BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 12:17 PM

Amos

"It is unconscionably poor thinking to make gross generalizations like that and pretend that some aspect of the label applies to all members of the class. It is not only bad thinking, it is also unjust to members of the set, and it is also -- because it distorts truth and promotes falsehood -- unethical."

As a self-declared conservative, I think you will be seeing this quote a lot, as people make gross generalizations and pretend that some aspect of the label applies to all members of the class. perhaps BOTH sides need to try to be a little more ethical?

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 01:58 AM

Amos:

It is likewise true that when someone disapproves of Kerry they are labeled as a Bush supporter and a liar. No one can bring up a single facet about Kerry that is not supportive of him with out be called a liar, stupid, right wing extremist and a Bush propagandist.

Then in the next breath accusations are hurled at Bush instead of defenses of Kerry. I guess the best defense is a good offense.

I am not here to defend Bush. I am here to point out that Kerry does not convince me that he is any better or even as good. Maybe if I was in a wheel chair and someone gave me empty promises that I could walk again or if I was Black and someone convinced me that my votes were not being counted, or if I was draftable and Bush might start a draft, I might be convinced that Kerry is better. But the facts that Kerry uses these transparent strategys tells me he is not so great or he would not need to use them.

So go ahead and start ranting on Bush, label me a right wing extremist, and call me a liar.

I deserve it for being an independent thinker.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 01:37 AM

I don't know why you folks (some of you) seem to think it is accurate appropriate or acceptable to sling these damn labels around and pass judgments on huge lots of people in one swoop by classifying them as liberals, Democrats or whatever. It is unconscionably poor thinking to make gross generalizations like that and pretend that some aspect of the label applies to all members of the class. It is not only bad thinking, it is also unjust to members of the set, and it is also -- because it distorts truth and promotes falsehood -- unethical.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 17 Oct 04 - 12:28 AM

Brucie: Democrats are only happy when everybody agrees with them. All you do is snipe and never contribute. Is that the limit of your abilities? Al Qaeda could use you in Baghdad. Here is their training manual in case you want to read it.

ABC NEWS Political Director Mark Halperin Internal Memo Dated Friday October 8, 2004:

It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave.
I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.

The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.

Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.

We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.

I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.

It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right.

What the hell does this memo mean? I don't need any "help" evaluating what the candidates are saying. It looks to me like an ABC bias against Bush and for Kerry when they say they don't have to hold both side "equally" accountable. Of corse I can't see through the superior eyes of a liberal or a Democrat

CBS has already demonstrated a bias against Bush. They backed off of their big scoop on Bush and will not say who told them about the forged documents about Bush's ANG record.

I agree with everybody so they won't beat me up.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 11:58 PM

OG,

You miss the point. Democrats are NEVER wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Peace
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 11:58 PM

So, you'll be changing it soon, then. Good.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 11:56 PM

I think there is one standard for Democrats and another for Republicans.

A Democrat like former Klu Klux Klan member Robert C. Byrd, Senator from West Virginia, can repeat the racist phrase "White Niggers" twice while speaking on national TV and it is considered completely acceptable by Democrats. The only penance required is a written apology from his office.

A Mississippi Republican Senator, Trent Lott made the comment at the 100th birthday party of Senator Strom Thurmond:
"I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either."

There arose a hew and cry from Democrats across the country about his "racist" remarks that even 4 public verbal apologies for any thing his remarks might have inferred was not good enough for the Democrats. Eventually he had to resign.

The prevailing justification is the Republicans are mean and Democrats are fighting for the rights of the average American. Therefore Democrats can do things that Republicans are not allowed to do.

I am not a Republican or a Democrat. I think for myself. I change my position whenerve I find out I am wrong.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 07:56 PM

How should I know? I'm not a liberal.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 07:46 PM

If one thing a conservative says is false, everything he says must be ignored.

If one thing a liberal say is true, than everything he says must be taken as true.


Do I have the right attitude, now?

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 07:36 PM

A "fact" is anything that a liberal presents, whetehre ther is any reality for it or not. a "lie" is anything that might disprove a "fact"

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 07:23 PM

Define "fact", beardedbruce.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 06:35 PM

OG, you are NOT allowed to bring any fact into the arguement unless it comes from a properly certified liberal source. You are just wasting our time telling us things that we don't want to hear about....

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 01:41 PM

I direct your attention to this thread Old Guy.

Excerpt:

"ABC News Nightline went to Vietnam and interviewed villagers who witnessed the firefight in February 1969 that led to John Kerry being awarded a Silver Star. The incident is a center piece of the allegations made by the so-called 'Swift Boat Veterans for Truth', whose leader John O'Neill has claimed that there was no firefight and that Kerry shot dead a fleeing teenager. Nightline's detailed interviews with the villagers, including former Viet Cong fighters who took part in the incident, verified Kerry's account of events. When confronted by Nightline's Ted Koppel, a clearly rattled O'Neill refused to address the content of the report."

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Oct 04 - 11:02 AM

Amos & Frank:

"He was aggressive, but vain and prone to impulsive judgment, often with disregard to specific tactical assignments," Hoffman said. "He was a loose cannon."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38337

"Another officer, retired Capt. Charley Plumly, said Kerry was under his command for two or three naval operations. He criticized Kerry's attitude and behavior."
"Kerry would be described as devious, self-absorbing, manipulative, disdain for authority, disruptive," Plumly said, "but the most common phrase you would hear [was] 'requires constant supervision.' "
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=/SpecialReports/archive/200405/SPE20040504a.html

"Sen. John Kerry was told to leave Vietnam by three colleagues upset with his behavior and attitudes, according to a fellow swift-boat officer during the war."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38483

I am thinking very hard but others are hardly thinking.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 11:40 PM

Frank:

Here's some information that might put you in touch with reality. Don't tell John Kerry though. He thinks he IS in touch with reality:

"Czech police officers train Iraqi cadets in Jordan "
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/57241

