  Here's some old-new news: the add by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth opposing John Kerry's bid for president. It's caused at least a little controversy, been mentioned on Meet the Press and numerous other shows, been the subject of lots of e-mails, and I'm sure more than a few water-cooler debates. My own first reaction upon hearing of the add and viewing it online, was to "Google" the name of the organization in question and check out their official web site at www.swiftvets.com. The more that I encounter this subject in the news and daily conversations, the more I begin to believe that I am one of the few people to try this approach. My first issue is with Sen. John McCain. He has called the add "dishonest and dishonorable," as you may have read many times in numerous articles. I have a certain respect for Sen. McCain, but not for his choice of words in this circumstance. After a thorough examination of the group’s web site, I can see an argument for saying that the add is misleading in some places, but I find it neither dishonest, nor in any way dishonorable. I believe Sen. McCain may have any number of reasons for the vehemence of his response to this add, and he is certainly entitled to his opinion, but I do not believe that he really examined the situation fully.
My second issue is with those who have attacked the group as a front for Republicans trying to undermine Kerry. The group is indisputably backed by people affiliated with the Republican party. I do not question that; I don't think anyone can. That those backers have their own reasons and personal vendettas is a definite possibility. Ultimately though, when one examines those involved, one finds that there are old relationships at play here that, though partisan in their own way, transcend party politics. Case in point: John O'Neill. O'Neill is a member of the "steering committee" for the organization, and has a statement on the web site that closely echoes the sentiments he pronounced over thirty years ago on The Dick Cavett Show in a debate with Kerry. The manuscript of the show is available on the web site, conveniently enough. Unlike most of those in the add, O'Neill is not taking issue with Kerry's awards, but rather with his actions upon returning to the United States.
This is not surprising, since it was what O'Neill was doing in the debate over thirty-three years ago. In fact, many of those featured on the site seem to take issue with Kerry over what they view as not just a betrayal, but a very personal betrayal. The issues I see at play are ones that cut into old wounds and bring out incredibly deep emotions for those involved.
It is a bit of personal opinion, but I believe that the those involved in the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth would oppose Kerry regardless of who he was running against or what his party affiliation was. I ask you to do a little exercise with me: imagine in your mind someone who has personally hurt you or a loved one. Imagine the person for whom you would have the least human compassion in this world; the person that if you saw them on the street you'd have to suppress overwhelming rage. Now, imagine that person is running for President of the United States of America, and imagine your reaction. Now realize that unless you have actually served in combat with others--been asked to put your life and everything dear to you in the hands of another based only on the affiliation provided by your uniform and common fate--that you can not even begin to imagine how these men feel.
Regardless of whether Kerry betrayed them or not--an issue I feel no authority to tackle and would rather leave to the Vietnam Veterans to decide amongst themselves--does not matter in the formation of personal opinions. They felt betrayed by him, more deeply so than most people can imagine, and in the formation of their opinions of him, that is all that will matter.
I am not claiming that all of their claims are just or valid. I am not claiming that the TV add is in good taste. However I do believe that the organization's web site makes several valid points, and I am honestly, personally, of the opinion that Kerry's own flaunting of his war record has been in less than good taste, but that is a subject unto itself. Many of my own opinions of Kerry, I admit, are personal in nature, and include elements ranging from people he reminds me of during my own time in service in a foreign country during an undeclared war, to his inability to at least show an iota of military bearing when he did his disgraceful impersonation of a salute on national television during the Democratic National Convention. These are things from my own background and experiences that many of you will not understand. For most, the salute thing may seem trivial, but to me, because of my experience, it is a reflection of character and discipline. We are each shaped by our backgrounds and experiences, and that, in-turn, shapes our opinions and approaches to the world.
What I advocate in regard to this issue is that people take the time to review the web site www.swiftvets.com, take the time to look over both the explanations of things like FITREPs and the actual documentation, take the time to visit www.johnkerry.com and get his side, take the time to do whatever other research they can, and then, finally, make the best effort possible to see things from every angle, transcend personal prejudice, and form an educated opinion.
I know, an American voter with an educated opinion may be an entirely new concept, but it might just work. Last of all, I think that the overall debate raised by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth should be left to the Veterans. Though I will form my own opinions and and they will be influenced by the evidence that both sides have provided, I am not going to try to say who is right or wrong in the overall debate when the argument itself is older than I am, and when the men involved are those I feel humbled in the presence of. So, learn a little (that means probing an issue more deeply than just finding evidence for your pre-formed opinion and going "Aha! Aha!
Just like I thought! "), think a little (just a little, don't strain yourselves, and take plenty of breaks--I know I had to), and then, if, after all of that, you honestly believe one of the candidates running this year in any way represents you, be my guest and go on and vote. Of course, if you're like most Americans, you'll end up voting for the one you dislike the least, or the one you think lies less, but remember, it could be worse. We could have a one-party system and be without the reassuring illusion of choice. At least we still have that. Oh, and feel free to ignore smart-mouthed, opinionated 23 year-olds who prefer cynicism and criticism to real action, and feel the need to share all of that bright sunshine with the world. 
