|
03 Nov 00 - 10:20 AM (#333512) Subject: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Jim the Bart It's all over the news, so I thought it merited comment. I have always maintained that what happens to a person in life, is not as important as how he or she responds to it. Watching the response to this "November surprise" will be interesting. I personally don't believe that this arrest, by itself, should matter in this election. It was a long time ago. He doesn't drink anymore. 14 years sober is something to commend. There are two things about this that bother me, however. 1. When asked last night if this was the only substance problem in the Governor's past, neither he nor his campaign spokesman would give a simple "NO" for an answer. There is the time for absolute candor. If he has nothing else in his past - say it! And it's not college pranks that I'm afraid lurk in the background (theft of a Christmas Wreath with some pals in college, also disclosed by his campaign spokesman. Big freaking deal). 2. He has repeatedly said about himself that "what you see is what you get". If he knew this was out there, an isolated incident that is truly insignificant, why didn't he just say it at some point over the past eighteen months of campaigning? Get it out there and basically de-fuse the issue. He thought he could slip this passed the electorate. In card playing terms, he tried to finesse the point. And he lost. Did the Gore campaign slip Bush the old "shanghai surprise"? A Gore supporter did, no question about it. But I seriously doubt that the Gore campaign OK'ed it. They're not that good at campaigning. If they would have known about proof like this before they would have been hammering it in ads for the past month until no one really cared anymore. And even if they did know - I once again quote the late great Mayor Harold Washington, "Politics ain't beanbag". |
|
03 Nov 00 - 10:26 AM (#333520) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall maybe its safe to vote for Nader after all! wuddaya think Doug? |
|
03 Nov 00 - 10:29 AM (#333524) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: JedMarum It's very safe to vote for Nader! |
|
03 Nov 00 - 10:30 AM (#333525) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: SINSULL More funny than tragic. I am more concerned about the rumors of cocaine use and a possible arrest. Makes ole Bubba Clinton look like a member of the "silent majority". |
|
03 Nov 00 - 10:38 AM (#333530) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: MMario I'm more concerned about a nation and a press that can take a 24 year old minor traffic incident that is a matter of public record and blow it up into national news. There has been more coverage of this then of the USS Cole incident, and 17 lost their lives in that!!!
|
|
03 Nov 00 - 10:40 AM (#333532) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: catspaw49 I don't see it as having any significant effect on the election. The public statement made by Bush will play in Peoria and I doubt if it matters much at this stage anyway. Though I would like to see anything happen to assure Gore's victory, I'm sick of these personal life issues that are not relevant whether its a blow job or a DUI. Yeah, I know......There are all these hidden issues that speak to the character of blah,blah,blah..........bullshit. It would also be easy to want some quid pro quo here and I'm sure both parties are childish enough to play the game. That's bullshit too. I have no idea how history will judge Bill Clinton and neither does anyone else, we can only speculate. I hope that 50 or 100 years from now we have all wised up to the point of judging the performance of a job and not the frailities of the human species. We seem to be going in the wrong direction at the moment. Spaw |
|
03 Nov 00 - 10:52 AM (#333543) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Jim the Bart I agree, 'Spaw, about the life issues thing being irrelevant. I find it interesting, though, that Bush, who has been campaigning as the "un-Clinton", is linked to him by something that (as MMario maintains) was a matter of public record. MMario - 24 years ago it may have been a minor traffic incident, but things change when you're five days from the White House. And the Cole incident was page one news and well covered. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:02 AM (#333556) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Whistle Stop I agree with Spaw; this shouldn't matter, period. It will be interesting to see what effect it has. It could hurt Bush by reflecting badly on his candor, or it could hurt Gore if people feel he was behind the 11th-hour disclosure. For myself, I would prefer that the election be decided on the issues and qualifications of the candidates; there isn't much about a 24 year old DUI that interests me. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:03 AM (#333557) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: SINSULL Spaw, I disagree with your statement "we seem to be going in the wrong direction." The Press may be but most of the people I know shrug, laugh, and say it's not relevant. That includes GW's arrest and Clinton's sexual affairs - Oh Sorry - he didn't have sex. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:12 AM (#333567) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: MMario I didn't say the COle incident wasn't well covered. I said this has had more coverage (which it HAS). |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:14 AM (#333570) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Uncle_DaveO A vote for Nader is AT LEAST a half vote for Bush. Dave Oesterreich |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:31 AM (#333590) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: catspaw49 I dunno' Sins......I hope so. What bothers me is that we have so much interest in it. I agree that the person on the street is wearying of the thing, but it still hasn't hit the press or the parties themselves yet. The press runs a story saying that few are interested in whatever and then turn around and triple the coverage. Polls showed that the general public was tired of the whole Clinton thing and it still didn't stop and indeed the issues became more trivial, but MORE investigated. They'll get it one of these days........I hope. Spaw |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:37 AM (#333593) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Greg F. Dubya may have made it at least slightly relevant by assuming the 'moral high ground' throughout & beating the issue to death. I agree it shouldn't matter any more than Whitewater allegations should have mattered.Yet we were saddled with that BS for quite a while. Best, Greg |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:37 AM (#333594) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: GUEST,Chaz Americans, Educate yourselves on abortion. In Congress they're debating as to whether or not an infant has the right to life and many democrats are saying no. This debate arose from an awareness of the NUMEROUS times that an abortion was unsuccessful, and so the abortionist needed to finish the job in order to collect his salary. There really isn't much difference between eliminating the life of a child inside of the womb or outside. If this isn't THE most important issue in this election, than I don't know what is. I'm scared. It often happens that when people actually investigate the reality of abortion, not only do they change their minds on the issue, but they become vehemently pro-life. Please educate yourselves, my friends. There are 4400 abortions everyday in our country alone. I can't look myself in the mirror and call myself a man if I don't do everything in my power to stop it. Thanks for listening. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:38 AM (#333595) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll Re. the USS Cole.When the first bodies were flown back to the States, the Commander-in-Chief was at a fund raiser instead of being present at the airport. Raising $200,000 for the Gore campaign was more important than showing support to the grieving families of 14 dead sailors. The papers didn't report THAT either. As far as I can tell. Bush did not try to get out of the tickrt at the time, and he did not try to deny it when confronted with it. His answer when asked if there was anything else in his past was properly evasive. If there was, and it is later disclosed, he didn't say "no". If there wasn't, no harm done. In the meantime, Gore supporters and reporters will waste time looking. Smart campaign move if you ask me.Candid where he has to be and evasive where a problem may or may not exist. troll |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:47 AM (#333607) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: paddymac Well, I'm basically in agreement w/ MMario & 'Spaw. My thoughts on the DUI are: 1) he owned up to it - "That's a true story. I'm not proud of it, but it's true"; and 2) the only difference between he and I, and more other folks than I can count, is that we were lucky and didn't get stopped. I think most people who did or do drink have been behind the wheel when they shouldn't have been. Most of us learn as we get older(or if we're lucky enough to get older). So, a great many people are in no position to throw stones. I'm not real fond of self-righteous hypocrits under any circumstances. As to controlled substances, there is great hypocrisy there as well. I don't know it to be true, but I would not be surprised if the people who have never smoked pot are in a minority in the US. Pot has been an article of commerce for at least 10,000 years, and it hasn't yet brought down civilization. Even George Washington cultivated it; some for fiber and some for "other uses." How else could he smile with wooden false teeth? I have no idea what proportion of the population uses, or has used, other controlled substances, but i suspect it is substantial. I have a range of sentiments about those other drugs. Coke has been around in various forms for a long, long time. I think I would be tolerant about most forms, but I am absolutely positive I would do my best to personaly assassinate anyone who pushed crack to someone I loved. Did you know that sugar was considered an addictive drug and was a controlled substance 100 years or so ago? If public health is the real reason for regulation, I think there are many good reasons sugar should be on the list again. Sadly, public health is rarely the real reason. I believe most listings are based on economic motivation. Regulated markets are more profitable for the manufacturers and the gate-keepers. That's true in many areas, but probably nowhere more so than in pharmaceuticals, alcohol and tobacco. Apologies for the rant. I need my caffeine "fix". |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:58 AM (#333621) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Jim Dixon Some miscellaneous thoughts: I personally do NOT consider a DUI conviction (or DWI, as we call it here in Minnesota) 24 years ago to be a big deal. If it happened to a friend of mine - especially if it happened only once - no way would it undermine my loyalty to that friend. But I also admit to a strong temptation right now to hope the information will be used to discredit Bush. I dislike him, I dislike his politics, and I hope he doesn't win. It was a TACTICAL blunder for George W. not to reveal the information himself a long time ago. Probably the best time to reveal it would have been right after he had the Republican nomination locked up, possibly even before the convention. If he had, it would have been would have been overshadowed by all the hoopla of the convention, and it would have been forgotten by now. I understand Dick Chaney had some similar problems in his past and he DID reveal them, and it made hardly a ripple. Why didn't George W. follow his example? As a MORAL matter, George W. should have revealed it even earlier, during his campaign for the primaries. As a rule, Republicans are less forgiving of such peccadilloes than Democrats are. No doubt they will stick by their man now, because he IS their man, their only hope against the Democrats. But if it had come out during the primaries, they might have nominated John McCain. Now the question arises, did Bush defeat McCain fair and square? If I were a McCain supporter, I would feel cheated. The Gore staff is wise to keep silent. They don't NEED to say anything. The press will have its own feeding frenzy. Anything Gore or his staff could have said, the press, and the numerous "pundits" that appear on talk shows will say