"Turkey Wants to Train Iraqi Police in Jordan"
www.bianet.org/2004/08/01_eng/news38887.htm

"Jordan will train Iraqi police, troops "
www.jordanembassyus.org/09302003001.htm

"CANADIAN POLICE OFFICERS HEAD FOR JORDAN TO TRAIN IRAQI POLICE. "
www.rcmp.ca/news/n_0401_e.htm

"The Iraqi female recruits are currently being trained in Jordan by the Jordanian army, which has females in its army and knows how to train them" www.tradoc.army.mil/pao/TNSarchives/May04/050104.htm

"843 Iraqi Officers Graduate in Jordan (June 21"
www.defense-aerospace.com/produit/40960_us.html

"NATO Partners Agree to Train Iraqi Troops White House Wins Support It Had ... allows for the possibility that some of the training will take place outside Iraq "
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ articles/A10255-2004Jun27.html

"US to train Iraqi police volunteers in Hungary. "
www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=640

"Germany is willing to help instruct the Iraqi police. Furthermore, the Iraqi military can be trained at our federal army academies. We will, of course, bear the expenses for these measures as we always do wherever we are present."
http://www.aicgs.org/research/focus2002/kempeiraqi.shtml

"Paris -- John Kerry may be overstating his ability to broaden the international coalition in the Iraq war and to win back countries alienated by President Bush's military strategy, European analysts say."
"German and French officials, for example, have stated repeatedly that they will not join any coalition in Iraq "
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/10/05/MNG6K93PEA1.DTL

"Kerry says the Iraq invasion was a pointless diversion from the real war on terror, which was in Afghanistan against Al Qaida. He says Bush fought the wrong war at the wrong place and wrong time.
Really? And he expects France and Germany to belatedly join this pointless diversionary war, at the wrong time and wrong place? And win it? "
http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/880031.cms

"Kerry's magic alliances will not materialize, because some nations have their self-interest at stake and choose a path of anti-Americanism in the hopes of appeasing their own peoples and the beheaders at large."
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=52194&d=30&m=9&y=2004

Posted by: Admin on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 11:41 AM GMT
According to a Nov. 20, 2002 AP story:
    Each automaker's fleet of light trucks — a class that includes SUVs, pickups and minivans — would have to get 22.2 miles per gallon by the 2007 model year, compared with the current requirement of 20.7 mpg, Bush administration officials said.

    The 1.5 mpg increase would be phased in by half-gallon steps beginning in 2005."
http://www.underreported.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=444&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

Bush Statement on Energy Efficiency February 25, 2002 : "Hybrid cars, the likes of which we just saw over there, are already in existence. They run on a mixture of gas and electric power. They are several times more fuel efficient than most cars on the road today.

I was told by the representatives of the manufacturing companies that more and more hybrid cars will be available in the marketplace next year. And this is good news. It's good news for our environment, and it's good news for American consumers who are not only worried about the environment, but understand the ramifications of dependency on foreign sources of crude oil.

And then the fuel cells are being developed. Fuel cells will power cars with little or no waste at all. We happen to believe that fuel cells are the wave of the future; that fuel cells offer incredible opportunity.

Now, there's a lot of obstacles that must be overcome in order to make fuel cells economically viable. And, therefore, we're promoting more research and development. In January, Secretary Abraham announced a $150 million FreedomCAR plan, focused on development of fuel cell technologies that run on hydrogen, whose only emission is water vapor."
http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-gl0214.html
"Because of Al Gore, We Are Twice as Dependent on Foreign Oil as We Were in the 1970s Clinton-Gore Opposition to Domestic Oil Production Enriches Arabs By: Mary Mostert, Analyst, Original Sources (www.originalsources.com) July 6, 2000" http://www.bannerofliberty.com/OS7-00MQC/7-6-2000.1.html

"Although he does not like to talk about it now, Kerry once even bragged about supporting a 50-cent tax on gasoline.
Among the "alternative" fuels that Kerry promotes is wind power. Yet Kerry has refused to endorse one specific wind-farm project for his home state that a power company is already set to build. Why? One suspected reason: The site of this proposed windmill farm is in Nantucket Sound, at a location the Kerrys can see from their summer mansion on Nantucket Island."
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=5006

"in February, when speaking before a union group in Detroit (the SUV capital of the United States), Kerry was proud of his collection. When asked what vehicles he owns, Kerry replied, "We have some SUVs…I have an old Dodge 600 that I keep at the Senate…and also a Chevy, a big Suburban.
on April 22, when speaking to a group of reporters on a conference call, Kerry outright denied his previous statement, definitively claiming, "I don't own an SUV."
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3396.html

"Kerry said it's important for his family to buy American cars and pledged to keep car manufacturing jobs in the country if elected."
www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/ story/0,1280,-4009850,00.html
"
There are eight "family" cars and SUVs, including the 1995 Suburban (15 mpg highway, 12 mpg city), a 1993 Land Rover Defender (12 mpg highway, 10 mpg city), a 1989 Jeep Cherokee (20 mpg highway, 16 mpg city), a 1994 Jeep Grand Cherokee (20 mpg highway, 15 mpg city), a 2001 Audi Allroad (21 mpg highway, 15 mpg city), a 2001 Chrysler PT Cruiser (25 mpg highway, 20 mpg city), a 1985 Dodge 600 Convertible (26 mpg highway, 23 mpg city), and a 2002 Chrysler 300M (26 mpg highway, 18 mpg city). Kerry, however, only owns up to the latter two.
    Then there's the 2002 Harley Davidson (his), two powerboats (one his, one hers), a power inflatable 2001 Novurania (his), and a Gulfstream II private jet (hers)."
http://john-kerry.tonyspencer.com/john-kerry-environment-suv.htm

"The old guard is scrapped, card by card, only to be replaced by a Governing Council that, despite being handpicked by the US occupying authority, promises sovereignty and prosperity."
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/023B71D9-9C84-4DC8-969E-32AD55B82A3D.htm

