Some on the Left are attacking McCain on the POW/MIA issue with smears. This is not right.

[beachmom]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6388234

Some really good comments in there from people who know what they are talking about:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6388234&mesg_id=6392019

I researched it myself, and of COURSE the person going after McCain had ties to the SBVT:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6388234&mesg_id=6396769

This New Yorker article is well worth re-reading about Kerry & McCain on the POW/MIA issue:

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/1996/10/21/1996_10_21_130_TNY_CARDS_000377420?currentPage=1

Makes me sad, though. Kerry and McCain were practically finishing each other's sentences back in 1996. Now look what has happened. Weirdly enough, it was the first war in Iraq that brought them together -- 1991, where they were stuck together and ended up talking for the first time. Now the Iraq War and presidential ambition have driven them apart, seemingly forever. I am still puzzling over who McCain is. I also think that McCain's downfall started when he walked away from his friendship with Kerry into the arms of George W. Bush.

[Inuca]

1. Thanks for the New Yorker link

I had come across bits and pieces of this before, but never read the whole article before. Very, very good and illuminating. As to McCain, reading the article left me even more puzzled as to who he really is. It seems indeed sad in a way, that McCain's ambition and... I do not know what else, seems to be more than just ambition that can explain and justify his behavior and political choices in the last few years... kind of sad that he lost the trust and I guess friendship of people of integrity like Kerry and possibly more recently Hagel. Well... he gained Graham and Lieberman in their stead, so number-wise if not quality-wise, he is even...

[TayTay]

2. You were very good in that thread

I think some folks on the left think that anything that criticizes Sen. McCain is a "good" thing. It is not. Sen. McCain should not have his service record attacked because it suits someone's political agenda. That is craven.

It is one thing to say that Sen. McCain has a history of letting his temper get the better of him. It is another thing to sign up with the scummy people who formed SBVT to smear Sen. Kerry just because they happen to be back to smear someone else this time.

Kudos to you for braving the storm in that thread. We have enough to fight the Republicans and John McCain on without resorting to hate mongering. It's wrong, plain and simple.

[karynnj]

3. I second that - Beachmom was great

and one of the main people backtracked to make it just about temper - especially against a relative of a MIA. (The problem is that some just could not bring themselves to believe the truth. It was telling that Smith, because of what he saw on that committee was willing to endorse someone he disagreed with on most votes and NOT McCain, citing his temperament. (Though many other endorsements were better - that was the most amusing I saw on the K/E site. I assume that part of his rejection of Bush was due to Bush endorsing Sununu in the primary, but I really liked the fact that he was honest enough to say that politically they disagreed - then spoke to Kerry's character and fitness in positive terms. Later, seeing the CPAN POW/MIA trip to Vietnam, he seemed to have respect and even some understanding and affection for Kerry. I bet Kerry would have been surprised had someone told him in say 1992, that McCain would wholeheartedly embrace his opponent for President and Smith endorse him.)

[beachmom]

4. Bob Smith endorsed Kerry? No way. I did not know that.

By any chance do you have a link to what Smith said? I am still shocked that Smith has gone out on a limb to say McCain is not fit to be president. Tempers were flaring back then, that's for sure. Still, in spite of it all, McCain was on the right side of that issue. It is clear, however, from that video that he had a horrible time dealing with it and the hate thrown at him. I think Obama is of a better temperament for the job as POTUS, but I will never question McCain's integrity of trying to settle the POW/MIA issue and normalize relations with Vietnam.

[karynnj]

5. Here is a link to a Dkos diary that contains it

The actual letter that was printed in the Manchester Union Leader is in the diary (in PDF form). It is surprisingly informal and seems a very sincere endorsement. Now, he likely hated Bush for a lot of reasons - including the endorsement of Sunnunu, but his given reasons seem sincere.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/29/13145/365 (I included to the diary, rather than just the PDF because the diarist seems as shocked as you and I were. I found it via goggle - teh Union Leader didn't seem to still have it.)

All I know is that Kerry managed to keep Bob Kerrey (a loose cannon), McCain (with a terrible temper) and Bob Smith, who came in believing every RW conspiracy theory - and got them to follow a very careful, methodical investigation plan and ended up with all of them agreeing to a statement that made it clear that there was extremely little reason to believe the stories.

