Liquidwrench
New Member
I give up. Cosmo Cramer maybe?
John Kerry = Fascist Whiner
- Thread starter vraiblonde
- Start date
Liquidwrench
New Member
Originally posted by penncam
How about Howard Stern with his finger in a light socket?
Wonder if he would get another purple heart if he put his finger in a light socket?
"illegal to make a false statment and claim it was true." You bet, it can also be called fraud when done on a military report. To make the claim that the Swiftboat Vets are lying is a matter to be proved in court. It could turn out that Kerry is guilty of fraud when statements of all the witnesses are presented along with those military documents.jlabsher said:
Liquidwrench
New Member
Okay, who busted my karma for pokin some fun?
Dude, it's coming true right before your very eyes.rraley said:
Penn
Dancing Up A Storm
Liberal 527s? Never happen...........
You most likely will not see this on NBC, CBS, ABC, or CNN
This blog purports to indicate the involvement of J.F. Kerry and the many people around him in the 527 democrats' "Hate Bush" sites; it depicts who knows who and their interaction.
You most likely will not see this on NBC, CBS, ABC, or CNN
This blog purports to indicate the involvement of J.F. Kerry and the many people around him in the 527 democrats' "Hate Bush" sites; it depicts who knows who and their interaction.
ylexot
Super Genius
I actually agree with you jlab! However, I think the Kerry camp is not doing that for a couple reasons. First, the trial would take forever (it would easily end after the election). Second, if he wins, it might help him a little...if he loses, it would hurt him a lot. Also, during a trial, he'd have to prove them wrong...if he can.jlabsher said:
jlabsher
Sorry about that chief.
From the Guardian UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1288272,00.html?=rss
Doesn't sound like the book is very fair and balanced. One of the writers has posted anti-Islamic & anti-Catholic rants on a right-wing website, the other was recruited by the Nixon administration to debate Kerry in 1971. RADM Hoffman, one of the group was pizzed @ Kerry attacking his military tactics in his biography. Two of the main funders are a close friend of Karl Rove and a trustee in daddy Bush's library.
Like the article says though, the facts don't matter, the damage has been done by Kerry's handling of it.
Doesn't sound like the book is very fair and balanced. One of the writers has posted anti-Islamic & anti-Catholic rants on a right-wing website, the other was recruited by the Nixon administration to debate Kerry in 1971. RADM Hoffman, one of the group was pizzed @ Kerry attacking his military tactics in his biography. Two of the main funders are a close friend of Karl Rove and a trustee in daddy Bush's library.
Like the article says though, the facts don't matter, the damage has been done by Kerry's handling of it.
Yeah, I read it. Very biased towards John Kerry, which isn't surprising, considering its source. I noticed at least a half dozen omissions and misrepresentations, in addition to the rest of the article.
" Two of the main funders are a close friend of Karl Rove and a trustee in daddy Bush's library."
Why is it that it's such a big deal that a Republican with a lot of money funds this group? You didn't really expect it to come from a Democrat, or someone with NO money. Why is it that it's horrible that a volunteer for Bush resigned his position because he's featured in the SwiftVet's ad, but it's totally ok for Kerry to keep Zach Exley who served as the organizing director for MoveOn.org?
Where does Kerry get off calling the SwiftVets as surrogates for George Bush, but said nothing to the myriad of the likes of George Soros and Michael Moore? Or Exley, who's portrayed Bush as a crack user?
They have no business calling out the Republicans, for they themselves are as guilty as sin.
" Two of the main funders are a close friend of Karl Rove and a trustee in daddy Bush's library."
Why is it that it's such a big deal that a Republican with a lot of money funds this group? You didn't really expect it to come from a Democrat, or someone with NO money. Why is it that it's horrible that a volunteer for Bush resigned his position because he's featured in the SwiftVet's ad, but it's totally ok for Kerry to keep Zach Exley who served as the organizing director for MoveOn.org?
Where does Kerry get off calling the SwiftVets as surrogates for George Bush, but said nothing to the myriad of the likes of George Soros and Michael Moore? Or Exley, who's portrayed Bush as a crack user?
They have no business calling out the Republicans, for they themselves are as guilty as sin.