Gerhard Schroeder: "I do know George Bush as someone whose political approach is rational and who, regardless of our differences in the Iraq question, always knows what needs to be done."
http://www.aicgs.org/research/focus2002/kempeiraqi.shtml

"the continuing defeatism is causing real harm. It is very demoralizing for us here in uniform to read & hear such negativity in our press. It is fodder for our enemies to use against us and against the vast majority of Iraqis who want their new government to succeed. It causes the American public to start thinking about the acceptability of 'cutting our losses' and pulling out, which would be devastating for Iraq for generations to come. Muslim militants would claim a huge victory, causing us to have to continue to fight them elsewhere (remember, in war 'Away' games are always preferable to 'Home' games). Reports like that also cause Iraqis to begin to fear that we will pull out before we finish the job, and thus they are less willing to openly support their interim government and U.S./Coalition activities."
http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/9/30/92736.shtml

"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs who should be arrested, exiled or hanged." Abraham Lincoln

"When asked whom they would trust as commander in chief, people in military service and their families chose President Bush over Sen. John Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran, by almost a 3-to-1 margin."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/10/15/politics1323EDT0590.DTL

I could be wrong.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 09:03 PM

As for the scurrilous use of FCC licenses to promote a candidate, the New York Times rebuts it:

Published: October 15, 2004




The Sinclair Broadcasting Group, one of the nation's most powerful television conglomerates, has a sad record of using its public license to promote Republican causes. Earlier this year, Sinclair tried to censor an installment of "Nightline" on its 62 stations when Ted Koppel announced plans to read out the names of soldiers killed in Iraq. Now the company, owned by financial backers of President Bush and other Republican politicians, plans to actively join the re-election campaign.

Its plan sounds like the plot of a bad political novel, or an actual election in post-Soviet Russia. The Times and other newspapers reported this week that Sinclair, a Maryland-based company that reaches nearly a quarter of American households, would broadcast a propaganda film in the next two weeks that labels Senator John Kerry a liar, a traitor and a "willing accomplice" of the enemy during the Vietnam War. It claims, falsely, that his antiwar statements inspired the North Vietnamese to step up the torture of American prisoners, and it is filled with other distortions about the war in Vietnam.

Sinclair has instructed its stations, which are heavily represented in swing states like Florida and Wisconsin, to run the film without commercials in the evening. The company already compels them to broadcast editorials and commentaries favorable to Mr. Bush and his policies. But this is a whole new arena, and little different from making the stations give donations to the Republican campaign.

We would be just as appalled if one of the major networks forced its affiliates to broadcast "Fahrenheit 9/11" next week and call it a news program.

The movie that caught Sinclair's eye, a 45-minute diatribe called "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal," rehashes Republican charges that are familiar to everyone from the latest round of ads attacking Mr. Kerry's antiwar activities: primarily that he lied to the Senate in 1971 about atrocities in Vietnam and that his testimony and the antiwar movement in general aided the North Vietnamese and harmed American soldiers. This line of reasoning neatly dovetails with the Bush campaign's assertions that criticizing Mr. Bush's conduct of the war in Iraq is unpatriotic and harms American soldiers.

Eighteen Democratic senators asked the Federal Communications Commission to stop Sinclair from broadcasting the new film, but the commission was right to refuse. As painful as it is to defend this agency, which has shown more interest in Janet Jackson's breast than in really doing its job, we believe that the federal government cannot indulge in that sort of prior restraint.

But the F.C.C. also cannot ignore Sinclair's poor record when it comes to meeting its obligation to act responsibly and fairly in the public interest, a duty it assumed when it accepted custody of a license to broadcast on the public airwaves. Broadcasting "Stolen Honor" within two weeks of the election would clearly violate those commitments.

Sinclair says it is just trying to give its viewers news. Unfortunately, this film is not news, and not journalism. It makes no attempt at balance or fairness. Its interviews with 17 men who were imprisoned and tortured in Hanoi are powerful. But the narrator and producer, Carlton Sherwood, a former journalist on leave from his job in a company that provides "homeland security" services to the government, exploits these brave men and their distinguished service for a cause that he openly says is personal.

Sinclair's First Amendment defenses lack credibility because it denied those rights to "Nightline." At the time, Sinclair's spokesman, Mark Hyman, who doubles as a conservative commentator, said Mr. Koppel's program did not deserve to be broadcast because it had "no proportionality" and ignored other aspects of the issues. It was hard to see how that could describe a tribute to the war dead, but it's a perfect description of "Stolen Honor."

Yesterday, Mr. Hyman seemed to be hedging a bit on Sinclair's plans, saying the program was not finished and would be balanced. But it was unnerving to hear him adhere to his bizarre claim that the major broadcast networks who wisely declined to run "Stolen Honor" when Mr. Sherwood offered it to them were no different than "Holocaust deniers."

If the company is thinking about seriously changing course, it should do it quickly. Sinclair is in dangerous territory. If television companies force their local stations to campaign blatantly, it will not be long before the administrations that have the power to grant licenses begin expecting such favors as a quid pro quo. And the public will question whether it can afford to allow such concentrations of power in the hands of huge media corporations.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 08:48 PM

Frank:

Well thought, and rightly said. Pay attention, OG -- Frank is being thoughtful, a condition I recommend to you and your ilk, to boot.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 04:51 PM

Old Guy,

Kerry has a decent plan to end the fisaco in Iraq. The first is to train an Iraqi defense force outside of Iraq and elicit the help of the allies that Bush has alienated. His committment to this goal is as intense as anything Bush has proposed. Bush has made a pretense of a "willing coalition" which in fact has not taken on the responsibility that Bush claims they have. Kerry is intelligent enough to develop a true coalition who accept this responsibility and would ask the UN for help. It's in the best interest of a rational world to stabilize Iraq by taking the American corporate interests out of Iraq and replacing them with a more impartial group. Kerry would reunite the world community by behaving in a civil and sensitive manner. Cheney is wrong. We do need sensitive as well as strong leadership and the two are not mutually exclusive.