[beachmom]

6. Thanks for posting. Wow, what a wonderful endorsement.

I think his anti-Bush sentiment was not why he endorsed Kerry. I just think that resentment would only have put Bob on the sidelines. It was Kerry's incredible leadership on the POW/MIA Select committee which was what put Bob over the edge, and to endorse Kerry. I am glad I got to view on cspan3 the video of what Kerry did with Bob Smith and other senators over in Vietnam. Kerry was a man on a mission over there, getting the job done. Bob saw this, and that is why he felt very comfortable with his endorsement.

Did McCain have anything to do with Bob losing his seat? If not, that makes Bob's assessment that McCain is "unfit to be president" that much more damning.

[karynnj]

8. I played with goggle and found nothing to say that McCain endorsed Sununu

In fact, this article suggests he didn't as they recount far less prominent endorsements. It is interesting to read why they challanged a guy pretty far to the right. http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-1966619/Smith-vs-Sununu-An-intra.html

I'm glad I saw the CSPAN thing too. I think it was clear that the endorsement was genuine - as it really listed things that were true. I agree that it likely was that work that gave them the time to know each other. (The two things I most remember weer: that it was Smith who commented about the fact that it was emotional for JK to be in the area he was during the war and a sillier part where having come into the wrong side of one site and having little time left before they had to go - Kerry suggested they borrow a couple of bikes from teh Vietnamese to cycle through as it would be faster. Smith, who was hugh, possibly taller than Kerry and not slender - started laughing. I think the idea was quickly abandoned.

[fedupinBushcountry]

7. One name comes to mind

and it is Ted Sampley, he is pure scum. In the early days of the Kerry blog most of our trolls were connected to http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.org/|]VVAJK started by http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.org/">Sampley. He was also behind the attacks of McCain in 2000. [b>He falsely led people to believe that there were many American soldiers still held prisoner in Vietnam.

He is behind VVA John McCain:
Republican 527s. Here they come again "Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain" - May 2008. Beginning in early March 2008, a website titled "Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain" appeared on the WWW. The site contains a collection of attacks on John McCain. As McCain moved to cement the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination, the site added more and more attacks on McCain. Briefly stated, the site is bull#. The website, "Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain" is the creation of Ted Sampley from Kinston, NC.

Sampley is assisted by another individual, Jerry Kiley, and the bills are being paid by rightwingnut and former member of Congress, John LeBoutillier. This is a long and twisted tale. To fully understand why Sampley is attacking McCain, you need to start by reading this article after which you need to read the articles linked to this one. link...

This from above link.

The charges that these people are levying against McCain include:

He was a "songbird" -- telling the North Vietnamese every US secret he knew.
As a result of his collaboration, he received special, favorable treatment from his captors.
This treatment included regular visits to/from Vietnamese women and McCain even has illegitimate children in Vietnam.
And a number of similar stories.

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE CLAIMS IS A LIE.
TOTAL, ABSOLUTE LIE.
NOT A SHRED OF TRUTH IN ANY OF THESE CLAIMS.

The individuals who are attacking McCain's record are not Democrats. In fact, the attacks on McCain are coming from hard-core right-wing reactionaries. Those who are attacking McCain include:

Ted Sampley of Kinston, NC. As explained in this article and several other articles on this website, Sampley made a lot of money in a scam operation focused on the issue of Americans missing in action in Southeast Asia. McCain blew the whistle on Sampley and Sampley has been after McCain every since.
Read more about Sampley at the links at the bottom of this page.

Former Congressman John LeBoutellier. Son of a wealthy New York family, Boot was elected to Congress on the Reagan coattails. His constituents recognized that his election was a mistake and voted him out. He is now a "commentator" for the radical reactionary nutcase website "Newsmax". Boot never met a wacky idea he didn't like.

Earl Hopper, Colonel, US Army Reserve (retired). Hopper claims to be a "retired Army intelligence officer." Horseshit. Hopper once served as the Intelligence and Security officer for an Army post where his main job was maintaining the library of classified documents.
Hopper is not smart enough to pour piss out of a boot with the instructions printed on the sole.
Hopper has made a career out of spreading lies about the loss of his son, Earl Hopper, Jr., when his F-4 was shot down over North Vietnam. Read about Hopper, his son's loss, and the identification of his son's remains here.

