Kerry Takes the Fight to Bush's Ranch

Found a link to this story via the Democratic Underground.  Kerry is sending Max Cleland and Jim Rassman to ask Bush to put a stop to the Swift Liars ads - sending them directly to Bush's "heavily guarded ranch" in Crawford!

I really do admire the sheer nerve it takes to pull off a stunt like this.  What in the world is Bush going to do?  I don't think they bet on team Kerry having the guts to go straight into their territory.  (My guess is Bush will find a way to avoid them, like he does everything else.)

Wow. And I was thrilled back when Zephyr Teachout stopped on the Drive for Democracy to put up Dean for America signs on the road leading to Crawford..

Link in extended copy-

Kerry Takes Fight Over Vietnam Ads to Bush's Ranch
By Adam Entous

CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites) will dispatch two fellow Vietnam veterans to President Bush (news - web sites)'s secluded Texas ranch on Wednesday to press him to condemn television advertisements accusing Kerry of lying about his wartime service.

The move comes one day after it was disclosed that a top lawyer for Bush's re-election campaign has been providing legal advice to the group behind the ads, the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

 Kerry is sending to Crawford former Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia, a frequent companion of Kerry's on the campaign trail and a fellow Vietnam War veteran who lost three limbs during the war.

Cleland and former Army Green Beret Jim Rassman, whose life was saved by Kerry during a Vietnam war firefight, will try to deliver a letter protesting the ads to Bush at his heavily guarded ranch, Kerry aides said.

Update from the AP wire (link goes to the Washington Post site): as expected, Bush hides

Cleland Attempts Delivery of Protest Letter
Letter to Bush Signed by 9 Democratic Senators Protesting Anti-Kerry Swift Boat Ads

By Deb Reichmann

Former Democratic Sen. Max Cleland tried to deliver a letter protesting ads challenging John Kerry's Vietnam service to President Bush at his Texas ranch Wednesday, but the Secret Service stopped Cleland short of his goal.

-snip-

"The question is where is George Bush's honor, the question is where is his shame to attack a fellow veteran who has distinguished himself in combat?" Cleland asked. "Regardless of the political combat involved, it's disgraceful."

Encountering a permanent roadblock to Bush's ranch, Cleland left without turning over the letter to anyone.

Update:

•  Will Michael Moore be there with a camera ?

  This is great stuff !

  by murphy on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:18:39 AM PDT

  •  I want pictures!

    By pulling this stunt, Kerry is by default linking Bush personally to the ads. Smart, smart move. Cleland is out for vengence, and Rassman is no doubt PO'ed as well. And now there's rumors that McCain will be bumped from speaking at the RNC because of this shit (though that could turn out to be total dross).

    We'll have to see if the Russian stuff pushes the Swifties off the air. Not completely, I dare say, since any news regarding the president is by default news and will make it on the air.

    Also, if the Russian airplane crashes turn out to be Chechen rebels, I'm not sure it will be covered that much here, considering how long that mess has been going on.

    by lanshark on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:56:42 AM PDT

    •  Well...

      And now there's rumors that McCain will be bumped from speaking at the RNC because of this shit (though that could turn out to be total dross).

      I don't know about the convention but, as I said in my post below, there is this line in the article:

      ...McCain was scheduled to campaign next week with Bush before the Republican convention.

      Typo or time to say hummmmmmm?

      by kimo on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 01:07:39 AM PDT

    •  Don't worry

      if it starts to look bad for Bush, Tom Ridge will be out with another terror warning.

      I'm actually more worried that the Russian incident will give Bush more fodder for his "war on terror" blather. Even if it isn't the Chechens, I have a feeling that Putin won't appreciate Bush butting in.

      by mugsimo on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 02:17:42 AM PDT

  •  omg no

    NO MICHAEL MOORE at Crawford with Cleland and Rassman!

    We don't need an issue as serious as this get associated with an entertainer that has a bad reputation with more than half of America.

    by beanoctco on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 01:52:29 AM PDT

    •  STILL beating up on Moore?