We need to reduce our dependency on oil. Kerry has made this clear. Alternative energy sources must be explored.

Kerry has not alienated allies at all. Alawi is not an ally buy employed by Bush who wants the election to go his way in Iraq at any cost as he does in the US.

A failed policy is costing American lives, not anyone's critique of the war. Not all soldiers believe they should be there and in the future, we will see more migrations of them to Canada and other places.


The idea that Democrats don't care about our troops is ludicrous.

You say, "If the American people would show a unified commitment to the war against terrorism the violence would abate sooner."

This is not necessarilly true. Violence brings about more violence. The Iraqi people are becoming unified in their repudiation of American forces. The only unified commitment that should be made is to understand the source of terrorism, define it better, and create the conditions that eradicate it. These are not just military. It requires judgement, education, respect for our country, and understanding, something that Bush has not shown during his tenure. He has been reckless in his foreign policy and has actually helped Al Quaeda by so doing.


The biggest defense of Kerry is that he is a diplomat and not a hot-headed impulsive commander-in-chief. The answer to terrorism ultimately is world diplomacy not a scorched-earth policy.

The results of this policy would be many countries of the world coming on board to help the US in it's fair and even-handed approach to solving the problem of "terror". Respect for the US would go up. Right now, it's the lowest it's ever been throughout the world. When America can act as a leader and not a military dictatorship, the world will recognize the value of our democracy.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 02:10 PM

OG:

How much of the present insurgency do you think is attributable to a long-term " gathering threat ", and how much of it do you think is attributable to a violent rejection of occupation?

The entire Vietnam war was fought based on a misapprehension about which was which, according to a conversation held years later between Macnamara and the aged general who led the VC campaigns.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 01:46 PM

My Idea of winning in Iraq is to keep large military forces there fighting back and train Iraqi forces until the insurgency dies down to the point that the Iraqi government can handle it.

Then keep a small military force there to protect contractors rebuilding the infrastructure. Hopefully Nato will step in. Isn't this the same plan that Bush and Kerry have?

There will be no ticker tape victory parades and signed peace treatys.

The terrorists will never be eliminated completely but it will not be "fashionable" to come to Iraq to fight the creation of a democracy.

There will be great political struggle there to create a Islamic government like Iran. Hopefully the citizens of Iraq will have a taste of freedom and reject being ruled by a Mullah.

Alawi could turn into a dictator like Saddam did but we must take the chance and hope for the best. Japan was converted to Democracy and they are now our allies.

My idea of loosing would be to listen to a bunch of liberal wussies, pull out and let terrorists and Iran take over. Then we would be looking at another Iran with nuclear capabilities and terrorists with nuclear weapons.

America would become like Israel taking terrorist attacks regularly. Something should have been done long ago to stem the tide of terrorisim but previous administrations eithere did not see the gathering threat or did not have the guts to do anything substantial.

We are paying the price of that inaction now.

How do others here define winning and loosing?

Open to correction.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 01:21 PM

OG:

Saddam's support of terrorism is vague; I won't argue that he didn't but the problem is that terrorism is too lartge a condition to be used as "the enemy". The terror caused by the US in various attacks agianst civilians over the years is enough to make it clear that we are on that list too.

But he did not make any deals with Al Quaeda as far as anyone has shown me. And out immediate enemy is AL Quaeda. Bush took something AL Quaeda did (an act) and claimed that all instances of that act constituted the nation's enemy, which is really stupid. It is also slippery, because if you can sell that bill of goods you get carte blanche to wage war at will. War thus becomes a matter of leader's opinion instead of national policy.

Now, who would want to do such a thing?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 11:21 AM

Nope, sorry, you gotta put up. You said "I think we all agree that it is to our benefit to win now that we are in it". Before I can agree with you, I need to know what *you* mean by winning.

BTW, I have never claimed we can't win.

Also, I'm open to correction, but I think the opposite of loosing is fastening.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Matt Taibi is an arrogant asshole
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 10:22 AM

Matt Taibbi

Matt Taibbi is the editor fo the Moscow-based alternative newspaper the eXile http://www.familyresource.com/contributors/8/

"Well, that's rich, isn't it? Christopher Hitchens crawling out of a bottle long enough to denounce Michael Moore as a coward. I can't imagine anything more uplifting, except maybe a zoo baboon humping the foot of a medical school cadaver.

All journalists are cowards. Hitchens knows it, I know it, everybody in this business knows it. If there were any justice at all, every last goddamn one of us would be lowered, head-first, into a wood-chipper. Over Arizona. Shoot a nice red mist over the whole state, make it arable for a year or two. A year's worth of fava beans and endive for the children of Bangladesh: I dare anyone in our business to say that that wouldn't represent a better use of our rotting bodies than the actual fruits of our labor."
http://www.nypress.com/17/26/news&columns/MattTaibbi.cfm

Continuing to bring you the best in penis-related campaign news, we learn a bit more about a controversy in the Kerry campaign. Specifically, Kerry correspondent Matt Taibbi once threw a pie of equine semen at NYT correspondent Michael Wines. So it's sort of fitting that he's covering the Kerry press corps, where his antics have included dressing up as a Viking and shoving cameras in reporters' faces.

"Sperm Pie-Throwing Journo Terrorizes Kerry Press Corps Now, those reporters really should consider themselves lucky. But journos aren't the only ones upset: After Howie Kurtz wrote about Taibbi in his column on Monday, former Clark press flak Matt Bennett emailed Kurtz to lodge a complaint. (Read it after the jump.) He cited the sperm-tossing and Taibbi's Nation piece on Clark (which was not flattering). There's also something about some "ethical issue" in Taibbi's Nation piece. (Apparently, Taibbi had an opinion of Clark before he started writing it. Doesn't he get the pre-article lobotomy like everyone else?). Bennett sums up: "Taibbi is, to put it plainly, a nut and a hack."
http://www.wonkette.com/archives/sperm-piethrowing-journo-terrorizes-kerry-press-corps-003547.php

"The girl, normally an office secretary, worked for the eXile. She was buying Pobornik�s sperm because she�d been gruffly ordered to do so by the newspaper�s editors. They�d been vague about what they needed it for, saying only that they needed a large quantity of horse sperm for some prank they were planning."