Penn
Dancing Up A Storm
Kerry's Ferry: Gunrunning in Cambodia
"This month, the Kerry campaign abandoned one claim that John Kerry had made for years about his Vietnam War service and put another into question.
The claim that has been dropped: that Kerry was in Cambodia at Christmastime in 1968. In a 1979 review of the movie "Apocalypse Now" in the Boston Herald, Kerry wrote, "I remember spending Christmas Eve of 1968 five miles across the Cambodian border being shot at by our Vietnamese allies." In a 1986 speech on the Senate floor, Kerry said: "I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. ... I have that memory which is seared -- seared -- in me."
In a 1992 interview with States News Service, Kerry claimed, "On Christmas Eve of 1968, I was on a gunboat in a firefight that wasn't supposed to be taking place." That year, he also told The Associated Press, "Everybody was over there (in Cambodia). Nobody thought twice about it."
These are vivid statements full of colorful detail -- South Vietnamese soldiers shooting off guns to celebrate Christmas. But, as Emily Litella used to say on "Saturday Night Live," "Never mind."
Historian Douglas Brinkley's best-selling "Tour of Duty," based partly on Kerry's wartime journals, places Kerry on Christmas 1968 in Sa Dec, 50 miles from Cambodia. On Aug. 11, Kerry spokesman Michael Meehan said Kerry's boat was "in the watery borders between Vietnam and Cambodia" on Christmas Eve. That's far from an endorsement of Kerry's oft-told stories.
"He was mistaken about Christmas in Cambodia," Brinkley told London's Daily Telegraph last week. But he "went into Cambodian waters three or four times in January and February 1969 on clandestine missions. ... He was a ferry master, a drop-off guy, but it was dangerous as hell. Kerry carries a hat which he was given by one CIA operative." Indeed, Kerry showed the hat to a Washington Post reporter last year. Similarly, in 2000 Kerry told U.S. News' Kevin Whitelaw that he had run guns into Cambodia."
________________________________________________________________
I'm of two minds here: first off I feel slightly happy that Johnny Boy might have to eat some crow(too chewy for my tastes) over this incident, the one that was "seared - seared into him"; but on the other hand, I feel sorry for a guy who thought he had to conjure up stories from the past in order to prove his manhood and garner respect from fellow 'Nam veterans.
"This month, the Kerry campaign abandoned one claim that John Kerry had made for years about his Vietnam War service and put another into question.
The claim that has been dropped: that Kerry was in Cambodia at Christmastime in 1968. In a 1979 review of the movie "Apocalypse Now" in the Boston Herald, Kerry wrote, "I remember spending Christmas Eve of 1968 five miles across the Cambodian border being shot at by our Vietnamese allies." In a 1986 speech on the Senate floor, Kerry said: "I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. ... I have that memory which is seared -- seared -- in me."
In a 1992 interview with States News Service, Kerry claimed, "On Christmas Eve of 1968, I was on a gunboat in a firefight that wasn't supposed to be taking place." That year, he also told The Associated Press, "Everybody was over there (in Cambodia). Nobody thought twice about it."
These are vivid statements full of colorful detail -- South Vietnamese soldiers shooting off guns to celebrate Christmas. But, as Emily Litella used to say on "Saturday Night Live," "Never mind."
Historian Douglas Brinkley's best-selling "Tour of Duty," based partly on Kerry's wartime journals, places Kerry on Christmas 1968 in Sa Dec, 50 miles from Cambodia. On Aug. 11, Kerry spokesman Michael Meehan said Kerry's boat was "in the watery borders between Vietnam and Cambodia" on Christmas Eve. That's far from an endorsement of Kerry's oft-told stories.
"He was mistaken about Christmas in Cambodia," Brinkley told London's Daily Telegraph last week. But he "went into Cambodian waters three or four times in January and February 1969 on clandestine missions. ... He was a ferry master, a drop-off guy, but it was dangerous as hell. Kerry carries a hat which he was given by one CIA operative." Indeed, Kerry showed the hat to a Washington Post reporter last year. Similarly, in 2000 Kerry told U.S. News' Kevin Whitelaw that he had run guns into Cambodia."