      It must be great to have SO MANY allies in this fight against Bush that some of us feel we should crap all over a major friend because we don't like his style.  Michael Moore puts his ass on the line for all of us.

      by claude on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:18:09 AM PDT

      •  it's not beating up

        the whole point of kerry sending cleland and rassman is that they have immense authenticity and credibility on veretans' issues. the way the media sees moore, if he was there, that credibility would be completely shot and the story wouldn't be "war hero with one limb delivers letter to bush", but "michael moore delivers letter to bush." it negates the entire story the campaign is trying to tell here.

        by thirdparty on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:24:44 AM PDT

      •  It's not beating up

        Moore is a propagandist- would even he dispute that?  As a result, he doesn't have any credibility to the non-converted.  

        I loved F9/11- but this is a job for someone like Cleland a veteran, a moderate, and a prior victim of Bush slander.

        by Preston on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:27:38 AM PDT

        •  "propagandist" implies untruths.

          Interesting how  a movie that does nothing but present facts  (has anyone found an untruth in F911?) is described, even by Kossians, as propaganda.

          While I agree that Moore's accompaning Cleland and Rassmussen to Crawford would become the story in the eyes of the SCLM, and that that would not be productive, I have heard far too many Kossians dis Moore to let it go by without a word.

          Dis Moore, you'll hear from me.  He is carrying water, with no bodyguards, for all of us.

          by claude on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 07:29:40 AM PDT

          •  Propaganda

            Propaganda:
            The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.

            Sure, Moore uses facts- but also innuendo. It doesn't detract from your liberal credentials to admit that.

            Take the Saudis:  Moore suggests a malicious connection between Bush and the Saudis with lots of slow motion photography of them shaking hands.  But what's the implication?  That the Saudis, Bush, and Bin Laden all conspired to destroy the WTC?  It may be effective but it isn't rigorously attempting to unearth the truth.

            by Preston on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 07:48:23 AM PDT

          •  First...

            "Propaganda" is not a dirty word: The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause... Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause: wartime propaganda.

            However, I wil allow that a negative connotation has become attached to it.

            Nevertheless, a propagandist is exactly what Moore is -- and he has said so himself. Michael Moore is, to my mind, a genius; but he belongs on the outside, whence he can properly and strenuously hold everyone's feet to the fire. Once allowed into someone's camp, he loses that outsider credibility. Those are the arguments against attaching Moore to Kerry that have to do with Moore himself.

            The arguments against Moore being attached to Kerry that have to do with Kerry have been outlined above pretty succinctly. A recap: Moore is an incredibly polarizing figure on the left, and as such can only do Kerry good if he is separate -- much like a one man 527.

            by Maryscott OConnor on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 07:51:25 AM PDT

    •  Whether or not the man himself is present,

      this kind of "gonzo" stunt will inevitably draw comparisons to Moore.  Even though he's not involved, it's very much his style.  The Kerry campaign should acknowledge the inspiration, but explicitly state that it does not constitute an endorsement of all Moore's claims.

      by contraption on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:46:56 AM PDT

•  This is impresive...

  They've kept this really low key.  The media will be all over this tomorrow.  Can't wait to see the response.  I like how the Kerry camp is trying to end and settle the discussion before the Rep. convention b/c once that starts up, the swift boat liar story will be push backed.

  by bemindfull on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:20:42 AM PDT

  •  Are you kidding

    The news out of Russia is going to kill this shit.

    I bet we hardly hear about the SBVFT for several weeks.

    Once the media is sure they were not accidents it will suck up all the media attention like there is no tomorrow.

    by ECH on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:24:30 AM PDT

    •  Russia

      I'm guessing the Russian media is not going to have loads of pictures and video like the American media would. It might temper things a bit.

      by Semblance on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:28:58 AM PDT

      •  The pictures are on the way

        And, what matters is that the public and the media connects this story mentally with 911.

        For the next several days you can expect an endless stream of military and terrorism experts suck up the media time like it is going out of style.

        by ECH on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:34:15 AM PDT

        •  Russia

          From what I've seen, the Russian media can be very closed and controlled, especially about sensitive things like this. It's not the United States. Let's wait and see.

          by Semblance on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:39:57 AM PDT

          •  Putin is going to want to play this up...

            for all this is worth.

            It will help Putin greatly and give him a blank check to really do some radical things like change the Constituation of his nation.

            I expect Putin and Bush will have a big meeting in the next couple days about the War on Terror.

            by ECH on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:43:54 AM PDT

            •  No

              You're paranoid. Relax. Putin will want to control the story in a heavy handed way, which means no wide open investigation in public.