"�Cooking for the Enemy� with the Anarchist Gourmet
A PIE FOR MICHAEL WINES
    The true sign of any gourmet chef worth his salt is his ability to work with the rarest, most expensive and exotic ingredients. The Chinese have their shark fins and the endless varieties of soup based thereon, while the Piemontese of Northern Italy have their beloved white truffles, which are literally worth more than their weight in gold. We here at the eXile have a rich culinary tradition of our own, with one ingredient in particular being treasured above all others: unadulterated horse semen.
    Prices for this ingredient vary based on the quality of the source, of course. For example, prices of $100,000 per ounce are not unheard of for the finest specimens. However, sperm of such quality is typically reserved for the meals of kings and other economic royalty. In our case, 5 ounces of spunk from �Pobornik�—a decidedly mediocre 15-year-old dark bay thoroughbred who has produced no exceptional offspring—cost a reasonable 500 rubles. This is plenty good enough for a Moscow hack target, even one as diabolical as New York Times bureau chief Michael Wines.
    Monetary issues aside, simply procuring the horse sperm can be a difficult process. In most Westernized countries, you will need to present all varieties of identification and licenses certifying that you will be using the cum for appropriate purposes. Here in Moscow, meanwhile, we were able to cut a deal with Moscow Horse Farm #1 by claiming we needed the sperm for some vague cosmetics experimentation.
    Any number of delicious recipes would benefit from the addition or substitution of high-quality horse semen, but nothing says �We Got You!� like the good old-fashioned pie in the face. As it happens, horse spunk is very close in both texture and nutritional content to the corn starch that is commonly used in custard cream pies.
    Below you will find the basic recipe we used for the Equine Custard Cream Pie with which we hit Michael Wines in the face last Friday, March 30, 2001. Even the beginner should find the recipe relatively easy to follow and technically undemanding. The chef who is more experienced with the handling of horse sperm may wish to alter the quantities somewhat according to personal taste. Please note, however, that use of milk in excess of the 1 1/2 cups quoted will in most cases compromise the structural integrity of the custard-cream mixture.
    A final note on handling the horse semen. The specimen may be stored without detriment for up to one year if kept in an airtight container in your freezer. As we learned the hard way, however, keeping the sample in a refrigerator may cause the sample to assume a bright yellowish hue that may only be described as �radioactive.� It is not known if this change has an effect on the sperm�s nutritional attributes, or if it involves any kind of health risk for the human target. In any event, avoid letting the semen come in to contact with your skin, and it�s probably a good idea to dispose of any implements used in the preparation of the pie.
   
    Equine Custard Cream Pie
    1 ready-made pie crust
    3 egg yolks
    5 oz. fresh horse semen
    3/4 cup sugar
    1 1/2 cups whole milk
    1/2 teaspoon coarse (kosher) salt
    1 tablespoon butter (at room temperature)
    1 teaspoon vanilla extract
    1/2 cup heavy whipping cream
   
    for the topping:
    1 cup fresh or frozen (thawed) strawberries
    2 tablespoons sugar
    1/4 cup milk
   
    In a medium saucepan, beat the egg yolks. Stir in the horse semen and sugar until well blended. Add the milk and salt. Simmer on low heat for 5 to 7 minutes, until the custard mixture begins to bubble and froth. Stir in the vanilla extract. Keep in refrigerator for 2 to 4 hours to cool and congeal.
    Using an electric mixer, whip the cream until the formation of stiff peaks. With a spatula, gently fold the whipped cream into the cooled custard. Final mixture should be semi-liquid, with the consistency of fairly runny pudding.
    Pour the custard-cream mixture into the pie crust, filling almost to the top. Using the tines of a fork, poke the surface of the custard repeatedly in order to form tiny, meringue-like peaks. Keep in refrigerator until ready to serve.
    To make the topping, mash the strawberries (raspberries may also be used) with a fork or puree in a blender. Stir in the sugar. Add the milk gradually while stirring, as much as the mixture will accept without becoming excessively runny.
    Just before serving, pour the topping onto the pie in whatever pattern you desire, the distinctive eXile �X� in our case. Be sure not to cover the entire surface of the custard! The topping is primarily a decorative accent, after all—you want your victim, assuming his palette is sufficiently well developed, to be able to taste the horse sperm you took such pains to procure.
    Good luck!"
http://www.exile.ru/113/lead.php

MT

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 08:13 AM

This article does a pretty good job of explaining the BushShiteApologist types & their tactics. Short exerpt follows:

        ...One of the great cliches of liberal criticism of the Christian fight is the idea that these people are wrongheaded because they profess to know the will of God. H.L Mencken put that one best, and perhaps first: "It is only the savage, whether of the African bush or the American gospel tent, who pretends to know the will and intent of God exactly and completely."

        These criticisms sound like they make sense. But I think they are a little off-base. The problem not only with fundamentalist Christians but with Republicans in general is not that they act on blind faith, without thinking. The problem is that they are incorrigible doubters with an insatiable appetite for Evidence. What they get off on is not Believing, but in hav-ing their beliefs tested. That's why their conversations and their media are so com-pletely dominated by implacable bogey-men: marrying gays, liberals, the ACLU, Sean Penn, Europeans and so on. Their faith both in God and in their political convictions is too weak to survive with-out an unceasing string of real and imagi-nary confrontations with those people -and for those confrontations, they are constantly assembling evidence and facts to make their case.

