Herman Jacobs: “He could have healed the wounds of Vietnam. Instead, he tried to exploit them.”

There has been an overwhelming amount of coverage about John Kerry this week – I’m only barely keeping up with it. However, Mr. Jacobs’ article on the WSJ editorial page is one of those that I’m glad I took the time to read. An excerpt:

Whenever the question of Vietnam percolated to the surface of the nation’s collective political consciousness, as it did briefly during Bill Clinton’s first presidential campaign, the protagonists on either side only became yet more distrustful and disdainful of the other. And so years ago, wearied by their own arguments as much as by the arguments of their antagonists, sensible majorities of both the supporters and the opponents of the Vietnam War yielded to an unwritten domestic truce, composed of two principles:

• Those who participated in the war, with the exception of anyone at or above the rank of general officer, are entitled to public honor for their service.
• Those who actively opposed the war, with the exception of the most extreme Jane Fonda-types, are not to be branded as cowards or traitors to their country.

Depending on one’s political bent, one or the other of the two prongs of the domestic truce might be accepted only grudgingly, but it was accepted nonetheless, because most of us had become convinced that the best way to handle any question involving Vietnam was just to “let it alone.”

Unfortunately, Mr. Jacobs writes, Sen. Kerry has violated this truce.

Perhaps he deserves what he’s getting at the hands of the Swift Boat vets.