              Besides, this diary is not about the Russian planes. Please take the discussion there.

              by Semblance on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:58:41 AM PDT

              •  I disagree

                But, I don't want to argue with you.

                by ECH on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 01:00:14 AM PDT

                •  I understand the temptation

                  to believe that, but for better or worse (actually worse - there is no 'better'), Americans just don't care that much about Russians.  The Spain bombings were big news, and they were not the only thing on TV that week.  This story, especially if it's Chechens and not Islamicists, will come and go without bumping SVBT, Scott Peterson trial or Olympic medal scandals off the front page (screen).

                  by PBJ Diddy on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 04:31:02 AM PDT

    •  We need to find a link btwn Amber Frey and SBVT

      by RonK Seattle on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 07:44:52 AM PDT

    •  You are completely wrong

      Look at the news today.

      by mattb25 on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:34:51 AM PDT

•  I LOVE This!

  I mean, what can Bush do?  He has to receive them, right? he can't just send Cleland bumping back down the rutty, dirt road in his wheelchair.  And if Rassmen looks him in the eye and says, "That man saved my life just the way I told it" and Bush still fails to denounce the ads he's dissing the veteran.  In fact, there's only one way out for Bush.

  You know when it's Halloween and you have no candy and the doorbell rings?  Quick! Mute the TV and be very, very still.  HA!  I can see Cleland banging on the door and calling out, real weary-like as he rolls his eyes at Rassman, "Mr. Pre-si-dent...we know you're in thereeeee."

  by Pyewacket on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:24:23 AM PDT

  •  ATTENTION McCAIN FETISHISTS

    MCCAIN NOT A SIGNATORY

    The Kerry letter was not signed by Republican Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), a fellow Vietnam veteran who has urged Bush to condemn the ads. McCain was scheduled to campaign next week with Bush before the Republican convention.

    by sunzoo on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 07:38:56 AM PDT

    •  McCain has already lost my respect

      Kerry signed a similar letter when McCain was getting trashed by Bush in 2000.  If McCain actually declined to sign this letter, then he's truly become the Bushchurian Candidate.  But I heard McCain has been out of the country, so maybe that explains it.

      Anyway, don't put too much hope in McCain.  Remember, he voted to remove Clinton from office.  Nobody has my respect after that.

      by existenz on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 09:57:32 AM PDT

  •  So glad Bush is in Crawford

    It's just so much more effective sending them to Crawford as opposed to the steps of the White House or negotiating a phalanx of various factotums and SS and physical barriers.

    by rodean on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 08:28:54 AM PDT

  •  Nah

    he'll send Laura, while George is out on the back 40 cutting brush or something.

    by a gilas girl on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 11:53:06 AM PDT

•  Wow!

  He's going to shove this thing down his throat! I love it! He's got a hold of Bush's jugular and is thrashing him about. Poor Karl Rove is going to need a medic!

  by Semblance on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:27:05 AM PDT

  •  Right on

    Kerry/Edwards ain't nuthing ta f' wit

    

    by daria g on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:30:36 AM PDT

•  John Kerry a total badass!

  This was a losing issue 20 years ago and it's a losing issue now. What was Rove thinking?

  Fueled by his fellow veterans' rage, Kerry struck early and angrily in the next debate: "You impugn the service of veterans in that war by saying they are somehow dopes or wrong for going." Shannon tried to brush Kerry's Vietnam card off the table: "John, you know that dog won't hunt. I don't owe anybody an apology."

  In doing so, Shannon made Vietnam the defining story of the primary election. Taking their name from Shannon's seemingly offhand remark, the Doghunters became the tellers of the story. All Vietnam War veterans, some had known Kerry in battle; some, such as Chris Gregory, had known him through Vietnam Veterans Against the War and appreciated his commitment to veterans as lieutenant governor.

  Gregory became the head Doghunter, dispatching veterans to trail television crews and get themselves on local news programs. "We went to Shannon headquarters and tried to give Shannon a copy of the Pentagon Papers," Gregory said. "The cameras got them closing the door on us."

  by missanthropy on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:29:15 AM PDT

  •  Here's another one

    from former opponent Bill Weld:

    Kerry will continue to emphasize his Vietnam War record, and will reinforce that message by traveling constantly in the company of fellow veterans in the closing weeks of the campaign. Shrum will have Kerry surrogates try to bait Bush surrogates into attacking Senator Kerry's military record--how purple was that purple heart, etc.--and then pounce on the attack with rallies and 30-second spots of outraged men and women in uniform and their families. He will seek to have the Bush campaign be against. Kerry will be for.