        But here's the twist. They are not looking for facts with which to defeat opponents. They are looking for facts that ensure them an ever-expanding roster of opponents. They can be correct facts, incorrect facts, irrelevant facts, it doesn't matter. The point is not to win the argument, the point is to make sure the argument never stops. Permanent war isn't a policy imposed from above; it's an emotional imperative that rises from the bottom. In a way, it actually helps if the fact is dubious or untrue (like the Swift-boat business), because that guarantees an argument. You're arguing the particulars, where you're right, while they're arguing the underlying generalities, where they are.

        Once you grasp this fact, you're a long way to understanding what the Hannitys and Limbanghs figured out long ago: These people will swallow anything you feed them, so long as it leaves them with a demon to wrestle with in their dreams...


exerpted from "Bush Like Me" by Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone,28 Oct 2004

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 15 Oct 04 - 01:02 AM

Amos:

I am not saying Saddam would be attacking the US. I am saying the US would be under 9/11 or PLO style attacks here in America, be it Al Quaeda, some future version of it or existing orgs like the PLO.

It is clear that Saddam supported terrorisim short of actually funding Al Quaeda. So does Iran. Korea is or will be in the terrorist supply business.

Over in another thread I listed the recipients of the oil vouchers from Saddam. Two names are on there that I am very familiar with. The PlO and Abu Abbas. I am sure that several of the other companys are fronts for terrorist orgs. Investigators are trying to track them down.

Read my lips, I could be wrong.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 11:58 PM

Your hypothesis that Saddam would have escalated to the level of attacking the United States is not supported by hard facts that I can see, OG.

The fact is a huge number of Iraqi citizens have been sliced and diced because someone thought Saddam should be taken out.

I have never said war is "never justified". The question is, should it be used easily, or as a last extreme measure? Because I respect life and value humans I argue it should be used ONLY when no choice is available. Mister Bush believed otherwise and sent the dogs of war into slaughtering mode.

Politically, this brought about one good thing -- the downfall of the dictatorship of Hussein. But it did it at an awful costs, brutalized lives, slaughtered children, lost American men, and beheaded kidnappees which would not have happened absent the invasion. This is like buying a starving child a Kiddy Meal and paying $3,000 dollars for it -- and then beating the kid up because she doesn't appreciate how much you are spending to help her. It was exorbitant and misguided, and it was (I believe) done for other reasons than those announced to you and to me.

As for Kerry, it may seem logical to you that he should be suing folks right now, instead of focusing on the campaign, but at least grant him the right to decide such things for himself. If I were in his shoes I would feel a mite too busy to worry about natterers like the Swift Boat Liars for Bush. There is no reason to presume guilt because he isn't behaving the way you would.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 11:43 PM

Tia: Winning is the opposite of loosing. Just define loosing first. There are plenty of losers claiming we can't win so winning would be what they think can't be done.

Amos:

It seems logical that if people were telling lies about Kerry, he would sue them. If there were questions remaining about his military records, he would release them. Why would he try to suppress the distribution of the lies rather than prove that they are lies? Why threaten to do something and not do it? So much for being steady, honest and dependable.

You have not addressed the question about what if a previous administration had taken action on Saddam. It tells me (maybe not others) that you are not thinking through the question to arrive at an answer. The next question I would ask about what if a previous administration had taken action against Saddam is "what would happen in the future if Bush did not take the initiative now"

I think the obvious answer would be even more bloodshed and money wasted.

Answers like it is not justification do not answer anything. What would constitute justification?

You might think I am picking a fight with you but I would really like to know your opinion. I want to know because I can't figure out how someone can come to the conclusion that war is never justified.

I think if nothing is done about Saddam, Iran and Korea we would eventually be living like the Israelis only on a nuclear scale.

And your answer to the question about the distention over the war is that it is not costing any lives. So that means that the insurgents are not considering the distention about the war among Americans a weakness? They are using the divide and conquer strategy. You and every dissenter are playing into their hands. They use the media to their advantage when they tape beheadings and deliver them to Al Jazera. Other muslims see it and it makes them bolder. Americans see it and it makes some of them weaker. They also know some politicians will use the war as a tool to get them elected.

    I thought for a while you were questioning your Anti-bush stance and looking for new evidence but now it seems the doors of the mind are closed.

   I could change my mind.


Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 09:31 PM

A

On your last post I can agree completely.


The decision to go to war is never a good thing- but sometimes it is required, in order to prevent a greater loss. The big problem is determining just when it is justified.

Peace at ANY cost is far too expensive.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 09:23 PM

LH:

Excuse me, but there was a genuine and concentrated attack on the American mainland a few years ago; there was nothing fictitious about those three thousand lives snuffed out in the name of hatred.

Be grateful you are a member of a nation at peace.

I despise warfare and those who promote it. But be careful where you draw the line between fact and illusion. Conspiracies are always easier to imagine than to find, and hard facts are often harder to confront than fictions.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 08:13 PM

It's divide and conquer, Old Guy, divide and conquer. The Islamic Jihadists have fallen for it, and you have fallen for it. Ordinary people of many nations will die fighting each other while the architects of the whole tragedy grow richer and more powerful. The War on Terrorism is a fraud, invented to divide and conquer the ordinary people of the World, just like your presidential elections are a fraud. They can control you as long as they can make you afraid, as long as they can stir up your fear and hatred. They can control the angry Muslim as long as they can make him afraid. They can send you out to kill each other. Divide and conquer. Who creates the money? Who builds the A-bombs and cruise missiles? Who controls the oil? Who arranges loans at the World Bank? Those are the people in command, and they invented this phony War on Terrorism.

I am not willing to kill anyone in order to advance their unholy agenda. (And they don't really care, because I'm not important enough to matter...let's hope they don't care, anyway...or I would probably be leaving this embodiment a bit sooner than I had planned.)

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 05:01 PM

Thanks, Frank. I'm witchoo.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 04:54 PM

Alawi is a puppet of the Bush Administration. He is a potential Saddam.

