I take back what I said about Kerry

When I first began covering the Swiftvet story, I said it gave me the creeps. I was not at all excited about the prospect of vets attacking other vets.

When the ad came out, I decried the use of 527 orgs and the negative influence they would have on campaigns.

When one of the Swiftvets supposedly retracted his story, I thought that would be the end of it. Almost immediately after the "retraction" the news came out that he had not retracted his story after all, and he reaffirmed in an affadavit everything that he had said.

Then I began looking in to the story myself to see if there was anything to it. I began with the assumption that Kerry was telling the truth and this was a difference of opinion. When the story broke about Kerry's Christmas eve in Cambodia adventure, I searched Lexis-Nexis but couldn't find anything.

Then I began to discover discrepancies in the stories that Kerry has told over the years. That's when my research began in earnest.

After a great deal of research I came to the conclusion that What cannot be argued is that Kerry went in harm's way, fought the enemy and was wounded in battle.

Now that I have read "Unfit For Command", I can no longer make that claim. I cannot say that Kerry served honorably, because he didn't. I cannot say that he was wounded in battle, because it's not at all clear that he ever was. I cannot even say with certainty that he ever fought the enemy, because he submitted false reports about his activities, disobeyed direct orders and hid activities that should have been reported.

The only thing I can now say with certainty is that Kerry dishonored himself and the US Navy and the nation. I'm ashamed that he served during the same period that I did and embarassed that the Navy didn't boot him out on his can.

If you haven't read "Unfit For Command", you need to. The press and the Demcocrats owe the Swiftvets an apology.