    So this move is right out of Kerry's playbook, though it seems that Kerry's upped the ante. This makes its pretty obvious that he has no problem with this story going on for a while longer.

    One thing puzzles me, why did the Swift Boat ads come out now? Because of Kerry's post-convention buzz? Was it because Rove thought there was a possibility of blowback so better now than later? Or maybe the timing was really up to the 527 guys? (I personally doubt that one, I'm sure the Bush campaign had a hand in advising the timing of the ad).

    by lanshark on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:49:28 AM PDT

    •  Their mistake, I'll take it

      It seems they might have been motivated by the lack of news in August.  Thus, assuring the media whores would work to get their message out there.  I think this was a strategic mistake on their part.  By coming out so early with their attacks they allow the media to debunk and allow Kerry to take the offense.  I would have come out with this right around the last debate.  If Karl Rove is behind this he is dumber than I thought.

      Btw, i'm so sick of people sucking Rove off when he actually lost the last election and is about to lose this one.  Stop calling the man a genious for goodness sakes!

      by BRockNYLA on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 01:03:54 AM PDT

      •  I don't believe Rove's a genius

        Really, I don't, though he is good at what he does. But I also don't think you have to be a genius to figure out that there might be blowback, especially if they've done any study of Kerry's past campaigns. So that blowback would be better happening now than later. This could have been a calculated risk for the Bush campaign, and heck, it's worked so well in the past (as Bill Clinton said on the Daily Show, "They'll keep doing it until it doesn't work anymore").

        Maybe they really didn't think that Kerry could successfully connect this back to Bush, that the "We object to all 527s" would be a good enough denial (weasley though it is). Well Kerry isn't going to let them get away with that, and thankfully the print press is actually looking for links between Swifties and the Bush campaign (and lookie here, the Dallas Morning News found another one).

        Heh, heh, heh...

        by lanshark on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 01:31:08 AM PDT

      •  It's not over

        These first two ads are only their opening salvos. There will be another in Sept and a real biggie in Oct. They have a campaign too -- it's not just a one-shot ad+book.

        by lapis on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:26:17 AM PDT

        •  They may have more ads coming, but they've

          now been completely discredited. If this Cleland/Rassmann trip to the ranch actually happens, any additional ads will just make Bush look worse.

          by strengthANDwisdom on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:47:01 AM PDT

        •  No "biggie" in October

          Their case has been made. They published their book. Believe me, they wouldn't leave out their most damning piece of evidence from the book. It would be chapter one. Not to mention that this has already been hashed and rehashed in all of Kerry's senate elections.

          I suppose they could just go ahead and make up more stuff, but that would only serve to discredit them even further. People would ask, "Why are you just saying this now?"

          Trust me -- they have no aces up their sleeves.

          by Zackpunk on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 07:45:49 AM PDT

          •  okaaay...

            I won't say I-told-you-so in October ;-)

            by lapis on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 09:33:28 AM PDT

            •  october surprise

              so much has been said about Bush's October surprise.  What about OUR October surprise?!!?  Surely, we should have a few tricks up our sleeve.

              by BRockNYLA on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 11:52:39 AM PDT

        •  October

          isn't there some regulation against 527s (or outside groups) running ads in the last 30 days before an election?

          They may not be allowed to release a new ad in October, so August-September, with September being the big push is it for them, I think.

          Or is my McCain-Feingold (never very stable in the first place)off here?

          by a gilas girl on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:03:58 PM PDT

          •  restriction relates to funding

            Apparently they cannot run ads if the money comes from corporations. Private donors seem to be exempted:

            And the 527 groups do have limits, Kraus said. They still must adhere to the electioneering communications rules, meaning that if their television or radio ads that mention a candidate within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election, the group must file reports with the FEC and they cannot use money donated by corporations or labor union treasuries.
            

            by lapis on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:47:08 PM PDT

    •  The Dem convention going Republican scared Rove

      And the fact that the 527s are providing Kerry with ammo beyond his own coffers probably motivated them into action. If they could get the candidates to declare a moratorium on 527 advertising, then the Repub's would stand a better chance, with more money in the box.

