This page was last updated on September 5, 2004.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“While serving in combat with the First Calvary [sic] Division in Vietnam and Cambodia, I soon learned the importance of good leadership.  That person must be wise, brave and, above all, respected by his men.

“Fortunately, I had more than one such person.

“Today, as always, we need that kind of person to lead the country.  Unfortunately, we don’t have one.”

[RWC] That’s Mr. Lapatka’s opinion; it’s not mine.

“In 2000, Bush used smear tactics against John McCain and, in 2002, Max Cleland, two very brave Americans.  He wants people to forget about his lies, which led us into war, the record deficit, loss of jobs, rising health care and his catering to the elite.”

[RWC] Regarding the McCain claim, some fringe wackos in South Carolina – not Bush – spread some unfortunate rumors.  It’s funny, though, Mr. Lapatka didn’t mention a problem with people in 1996 who tried to denigrate Bob Dole’s WWII service.  There couldn’t be a double standard, could there?  Regarding the myth of Max Cleland, go here.

What lies, Mr. Lapatka? 

It’s not an excuse, but we had record deficits with President Clinton too.

The only way President Bush can reduce the price of healthcare is to get government out of it.  Does anyone believe Mr. Lapatka would support this approach?

Tell us how President Bush “caters to the elite.”

“Currently, he is trying to smear John Kerry.  While Kerry could have undoubtedly avoided Vietnam, he volunteered for it.  He served his country bravely.  His boat crew says so and also John Rasserman [sic], whose life Kerry saved.  Rasserman [sic] was a Special Forces soldier, an elite professional who would not make up stories or give false credit to Kerry.  In 30-plus years, you can bet he sorted out every little detail.  Combat veterans have bonds that are as strong as family bonds.”

[RWC] The Bush campaign is not trying to smear John Kerry’s military record.  Both President Bush and VP Cheney have said Kerry served honorably and should be proud of that service.  Here’s a specific example from an August 30, 2004, interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer.  Lauer asked, “Do you think you both act — served on the same level of heroism?”  President Bush replied, “That no, I don’t.  I think his going to Vietnam was more heroic than my flying fighter jets.  I mean he was in harm’s way.  I wasn’t.  On the other hand, I served my country.  Had my unit been called up, I would have gone.”  That was a pretty gracious response given that Kerry – and his wife – likened Bush’s National Guard service to running away to Canada.

Not that it makes a difference, but John Kerry admits he did try to avoid Vietnam.  After graduating from Yale, Kerry applied for a deferment to study in Paris.  The draft board denied his request.  It was then Kerry enlisted in the Naval Reserves.  No one doubts that Kerry served honorably, though some who served with Kerry – Swift Boat Veterans for Truth – claim he lied about some points and exaggerated others.

I don’t doubt James Rassmann’s sincerity, but he himself has presented different accounts of what happened in the incident where Kerry helped Rassmann from the river.  That kind of kills the “he sorted out every little detail” argument.

By writing Rassmann “would not make up stories or give false credit to Kerry,” is Mr. Lapatka implying any eyewitnesses – other decorated Swift boat veterans – who disagree with Mr. Rassmann are liars?  Again, without doubting Rassmann’s honesty and sincerity, the physical evidence tends to support the version presented by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.  I’m no military expert, and I certainly wasn’t there, but if the boats were under heavy small arms fire, why were none of the 30+ sailors and other servicemen hit with bullets and why did none of the boats have bullet damage from that incident?  Were the Viet Cong such terrible marksmen they could not hit five boats essentially “dead in the water” during rescue operations?

“Some veterans attacking Kerry were also involved in McCain’s smear, while others probably dislike Kerry for his antiwar statements.  Some people don’t want to face the facts.

“In all wars, atrocities are committed by all sides - the Civil War, World War II, Vietnam, or our current one.  John Kerry just told the truth, and some people won’t accept it.”

[RWC] “Some veterans attacking Kerry were also involved in McCain’s smear” appears to be untrue.  Other than Mr. Lapatka, I could find no one else claiming veterans allegedly involved in the 2000 McCain “smear” were also in SBVT.  Others allege the same PR firm was used to set up the first SBVT press conference, but I’ve seen no proof.  Even if the same PR firm was involved, so what?  I’d be willing to bet some PR firms working for Bush bashers also work for official Democrat and Kerry clients.

As most Kerry supporters, Mr. Lapatka ignores what Kerry said during his antiwar days.  Indeed, the SBVT say they aren’t upset Kerry opposed the Vietnam War after he returned; they oppose how he did it and what he said.

Mr. Lapatka writes that all sides commit atrocities during all wars.  Sadly, that is true.  But that is not what Kerry said.  In his testimony, Kerry said war crimes were an ongoing strategy committed on a daily basis with the full knowledge and support of the military command.  That clearly was untrue, unless Mr. Lapatka is going to tell us he and his good leaders committed atrocities as part of policy.

“This country should be thankful it has people like Kerry, McCain and Pat Tillman.

“Leaving a good life behind, they volunteered to serve.

“Meanwhile, on the other side, you have Bush; Cheney and Rove, who avoided their turn at war but have no problem with sending others off to it.”

[RWC] Does Mr. Lapatka believe combat experience is a prerequisite for the presidency?  If so, what did he think of Lincoln, FDR, Eisenhower (No, he never served in combat.), Carter, and Clinton?

Why does Mr. Lapatka believe President Bush and his advisers have no problem putting our military in harm’s way?  How can you have such a low opinion of someone?

© 2004 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.