Bush is not only far from perfect but he is out of touch with reality.
It's not Kerry who thinks he knows everything. There are so many lies being heaped upon Kerry these days that it's impossible for people to know much that's truthful. Most of them are coming from the Bush camp.

It's not true that Theresa Heinz Kerry has an offshore account. Prove it with some reliable source other than the Washington Times or the Op Eds on the WSJ. Another lie. It sounds like a concoction from the billionaire smear merchant, Richard Mellon Scaife. Or Karl Rove.

Theresa is an educated woman who actually can speak other languages than English which is an accomplishment that many anti-intellectual bigots denegrate.

Edwards is a compassionate advocate for those who suffer under the injustice of the medical profession. His cases include the defense of a young girl who was injured in a swimming pool through the responsibility of the owners.

The idea that going to war with Iran, Syria or any other country is madness.
Going to war is a grave mistake that if anyone glorifies it or thinks of it as an option to solve problems is in serious emotional trouble.

I disagree with this thread and it's unfactual and empty rhetoric.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 01:27 PM

It is not costing any lives to call a spade a spade, OG.

I don't have any reliable data on the points you raise, merely about as much noise in one direction as you have in another. The idea that the absence of a lawsuit is a proof of truth is pretty watery, IMHO.

The idea that Bush had to start the war in Iraq because Clinton failed to do so is palpably ridiculous. This is not an extension of Gulf War 1 -- whose whole goal was to restore self-determination to Kuwait. There was no invasion, no assault that precipitated this one.

There were no WMD and your imaginary terrorists were not in evidence. A lot of them have come to Iraq since the war begun, though, called to arms by the violence. By being in Iraq, US troops have provided them with a perfect excuse -- nay, an explicit invitation to "bring them on" -- one of the syupidest diplomatic phrases ever uttered. And we are paying theprice for that stupidity.
From our own families, a thousand sons and daughters snuffed because of that stupidity.

It is hard to step up to the fact that one has been terribly, seriously wrong, but if Bush is half the man his admirers think he is, it is time for him to do so. But it won't happen, I expect.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 01:17 PM

Please define what you mean by "winning the war". Before we can all agree on anything, let's see if we agree on what constitutes a "win".

Open to Correction.

TIA

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 01:01 PM

Amos:

If Bill Clinton (or possibly even Old Man Bush for that matter) had decided to find and wipe out the terrorist networks before the cancer spread, would be be experiencing the level of loss of life that we are experiencing now?

It would have cost the lives of innocent civilians and military people but far fewer than the present amount.

Think of Kosovo. That was a just and successful military action and they I think ended genocide. How many lives were saved there?

The first Gulf war was completely justified and passed all of Kerry's global tests, even though he voted against it. The current Iraq problem began when we let Saddam's Army get away. We ended it too soon.

This Iraq war is a continuation of that war. It is something we should have done then but due to the delay it is a more difficult task. Think of the lives that could have been saved if we continued and wiped out Saddam's army and took Baghdad then.

As to Swifties and "their "charges" have been repeatedly and conclusively shown to be bogus", I have not seen or heard a shred of evidence that the Swifties charges are false or cooked up by the Republicans, only Democratic rhetoric. The Swifites are Republicans. They would have to be Republicans to oppose Kerry. Why have no law suits been filed if they are lying?

O'Neil who wrote the "Unfit for Command" book has "challenged the presidential candidate to sue him if he's wrong about any of his claims." "If he didn't wound himself with a grenade, causing a rice fanny wound, and then reported it to the Navy as a water mine – if he didn't do that on March 13th he should sue me," Where are the law suits? "Kerry's campaign has been threatening to sue television stations that broadcast ads by O'Neill's Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. The campaign has also threatened to sue Regnery Books, the company that published "Unfit for Command." http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40096

It sounds to me like a chicken shit way to suppress first amendment rights, which the Democrats vigorously claim to defend, without actually having to prove that the charges are false. Let the Kerry junta put some lawsuits where their mouth is. Let them put up or shut up.

If you want to talk about lies, find out who was the first person to alert CBS about the forged ANG memos. Could it have been a DNC operative?

Now to cap off this "Iraq War is Wrong" controversy, how is the enemy benefiting for this distention and how many extra lives is it costing? Just pull together, win the war and sort out the who struck John later on. I think we all agree that it is to our benefit to win now that we are in it.

I could be mistaken.

   Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 09:12 AM

I for one, believe the Swifty Guys.

Then, since their "charges" have been repeatedly and conclusively shown to be bogus, and to have been invented by a Republican Party pit bull, you are, indeed, an idiot. But you can take comfort in the fact that there are a substantial number of idiotic Americans that apparently do believe this crap along with you.

Perhaps the No Child's Left Behind Act ( or was it their right behind?...) can be ammended to require U.S. citizens to prove proficiency in logic, critical thinking, reading comprehension & etc - and if they fail be barred from voting.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 08:42 AM

nor me. oh, 300 by the way.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Metchosin
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 02:47 AM

not by me Amos.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 01:38 AM

I watched these two face off tonight. On every point of discussion Kerry was better informed and more articulate. I understand that is not the whole of a man's character, but let me pose you this thought: if Bush intentionally set in motion the machinations of war, knowing innocent civilians would surely die, and he did it based on a credulous acceptance of information that was faulty (and smelled it, I would add), without insisting on findingh out the facts, with out bending over backwards to spare innocent lives, he is not my kind of man nor would ever be my kind of president.

He did exactly that -- based on bad data he didn't have the gumption top insist on getting his facts straight before throwing the nation into war and killing human beings in large numbers in direct consequence.

He may smile a nice Texas smile, but as far as I am concerned he is more the murderer than John Kerry ever was.

Maybe somewhere in your life you were taught that war "in defense of country" is glamorous. I was taught that taking another person's life in any but the most dire circumstances of self defense is a crime and a sin beyond forgiving.

