This just kills me.
From Newsweek, an article called
The Vets Attack:
"The cheers were premature. The Swift Boat ads - a first round charging that Kerry had lied to win his medals, then a second batch accusing him of betraying his mates by calling them war criminals -were misleading [italics mine], but they were very effective."
Please, someone, explain to me exactly how these ads were
misleading? How was it
misleading to charge that Kerry's medals were earned under questionable circumstances, charges that have never been debunked nor answered? How is it
misleading to say that some vets feel that Kerry betrayed them? The latter point in fact is beyond dispute, how on earth could someone be
misled by a brazen fact?
Will the MSM ever admit that there might have been something to that little Swift Boat Vets story after all? Now you can finally admit it . . .
7:03 PM |
|
|