      But it's backfired badly, since it was all based on lies, and since it has now made it possible for the press to go after the president's own service record, without fear of being intimidated by the WH.

      Also, note what's happened in the last few weeks, post-convention. The CW is calling it for Kerry, and the media want to get with the winning team. Just look at today's front page of the NYT if you want proof.
      

      by SteinL on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 03:37:42 AM PDT

      •  right on

        If they could get the candidates to declare a moratorium on 527 advertising, then the Repub's would stand a better chance, with more money in the box.

        I think you're right on that being the actual Rove plan.  The reason it hasn't worked is that the media is hung up on the whole lying part of it, and they don't care about the flip-flop allegation that Rs have been pushing.

        by littlewillie on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:27:32 AM PDT

      •  Why now?

        This is the second of two major ad assults on Kerry -- the first right after Kerry secured the nomination.  This is the same time they started smearing Gore and it stuck because Gore beleived that there was so much time to gear up to the election and because of money issues.  Gore was wrong. Kerry survived very well during that time and is actually leading.  

        Rove spent $45mil in that first assult on Kerry after he secured the nomination, and now they believe they could force kerry to spend money post convention when Kerry is spending from general funds and Bush is still pulling from primary money.  Kerry was prepared for this and spent wisely.  If money is an issue later, then MoveOn can pick up.

        by GrandmaJ on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:35:37 AM PDT

  •  Chris Gregory eh?

    Right time, right state.  I probably worked with him just before he got involved with that Kerry effort.

    That race was immediately after the spectacular collapse of Massachusetts Fair Share, a statewide citizen action organization in which I was heavily involved, as statewide energy committee chair.  One of the best of our field organizers was a guy named Chris Gregory, high likelihood it's the same one I knew.  And his stuff with the media was right out of the Fair Share playbook, funny that Kerry 2004 may well be indirectly reaching into that old bag of tricks, kind of makes me proud.  Well, I'll always be proud of what we did in Fair Share.  (OK, am I the spectacular collapse bad-luck charm, Fair Share, Dean?  My first band did that too...)  

    by Dancing Larry on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 02:19:00 AM PDT

    •  No

      You are just ahead of your time.  Not sure what Fair Share was but Dean was indeed ahead of his time.  And look at him now.  He is all over the T.V. and people want to talk to this "crazy" guy.  And he doesn't mind telling those T.V. heads what he thinks.  We were not wrong to back him like we did and he (and we) got much attention for very honorable reasons.  

      I am still awed by what Dean and all of us did during that time.  It was our money and energy that got attention.

      by GrandmaJ on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:41:15 AM PDT

  •  What Kerry needs to push it over the top...

    A la Rove's Sore Loserman Gang outside the Veep's Residence 24/7 in 2000...

    Have a bunch of vets, maybe even current soldiers if they're willing to risk it, in their uniforms or their VFW, etc garb trying to speak to Bush, asking him to repudiate the Swift Boat Vets' lies, demanding to see his records from TANG (which can't be produced since the Pentagon "accidentally" destroyed them about when he was walking into the governor's mansion in Austin), asking why he's cut military benefits ... generally calling him out on it, all of it.

    "Mr. President, why do you shame us vets like that?"

    "President Bush, why won't you repudiate your supporters' lies about veterans?"

    "Commander-in-chief, why are you cutting military benefits?"

    "Mr. President, why won't you be open about your own service?"

    It only takes a dozen or two people, if not more, and it almost completely negates the 'GOP supports the military' meme.

    by thesill on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 07:48:46 AM PDT

    •  Actually, they weren't destroyed

      Maybe you missed it since the news was dropped on the eve of the DNC, but they were they reported that the records were not destroyed.  They found the payroll stubs, which confirmed that Bush was not paid for five months in 1972.

      by existenz on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:04:29 AM PDT

•  I've been hoping

  for awhile now that Kerry would grab Bush by the balls and squeeze so hard Bush would never forget the pain. I'm not sure how hard Kerry's squeezing with this move, but you can bet it's gonna hurt.

  I love this line from Max Cleland:

  ...Bush "owes it to every soldier and veteran in the nation to stop condoning their smears through his silence."