Maybe you believe there is something cleansing about the fire of battle and something self-forgiving about the extremes of warfare. I believe, instead, that allowing such conditions to come about is a complete failure of leadership and the ugliest opffense a leader can commit.

In Vietnam. as in Iraq, men of George Bush's ilk forced others to take up the gauntlet and fight it out in the field, never duisturbing their own lives or their own children int he process.

When Bush's girls head off to Baghdad as Marines I will reconsider. The longer I ponder this, the more of failure he appears to me, as a human and as an American.

Open to correction.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 14 Oct 04 - 01:27 AM

I originally heard that Kerry was playing with a grenade when it went off and gave him a very minor would consisting of rice embedded in his ass. After searching for it in print I found the above story told by Rassman.

Rassman was the soldier that Kerry pulled out of the water so one way or the other he was tripping up Kerry on how he got the shrapnel for his purple heart.

I was hoping some of you would check it out for yourself but obviously it is more comfortable for you to decide it is not the truth.

Yesterday I was talking to my neighbor. I had been reluctant to voice my opinion about the two candidates because I did not want a feud with him. He said something about not liking Kerry. I found out he has the same opinion as me except more extreme. He was bragging about him and his wife raising his sons right because they were both conservative and opposed to Kerry.

Every body I have talked to except my wife likes Bush over Kerry. My wife has recently decided Kerry is not her choice. She was born and raised a Democrat. Her Mother worked at the polling places as a Democrat every year until she got too feeble. Her Father was a staunch Democrat.

I live in a blue state so there should not be so many people against Kerry. What can I say except what do people see in Kerry other than a bunch of empty promises? Witness Edwards saying "when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve will get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apelection_story.asp?category=1131&slug=Campaign%20Reeve

Edwards would make a good miracle healing preacher but a lousy VP.

Subject to correction.

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Lucia
Date: 13 Oct 04 - 06:53 PM

Amos, you are obviously one of the better educated, most eloquent posters on this forum, so I really don't want to get into a prolonged
debate with you over this-a don't show up for a gun fight with a knife kind of deal-but it truly saddens me that you can't open your eyes to what a duplicitous liar John Kerry is. He may indeed be better than Bush, although I have my doubts. He will probably get my vote come November,but certainly with my nostrils held tightly clenched. Amos, I went to too many funerals in the 60's-and worse, in the 70's(three in total)-of people who served honorably in SE Asia to watch in silence while you beatify a sanctimonious Brahmin like John Kerry. I for one, believe the Swifty Guys.
Even as we differ,My Best to You

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 13 Oct 04 - 06:28 PM

Lucia:

Which truth is that? That story is so full of holes it sounds like it was written by one of the professional Swifty Liars Club dudes that Bush refused to admit he hired.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Lucia
Date: 13 Oct 04 - 06:09 PM

Just can't handle the truth, can you Amos.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 13 Oct 04 - 10:07 AM

Old Guy:

I think engaging in this sort of maliciousness is beneath you.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 13 Oct 04 - 09:31 AM

I understand that in Vietnam, Kerry and Jim Rassman threw a grenade into a rice bin and ran. The grenade exploded before they could get away and some rice and a piece of shrapnel hit Kerry in the ass. Then he claimed the shrapnel was from a mine that exploded under his boat later the same day. Is that correct?

"Jim Rassman in the Washington Post describes how Sen. Kerry really picked up a tiny piece of metal that day. As they were heading back to the boat, Kerry and Rassman decided to blow up a five-ton rice bin to deny food to the Vietcong. In an interview, Rassman recalled that they climbed on top of the huge pile and dug a hole in the rice. On the count of three, they tossed their grenades into the hole and ran.

Evidently, Kerry did not run fast enough. "He got some frag and pieces of rice in his rear end," Rassman said with a laugh. "It was more embarrassing than painful." At the time, the incident did not seem significant, and Kerry did not mention it to anyone when he got back on the boat. An unsigned "personnel casualty report," however, erroneously implies that Kerry suffered "shrapnel wounds in his left buttocks" later in the day, following the mine explosion incident, when he also received "contusions to his right forearm." "
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/002447.php

Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Oct 04 - 11:23 PM

The "Big Lie" technique seems to apply to both...but perhaps Bush is not consciously aware that he's lying...in which case he isn't, technically speaking. He's just in error.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 04 - 11:16 PM

There are certain traits worth comparing between the two, although in general I'd say Hitler was far more evil and Bush probably is a but more stupid in some areas.

A.

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 12 Oct 04 - 10:42 PM

Nerd:

I am tired tonight. Suppose you ferret out the first negative ad in the campaign.

I said bush was compared to Hitler. I did not say that Kerry said it. When I say Kerry said it I mean Kerry said it.


Old Guy

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 12 Oct 04 - 03:38 PM

This old thread still going? Sheesh - Old Guy, you Do have time on your hands!

Subject: RE: BS: Kerry is an arrogant asshole
From: Nerd
Date: 12 Oct 04 - 12:13 AM

Old Guy:

Bush has complimented Kerry on his Vietnam service.

If you don't know Bush did this just so he could not be blamed for the vicious "Swift SBoat Liars for Lies" ads, then you've got your head somewhere dark and quiet.

As I pointed out and you ignored, Kerry complimented Bush on his strong convictions. Big whoop!

The fact remains that Kerry's campaign dwells on claims that Bush did everything wrong. Kerry does not give credit where credit is due and has no credit of his own.

All campaigns do this. What has Bush said Kerry would do right if elected?

This negative campaign began long before the Bush campaign turned negative. Like after Bush was compared to Hitler. Should Bush not fight back?

Kerry compared Bush to Hitler? When? Or are you saying that if anyone in the world says anything mean about Bush he should attack Kerry in response?   

The Democrats fired the first negative shot and cry like babies when one gets fired back.

Show me what you consider the "first negative shot," and I'll show you an earlier one, Old Guy. Each party does this to the other all the time. The only one crying like a baby is you.