Kerry's Lie--Is it Consequential?

I've always said so. Here's a round-up of pundits other than bloggers who agree and their reasoning:

1. Pat Buchanan:

   Kerry has falsified a central event of his life. For Mr. Kerry has used this story repeatedly, and it has been used by admirers to explain how the idealistic young warrior lost his faith in the U.S. government. Nor is this an unserious matter. For the charges against Mr. Kerry in "Unfit for Command" go to an issue the media failed to address in 1992, to the detriment of this country: the issue of character and credibility.

2. Kathleen Parker:

   What if the single pivotal event of one's life - the moment that altered one's entire course, illuminating the path ahead, providing that critical psychological turning point - turned out to have been an invention of one's very own?

3. Mark Steyn:

   For Kerry, his Yuletide mission was an epiphany: the moment when he realized his government was lying to the people about what was going on. This is the turning point, the moment that set the young Kerry on the path from brave young war volunteer to fierce anti-war activist. . .

4. James Lileks:

   If Kerry’s story is a lie, it’s significant, but not because we have a gotcha moment – gee, a politician reworked the truth to his advantage, big surprise. This is much larger than that. This is like Bush insisting that he flew an intercept mission with the Texas Air National Guard to repel Soviet bombers based in Cuba, and later stating that this event was “seared in his memory – seared” because it taught him the necessity of standing up against evil governments, such as the ones we face today. In other words, it would not only be a lie, but one that eroded the political persona he was relying upon in the election. Kerry has made Vietnam central to his campaign. If he’s making crap up, it matters.

5. [new] Jim Wooten (Atlanta Journal-Constitution):

   Does it matter? It does to those he accused of committing atrocities.
   
   [Kerry's Vietnam record] is fair game, not only because he and his running mate invited it but also because there are legitimate reasons to examine it. "I ask you to judge me by my record," said Kerry in his acceptance speech. "If you have any questions about what John Kerry is made of, just spend three minutes with the men who served with him," urged John Edwards.. . .
   
   Disagree with the veterans if you like. Think them partisans. Accuse them of bitterness. But in the proper arena for public debate, hear them out.

Anyone disagree?