Various associates of Sampley, LeBoutellier, and Hopper. Jerry Kiley -- front man for Sampley and the registered owner of the website Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain.
Will add others as they surface.


So -- why are these people attacking McCain's record as a prisoner of war? It's a long and sordid story. The short version is this:

Sampley was making a lot of money off the issue of Americans missing in action in Southeast Asia; Hopper enjoyed a certain amount of notoriety because of the lies he told about his missing son; LeBoutellier had nothing better to do.
McCain was an active member of the 1991-1993 Senate Select Committee on POW-MIA Affairs and he exposed the lies and scams that Sampley, Hopper, LeBoutellier, and others were running.
Because McCain exposed them, they have set about trashing McCain.

However, to understand fully why these frauds are attacking McCain, you need to read through this page then read all the pages and articles that are linked to this page. Doing this reading will take some time but it's important -- because -- some of these phony charges against McCain are showing up in the legitimate press and the truth needs to be told.

This for me is one and only thing I will defend McCain on, it is wrong and it needs to stop.

[beachmom]

9. Diary on MYDD right now defaming McCain AND Kerry. This was inevitable.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/6/27/131132/212

And it's why we cannot tolerate the smearing of McCain, because if that is endorsed, then it will rub off on Kerry.

[beachmom]

10. Wow, a diary that stayed high on the Rec List saying we should EMBRACE

the POW swiftboaters:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/31/142834/892/240/560121

The only real publicity I recall McCain getting during that time was over the "issue" (if that’s the right word) of missing POWs in Vietnam. McCain, the POW movement’s former poster boy, suddenly became McCain, Hanoi’s best good buddy on Capitol Hill. The media, which thought the POW activists were a bunch of kooks, gladly gave him an free pass on that particular flip and flop. The activists, who remembered that McCain had been sympathetic, or even a full-fledged supporter, up until about his first Senate race, were much less charitable – the diehards still hate his guts. (That the Obama campaign hasn’t reached out to them the way Rove reached out to the anti-Kerry Swiftboat cranks in 2004 tells you all you need to know about the Democrats’ nice-guys-finish-last syndrome.)

My response:

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/7/31/142834/892/499#c499

And, then, he says this later on:

In the summer of 2004, when it looked like Bush might actually lose, McCain played footsie under the table with John Kerry, briefly considering a spot on the Democratic ticket. But when he saw what a lousy candidate Kerry was (and how effective the Rovian Swiftboat machine could be) he quickly switched gears and hit the campaign trail with Bush.

Now, no doubt, McCain was really a jerk during that time, and definitely made a political calculation which involved throwing his friend under the bus. But notice how this jerk diarist has to knock Kerry? I am sorry, the type of Democrat the diarist is (he was/is in the political business) represents everything I am against. He's probably some type of consultant with NO SOUL. Ugh. And this diary, which may have been insightful at points about McCain, is just despicable to me because of the examples I show. Frankly, I don't know if I can believe any of it, when he advises we dispatch the crazy POW/MIA crowd as part of our campaign.

[beachmom]

11. Effing KOS rec'd this diary. This is just sick. I swear, if this crowd

runs the party, I'm out.

[Mass]

12. This diary is off base, because the diarist does not recognize what is at stake here.

1/ This ad (racist at several level) remobilizes McCain basis, which accounts for the higher number of Republicans in the polls and the fact that Republican identity is high. Will these people vote is a different question, but they are remobilized by typically far right wing methods.

2/ At the same time, Obama has somewhat demobilized his basis, particularly by the media announcement that the VP would be a very moderate Democrat (be it Kaine, Bayh, or Sebelius) and by some of the implications. I am not saying it is or not a wise political move --only time will tell-- or even that the noise is wrong (the media have had things wrong so often in this campaign--.

3/ Most activists are disappointed by the perceived feeling that Obama is not punching hard enough. He needs more Democrats attacking McCain where he needs to be attacked and a little less strategists (Axelrod is not that good on TV, neither is Gibbs, though a lot better). Once again, Democrats are absent to defend their candidate, a few of them excepted. This is this need to fight that leads to such diaries being acclaimed like that. There are even some people calling for Kerry to be the VP after the MSNBC appearance yesterday. People are ready for a fight. Not necessarily a bad one like this one, but they want to see Obama fight back.