  Cleland has drawn a direct line between what Bush is doing to VietNam veteran's straight thru to what he's doing to soldiers in Iraq.

  The article also says that McCain did not sign the letter, but it does say this:

  ...McCain was scheduled to campaign next week with Bush before the Republican convention.

  Was?  WAS? Is this a typo or something to make you go hmmmmmm?

  by kimo on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 01:04:01 AM PDT

•  I'm thinking Kerry handled this beautifully

  and those in the mainstream media (like Maureen Dowd) who tsk tsk over a feeble response aren't following the large picture.  Yes, the Swift Boat story has been dominating the news, but it has turned around just in time for the opening of the RNC.  Now it's not about Kerry, it's about lying and smearing and hypocrisy (USA Today's recent article about Bush's record and how they've had no germane production as yet in response to their Freedom of Information Inquiry)

  It's like the Kerry camp timed it perfectly.  Let it fester, tried initially to take the high road, let some of the lies emerge, let it fester some more, and now days before the RNC suddenly Kerry is all statesmanlike and his front men are coming in like a buzz saw on Bush while the papers are all - oh, I guess we have to be balanced and look at Bush's record now.

  NY1 yesterday had a thing starting out with describing the SBL's as an "independent" group but ended up showing visuals of Kerry's visit to NYC, traveling to the Statue of Liberty and bonding w/school kids, the sum of the piece adding up to a portrait of somebody unjustly embattled and nobly rising above and carrying on.

  by Brooklyntype on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:43:38 AM PDT

  •  just adding

    no better time for a blowback than the opening of the RNC.  That and the rallies/protests should - I hope - do a nice job killing Bushco's bounce.
    

    by Brooklyntype on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:50:20 AM PDT

•  Convention

  I think if they don't get an appropriate response in Crawford, they should take it right to the RNC... the Bushies made this news, they can deal with it being the news of the convention too.

  by fblau on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 06:55:56 AM PDT

•  Love it!

  Is Bush going to turn these guys away?  No.  That would be a big story.

  If he receives them, even if he is folksy and charming to them, he has to act or respond to what they are saying.

  I love it!  

  Just when I get discouraged- Kerry pulls one out of his ass and shoves it straight down their throats (ewww! Maybe that was a bad choice of words!)

  by jgkojak on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 07:50:04 AM PDT

  •  thanks for a "laugh out loud" line!

    by strengthANDwisdom on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 09:20:31 AM PDT

  •  Bush is scheduling a trip right now

    So that he can be in New Mexico, or Oklahoma, or Houston -- anywhere but Crawford when Rassman and Cleland arrive.  That way the Bush team at the door will say "sorry, he's not home" and the press corps that follows Bush around won't be there to cover it.

    by existenz on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:07:07 AM PDT

•  Backlash and Balls

  At first glance, I worried for a minute that this would just invite similar retaliations on the part of the Bush camp and its allies. I.e., sending former POWs to accost Kerry about his testimony, creating similar uncomfortable situations, etc.

  But on further thought: #1, the Kerry people are surely aware of that fact, and #2, Kerry has more balls than Bush will ever have. He's already used to dealing with hecklers, and if someone challenged him he would discuss things with them and challenge right back, especially if its related to Vietnam. He wouldn't hide, freeze, get pissed, or change the subject, which is the guarenteed Bush response to direct confrontation.

  by ChiragR on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 08:30:05 AM PDT

  •  Kerry is awesome

    I really like the guy.  I even like his stiff awkwardness, because to me that means he is a somewhat dorky but genuine guy.  And he's a real tough campaigner when it comes down to it.  Bush & Rove may have met their match.

    Kerry actually confronts his accusers, unlike Bush who hides himself even from unfavorable newspapers.  Kerry called Bob Dole after Dole smeared his record, and Kerry has been secretly calling these Swift Vets to discuss their problems with him.  That takes real balls and real statesmanship.

    by existenz on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:10:18 AM PDT

•  Oops. Dunno how I missed this when I wrote

  my diary on this.  Great stuff!!!

  by mikepridmore on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 09:06:10 AM PDT

•  Is it ...?