________________________________________________________________
I'm of two minds here: first off I feel slightly happy that Johnny Boy might have to eat some crow(too chewy for my tastes) over this incident, the one that was "seared - seared into him"; but on the other hand, I feel sorry for a guy who thought he had to conjure up stories from the past in order to prove his manhood and garner respect from fellow 'Nam veterans.
jlabsher
Sorry about that chief.
It was a one sided article, but it had information in it that hasn't been shown elsewhere. Like the deeply rooted inner circle types who funded it. I am not surprised it is funded by the right, just by how close the main funding is to the Bush whitehouse.
It shows some of the motivation for the swifties, they have never liked Kerry. I think it is amusing that fellow officers are against him but his crew supports him. I have served in commands that had officers who weren't the typical academy boys who "played by the rules". In war, those are the guys you want to be working for, not somebody who waits on the upper levels of command to approve something. I think there is a lot of spite in their attacks, call it what you will, but it does smell of deeply rooted and long held animosity.
Also it shows that the right is just as dirty as the left is being called.
It shows some of the motivation for the swifties, they have never liked Kerry. I think it is amusing that fellow officers are against him but his crew supports him. I have served in commands that had officers who weren't the typical academy boys who "played by the rules". In war, those are the guys you want to be working for, not somebody who waits on the upper levels of command to approve something. I think there is a lot of spite in their attacks, call it what you will, but it does smell of deeply rooted and long held animosity.
Also it shows that the right is just as dirty as the left is being called.
Penn
Dancing Up A Storm
jlabsher said:
I think that is sort of a half-truth, jlab. From all the news and other reports I've seen, there was only one guy who was trotted out in the Nixon era to haggle against Kerry: His name is John O'Neill, and he's been an adamant critic of Johnny Boy since that time.However, the rest of the 250 odd ex-swiftboat members have stayed relatively quiet over these 30 - 35 years.
It's only been since Kerry has made his Vietnam "experience" a centerpiece of his platform campaign that these people have stood up and said: "Wait a minute, that's horse$#!t"! I was there alongside him in another boat like his, and none of that stuff went down like he's claiming it did."
That is the way I've been understanding it.
jlabsher
Sorry about that chief.
penncam said:
However, the rest of the 250 odd ex-swiftboat members have stayed relatively quiet over these 30 - 35 years.
It's only been since Kerry has made his Vietnam "experience" a centerpiece of his platform campaign that these people have stood up and said: "Wait a minute, that's horse$#!t"! I was there alongside him in another boat like his, and none of that stuff went down like he's claiming it did."
That is the way I've been understanding it.
The article says just that about John O'Neill. But it sure is a one-sided paper, was looking at some of the other articles.
Pete
Repete
I think what is more telling about the Senator is how he is handling this whole issue. Nothing like filing suits, supressing free speach of critics and flopping about the floor in a fit of childish rage that people are being mean to him, when I am sure he was sitting in the Holliday Inn giggling when Bush was being tormented and called a "desserter". I am sure he has F 9/11 on DVD and has made it mandatory training film for campaign workers.jlabsher said:
KEEP GOING SENATOR
Pitch a bigger fit and let everyone see what a hypocritic baby you are. Not exactly the confident, unafraid, tough, American role model is he?Maybe when it is all over and he loses, Senator Edwards can represent him in a class action suit against all Vietnam era veterans who either didn't vote for him or talked bad about him for ruining his chance at being boss.
Liquidwrench
New Member
Fill a youngun in here. Has politics always been such a nasty stabfest as it is today? 
Penn
Dancing Up A Storm
I think it's always been a nasty situation, especially the final 6 months before the election happens; it's just that we are getting more coverage faster, and in one sense the news media is seizing on every soundbite, every response from each of the protagonists, we're flooded with the coverage.
Notice too, the delineation of partisan politics between news networks and and the newspapers as well.
Papers like the New York Times is always critical of conservatives, The Washington Post is pretty much balanced, and The Washington Times, is pretty much tilted to the right.
NBC, ABC, and CBS, as well as CNN, seem to tilt to the left in their commentary. JMHO
Notice too, the delineation of partisan politics between news networks and and the newspapers as well.
Papers like the New York Times is always critical of conservatives, The Washington Post is pretty much balanced, and The Washington Times, is pretty much tilted to the right.
NBC, ABC, and CBS, as well as CNN, seem to tilt to the left in their commentary. JMHO
Last edited: