham group"? They are putting forth their version of events and how they drastically conflict with Kerry's version. But thats ok. If you don't agree call them names.

DB:
Maybe you should broaden your horizens, get out of you bliss and read the three part series in the Washington Times (available online) about the book and John Kerry's actions. Goo luck and good reading.

I have hard time reading the Washington Times knowing its owner, but I'll try. And yes, the group is obviously a sham. It this group was putting forth its version of events, I would support it no matter what it said. But SBVT is not putting forth its version. It is creating a fictional version to damage John Kerry. Many of the veterans in the ad actually have made praising statements about him in the past that directly contradict what they say in the video. Most have written in thier own records statements that contadict what they said in the video. And most did not actually serve in John Kerry's actual boat. THe group is a sham. If it's a sham that helps GW Bush get elected, maybe that's a good thing. But lets call a spade a spade.

Say what you will about the Swift Boat dudes. One thing is true. Since the arrival of the Swift Boat Vets on the scene, their message and version of events has been consistent. It is John Kerry's message and version of events that has changed. And that change has occured only in the last few weeks. That change is due to their presence. Something's up. Kerry's obviously concerned about soemthing. He's now filing complaints with the FEC, and encouraging book retailers to curb the sales of John O'Neil's book. The group is as much of a sham as any other independent expenditure or PAC on the scene; just like ACT, MoveOn.org, and MediaFund.

So consistancy is truth then?

I didn't say that, now did I?

It was implied.

I suppose you could charecterize MoveOn and ACT and MediaFund as shams too, in that 527's are not supposed to coordiante thier activites with politcal parties, but 527's from both sides obviously do. But from a less legalistic standpoint, SBVT seems to outsham the rest. MoveOn was established by two computer professionals and grew as a grassroots progressive organization before becoming involved in Election 2004 democratic politics. It has a large member base, and despite high profile donations from Soros and the Progressive Insurance guy, is largely self funded. These facts, I believe, give it more legitimacy. It is an orginaztion representing a large number of progressive voters. In contrast, SBVT was established by a a number of people with close ties to the Bush administration. It recruited John O'Niel and the others to tell thier stories. It wasn't as if a bunch of Vietnam Vets were sitting in the VFW hall one day and decided to form an organization to tell thier story. The organization was formed first, then people were found to join it. This is a reversal of the process MoveOn went through during its formation, and I believe that this "top-down" story of its formation makes it less legitimate. ACT and the Media Fund share this "top-down" formation with SBVT. In that since too they are shams. But at least the tactics ACT and MediaFund use are less objectionable than the SBVT people.

DB: Finbar did not imply that consitancy is truth, but it certainly is a necessary condition for it. So if Kerry's story has changed and theirs hasn't, that is not proof that the Swifties's claims are true, but it does show that at least some of Kerry's claims are false.

Kerry may be changing his story because it was something that happened thirty years ago.

On the other hand, SBVT may be staying consistant because thier story is a fabrication. It's easy to stay consistant when reading from a script.

Consistancy is not a nessacary condition for truth. What each side tells the media has no bearing no what actually happened thirty years ago.

Why even reply or argue with DB. He's proved and continually demonstated that he is a most insane left wing fanatic.

Makes us long for the days of LeGadfly.

At least he made sense and had his facts straight.

It's bad enough that what Kerry did or didn't do in his service Viet Nam is under scrutiny by the very men he served with and for, but it's more of what he did when he came back that truly demonstrates that he is not fit to be Commander in Chief.

His opportunistic, traitorous ramblings on his return home when he smelled which way the political and cultural wind was blowing should be enough to convince most reasonable people that he is not the person we need leading this nation.

Yeah ok whatever pal. THat's two different issues. On the first one, Kerry was a war hero. Bush was the traitor who desserted the National Guard. On the second, Kerry had the balls to call a spade a spade and tell his country that the war was failing.

Where do you get your facts on this issue jackass? I've read the man's millitary records. Why don't you try that rather than reading your NewsMaX and listening to your FoxNews!!

Why don't you stop being Rush and Hannity's bitch and get the facts yourself!!

What facts have you put forth? You put forth your opinions on why certain PAC's were bad (the ones arguing against Kerry) and you put forth your opinions on why certain PAC's were not so bad or "outshammed" (the left ones funded by George Soros) but you haven't put forth any facts. Like I said before, say what you will about the Swift Boat dudes, and now say what you will about the role of Political Action Committee's (which are the the embodiment--left or right-- of the 1st Ammendmant in action in my OPINION), say what you will about all of that, the fact of the matter is that they are saying some things that Kerry must answer to, and day by day, his story changes. I don't listen to Rush, and I can't name a station that carries Hannity. Kerry is simply concerned about something the Swift Boat dudes have to say, he's changed his story, he has filed FEC complaints on the Swift Boat dude PAC, threatened legal action to booksellers of Unfit For Duty, and will not allow any republication of his story "The Winter Soldier." There is something to be said about all of this, isn't there?

Slander is a crime. To tell a lie in print is a crime. If these SBVT people are telling lies in print, Kerry has a right to stop it. If someone wrote a book about you claiming that you had sexual relations with your mother, you would have a right to stop its publication. Kerry has the same rights.

The facts I am REFERING to are Kerry's millitary records and the New York Times article explaing the true nature of SBVT. I do not state them in my posts bc they are part of the public record, and I REFER them.