On the floor of the U.S. Senate on March 27, 1986, Sen. John Kerry said:

I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the president of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared – seared – in me.

It wasn’t the first time Kerry told that story. It wasn’t the last time.

In some versions of the story, he mentioned the name of the president – Richard Nixon.

Nobody bothered to question the story until recently when John O’Neill and Jerome Corsi authored their book, “Unfit for Command,” and pointed out that Kerry never got near Cambodia on Christmas 1968 or any other time during his brief tour of duty in Vietnam.

Why it wasn’t challenged before is rather strange, given the fact the president of the United States at the time was Democrat Lyndon Johnson, who had never been accused of sending U.S. forces into Cambodia and certainly never denied something he didn’t do.

I don’t know what Kerry was smoking when he was in Vietnam, but he apparently is so confused about his four months there that he doesn’t even realize who was president at the time. Richard Nixon, the president who, much later, did send covert forces into Cambodia, wasn’t even sworn into office for another month.

How does a guy who tells whoppers like this remain in the U.S. Senate for all these years, let alone become the nominee of a major party for president?

It reminds me of Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton would lie even when there was no reason to do so.

I remember his recollections of the bombings of black churches that took place when he was a kid in Arkansas. Those stories took a little more checking to determine there were no such bombings in the state when Clinton was a child. But he would lie just to place himself in the center of any historical event, just to seem more relevant, just to show what a compassionate person and the way he transcended his surroundings.

Al Gore said he invented the Internet. Did he think he could get away with that one? Who knows what goes through the minds of these politicians who live in a rarified atmosphere, surrounded by yes men who will accept anything they say?

Is this what Kerry was doing with this story?

I wonder if Kerry actually has come to believe the lies he has told so often about himself and his experience in Vietnam?

Has he convinced himself he really is a hero who deserved three Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star?

Does he really believe his comrades in arms committed those war atrocities he cited in 1971 before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee?

It’s a scary thought that such a sociopath could once again be so close to the White House.

It’s scary because these yarns have become the centerpiece of who John Kerry is. We all saw that in his Democratic convention speech.

Keep in mind the words Kerry used: He said this memory was “seared – seared in me.”

Kerry still hasn’t explained himself. But yesterday the campaign said it was inaccurate when Kerry said he was in Cambodia on Christmas 1968. It was some other time. And we’re supposed to believe that.

But that’s hardly enough. We need to hear some details.

What happened to that memory that was “seared – seared in me,” as he said?

Kerry has attacked the veracity of the SWIFT boat vets who have challenged his war stories. The campaign has attacked their character. His partisans have scoured Internet bulletin boards to find dirt on them. They have questioned the funding sources behind them. They have done everything except present facts to counter the persuasive and well-documented charges against the presidential candidate.

What will he say about Christmas in Cambodia?

Personally, I can’t wait to hear the spin. I hope the American people are paying attention.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.