Not many will read 4,200 words to the end of this column to make comments there, much less scroll down to read them. Paid subscribers may make comments here, short and to the point.
Thanks to you all. John Kerry's political career is interesting in and of itself, but here it is mainly a vehicle for a look at a broader topic: the editor/publisher relationship and the role that print newspapers play as assayers of truth in an age when almost anyone can manufacture "facts." Bad City: Peril and Power in the City of Angels, by Paul Pringle, about tensions that arose among reporters, editors, and the publishers who employed them at the Los Angeles Times is an interesting story. The Swift Boat perplex has more contemporary relevance. It is worth some re-examination.
What this incident clearly revealed to the electorate was not that Kerry had misrepresented himself as a war hero, but that he resented having the basis for this claim examined closely. He was incapable of playing an "Aw Shucks" card.
As your friend, my comments are suspect. Even so, It looks llike you were a small fry that got played in a political stunt. The former letter must have bought up devastating self doubt on your part, but good on you to speak out on what you saw as legitimate grounds. If they didn't want the column out there, they would have talked with you. Now a bit of speaking out myself. I've always thought of Kerry as an arrogant bastard. I was sorry he lost in '04, but can't imagine the alternative future his win would have brought.
I attended the DNC convention in 2004. Kerry's bearing gave me the sinking feeling that he was going to lose. He had an off-putting bravado - remember that salute? - that signaled arrogance rather than modesty, and made me believe he had exaggerated the story of his own heroism in Vietnam. Much worse, he refused to apply the moral standard he had reached in Vietnam (unwilling to send "the last man to die for a mistake") to the war in Iraq.
Thanks to you all. John Kerry's political career is interesting in and of itself, but here it is mainly a vehicle for a look at a broader topic: the editor/publisher relationship and the role that print newspapers play as assayers of truth in an age when almost anyone can manufacture "facts." Bad City: Peril and Power in the City of Angels, by Paul Pringle, about tensions that arose among reporters, editors, and the publishers who employed them at the Los Angeles Times is an interesting story. The Swift Boat perplex has more contemporary relevance. It is worth some re-examination.
What this incident clearly revealed to the electorate was not that Kerry had misrepresented himself as a war hero, but that he resented having the basis for this claim examined closely. He was incapable of playing an "Aw Shucks" card.
As your friend, my comments are suspect. Even so, It looks llike you were a small fry that got played in a political stunt. The former letter must have bought up devastating self doubt on your part, but good on you to speak out on what you saw as legitimate grounds. If they didn't want the column out there, they would have talked with you. Now a bit of speaking out myself. I've always thought of Kerry as an arrogant bastard. I was sorry he lost in '04, but can't imagine the alternative future his win would have brought.
I attended the DNC convention in 2004. Kerry's bearing gave me the sinking feeling that he was going to lose. He had an off-putting bravado - remember that salute? - that signaled arrogance rather than modesty, and made me believe he had exaggerated the story of his own heroism in Vietnam. Much worse, he refused to apply the moral standard he had reached in Vietnam (unwilling to send "the last man to die for a mistake") to the war in Iraq.
A side of David Warsh I didn’t know! Thanks for sharing this old but important story!
Short and to the point: You are a man of tremendous integrity!
Thank you. My lips grow tired at around 3000 but if I sound out the big words, I can make it