objective: objectivity
25 Aug 2004This is the sort of reporting in the media that I can’t stand:
The letter signed by pro-Bush veterans said they were angry that he had never apologized for saying that U.S. troops had committed atrocities in Vietnam. Kerry has said those comments were taken out of context and that he had been quoting what veterans had told him.
No. That the comments were taken out of context and that he was quoting other veterans isn’t “what kerry has said” – it’s the god damn truth. It’s on the congressional record.
The whole thing is on the internet. You can go read it right now.
Reporting the verifiable truth as “what Kerry has said” in the face of these idiotic, slanderous lies is traitorous to the truth and any sense of journalistic integrity. But hey, it’s CNN, so what do you want.
Honestly, I could give two shits how far from Cambodia Kerry was on Christmas, or whether or not he got shot at while pulling someone out of the water. But when people start criticizing Kerry’s role in campaigning for the end of the Vietnam War, I get a little sensitive. It’s a part of our country’s legacy that should not be forgotten, and one of the few things I actually like about Kerry.
In related news, Arthur Silber links to my posts on the WSI (which seem to be garnering a lot more attention now, for obvious reasons) in his essay, which manages to weave seamlessly from “hot saucing” child discipline to Kerry and the Vietnam War.
One of the more regrettable things is the way Kerry has de-emphasized this. So many of that generation either try to pretend the 60s didn’t happen or apologize for it (by 60s I’m including the whole Vietnam era).
Kerry should have faced this head on - “I opposed the war because it was a wasteful, badly waged war. I opposed it because I got sick of seeing people die and the government lying and soft-pedaling it. I stand by my actions and for the most part I’d do the same today.”
It’s gotta be unpleasant to be a committed leftie, and all you realistically have is the Democratic Party to support your interests, and the best they could do is nominate Kerry.
What I do like about him is he’s presidential and doesn’t seem impetuous to me. I think he’s probably an intelligent man (no one has alleged otherwise), and will probably do fine, relative to other presidents, as the next president. I just wish he’d be a little more energetic and grow a pair.
No one should be apologizing for supporting that stupidly waged, ill-advised police action, just like no one should be apologizing for having to fight it because they were drafted. The 60s, and the resistance and uprisings that happened, are being completely erased from history as a “discredited era of excess.”
Certainly there were excesses, and certainly there’s a lot to be learned from the many mistakes (the implosion of the SDS and what followed, for example), but god damn, there’s so much to learn, and so many good examples to follow as well. And people aren’t standing up for it.
Everyone born since has so much to be appreciative for. I think many people can’t imagine what it was like before the Civil Rights movement, or before you could, en masse, resist war, and stand up to your government, and believe - realistically or naively - that you really *could* beat city hall.
That people did way too many drugs, got involved with goofy extremist causes like Weather are certainly lessons to be learned, but its like the baby is being thrown out with the bathwater.
I wish Kerry would stand up for himself.