  I hope it goes like this:

  Mr. President. A group called Swiftboat Veterans for Truth claims about John Kerry's war record has been debunked.  The content of the ad and the accompanying book are false.  You have yet to condemn the content of these ads.  Why? Is it moral (and Christian) to allow this smear campaign to continue? It seems very similar to the smear campaign waged against John McCain and his war record in 2000.  Can you win a national election without smearing a veteran's war record?  If you don't condemn the content of the ad and the book, the answer would be no and would be another in a long history of you not taking responsibility for your actions.

  by Newsie8200 on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 09:09:25 AM PDT

•  Sounds cool

  but they will probably turn away the vans at the front gate. It still makes for a great photo op, if you have Bush talking to the seated Cleland, with Rassman standing behing him.

  Look, there's no brilliance to the strategy of these ads. Everyone knows that Kerry got the nomination in Iowa because of the military record, and that this was going to be a big play at the convention. So the GOP 1)cooks up the terrorist threat in order to stop coverage of the post campaign tour and 2)has this indy group roll out a succession of ads/book, starts the talk radio misinformation circuit through August when the KE campaign is in "blackout" and counting on free media, and 3) starts all these sudden arrests of people who have been under investigation for months and months. And that leads right up to the Republican convention, when they do their dog and pony show.

  Anybody could have predicted that. And I think Kerry probably knew something would happen at some point. You want to try and set the election before you ever get to the debate... and this is their attempt.

  by Zach in Phoenix on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 09:51:22 AM PDT

  •  or...

    
    A cool shot might be a shot of the back of Cleland in his chair being pushed by Rassman down the long lonely driveway from the ranch.  Just the backs of them, all alone - playing up the rejection from Bush.

    by Houstonia on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:26:55 AM PDT

    •  Great minds!

      I had the exact same concept... I thought they should have had Rassman push Cleland down the drive to the ranch alone... great image.

      It's just come across CNN that Bush is NOT going to meet Cleland. Instead he's sending the Texas land manager or some such thing out to give Cleland a letter from Bush-supporting vets to send to Kerry. Apparently they're whining that he's only saying half the veterans should have a chance to speak out.

      Cleland isn't going to put up with it! He's apparently refusing to give up the letter to the Land Commissioner...

      This is going to go well. Why is Bush such a coward? He won't even come out of his bunker to greet a triple-amputee? And how did the Land Commissioner get dragged into this?

      developing, as some would say...

      by MiklCraw4d on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:47:33 AM PDT

      •  the bush letter was malarkey

        The letter that Bush had drafted for Kerry was a bunch of baloney with the jist of it being that Kerry only wants vets who support him to have their say.

        No. What Kerry wants is for anyone to speak their mind, but not to LIE. It's really just that simple.

        by thesill on Thu Aug 26, 2004 at 11:08:12 AM PDT

•  just reported on CNN...

  that cleland would be met by some texan land official who was also a vietnam vet who would present a letter to kerry about the 527's.  apparently, bush will be absent.

  also, this new cnn reporter that appears to be covering all the white house issues right now is just terrible.  she was blathering over herself earlier this week that bush actually had specifically condemned the specific SBVT ad...earlier today, she even mentioned that bush had actually mentioned the ad specifically.  

  by Hounds on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:22:45 AM PDT

  •  Is this true?

    If not Chimp, not even a single senior campaign official could be there to meet them?  Just some lowly Texas land official..?

    Is this class or what?

    by Sanjay on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:44:46 AM PDT

    •  Hard to find a real vet in the Bush team

      There aren't many bonafide Vietnam veterans working for the Bush team.  They had to look far and wide to find an actual vet to confront Cleland.

      by existenz on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 11:29:54 AM PDT

•  Two, Three, Four, Five... Drip, Drip, Drip...

  Two veterans today.
  Three tomorrow.
  Four, Five, Six, etc. tailing Bush each day, asking him to repudiate these attacks on veterans everywhere.

  Let it build slowly, but don't let up.
  

  by tg in ny on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:39:13 AM PDT

•  GIVE 'EM HELL MAX!!!!!!

  Watching Max Clelend about to explode out of his wheelchair on CNN right now!  Man oh man, I just LOOOOOOVE this.

  by Southern Bird on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 10:56:36 AM PDT

  •  I know

    I worried the Russia story would dominate.. then I turned on the TV and the FIRST thing I see is Cleland going ballistic.  Awesome.

    by daria g on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:08:06 PM PDT

•  The CNN.com article

  Here it is.

  by JacksonBlogs on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 12:13:21 PM PDT