for them, and more. They will pick this thing apart, examine it from every possible angle, interview everyone who knows anything, or has anything halfway intelligent to say about it, or less than halfway. They won't stop until they have a bigger story to report. As of next Tuesday, the election itself, and the election results will be the bigger story. Therefore this story has a time limit of only about four days. After that, it will be practically forgotten (assuming some even more damaging information doesn't come out). The question is naturally being raised of whether the Gore campaign leaked the news. It's possible, I suppose, but I doubt it. For one thing, why did they wait so long? Surely it would have benefited the Gore campaign a lot more if this information had come out a couple of weeks ago. Then the feeding frenzy would have lasted longer, and done more damage, and perhaps even more damaging information would have come out. Now, there isn't time. Also, assuming the Gore staff had the info a long time ago, how could they have kept it out of the press until now? Even if the vast majority of Gore staff thought it was best to hold it back, remember, it only takes one dissenter to leak. There is one thing that puzzles me: Why didn't some reporter discover this independently? No doubt there are hundreds of reporters who would give their eyeteeth to be the one who broke the story. During Monicagate, lowlifes like Matt Drudge and Larry Flynt were raised to fame and near respectability by the roles they played. Why weren't similar types digging up the dirt on George W.? I, for one, am not so interested in who leaked the news, as in, who kept it secret for so long, and how did they do it? Maybe it just goes to show how little investigative reporting really goes on in this country. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 12:11 PM (#333630) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: mousethief The only relevance this has is on Bush's self-definition as a straight-shooting, square-rigged, HONEST man over and against Clinton. That the voters haven't seen through Bush yet is a very high tribute to P.T. Barnum.
Alex |
|
03 Nov 00 - 12:33 PM (#333641) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Kim C How many of you did dumb things in 1976? I was only nine years old then but I'm sure I contributed my share. Not a Bush supporter but I think 24-year-old stupidity is a non-issue unless we're talking about something serious like war crimes. There are plenty of things like that I have done since I was about 18, that could be held against me if I ever ran for office. I inhaled. I drank too much. I had sex before I got married. I have never had an affair but I have been known to shamelessly flirt with men other than my husband (not seriously, of course). I have been tattooed three times and probably will go for a fourth. What a relief to know that I would never be able to get elected!!!!! ;) |
|
03 Nov 00 - 12:36 PM (#333643) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall Sorry to disagree Mario, but, the oui thing is news today..one day.. the Cole incident has been in the news almost every day since it happened. Drunk driving a minor traffic offense? not here it aint!If his name had been John Smurd he would have gone to jail! The matter of timing..that story was broken by a local reporter for Fox tv, a very conservative station right here in Portland Maine. The idea that it is a democrat plot is horse shit. Its too late to do the demos any good. What bugs me about Bush, well one of the things, is his "holier than thou" stance all along. I believe the word is hypocrite. Maybe now he will come clean about his drug use too. For a while there I thought we were getting rid of a liar and getting a drunk..now, it seems we may be getting two for the price of one.. I'll say it again..these birds are all politicians and lawyers. What can you expect? Paragons of virtue? HA! |
|
03 Nov 00 - 12:54 PM (#333664) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Charlie Baum Americans stand poised to elect an alcoholic to the most stressful job in the world, and the first stressful job GWB will have ever had in his life. What's to keep him on the wagon? Do we want to risk a drunk with his finger on the nuclear button? --Charlie Baum |
|
03 Nov 00 - 12:57 PM (#333671) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Bert More important issues than DUI Family values 100 people have been executed in Texas under Governor George W. Bush. In a poll of Texans conducted by the Public Policy Resource Laboratory of Texas A&M University, 47.5 % of the respondents favored a life sentence with no possibility of parole over the death penalty, with 13 % unsure and 39.5 % favoring executions.here |
|
03 Nov 00 - 12:57 PM (#333674) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall And his vice president has had TWO convictions!! Maybe it's Christmas Dems!! |
|
03 Nov 00 - 12:59 PM (#333676) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Whistle Stop Let's be fair. Bush is not a lawyer, he is not a drunk, and as far as I am concerned he is not a liar (on this topic, anyway). He told people early on that he didn't intend to discuss his youthful indiscretions, and he stuck to his word until this came to light yesterday. I don't like the guy either, and I hope he loses. But I don't want him to lose over this little piece of trivia. Paddymac and Kim are right -- we've all got something in our past that we would rather not be judged by now. It might be drunk driving (yes, most drinkers who drive have been inebriated behind the wheel at some point), or use of illegal substances (virtually everyone around my age in the USA has used illegal drugs at some point, and for most of us it was a lot more than "experimentation"), sexual relations outside of marriage (it's a rare individual indeed who can honestly deny this one), or something a good deal more sinister than those. If we continue to insist on using those things as our selection criteria, we'll end up choosing between misfits and liars. Sure, if you dig hard enough the information is out there, but it's up to us what we do with it. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 01:10 PM (#333686) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall Youthful indiscretion? he was 30 at the time. I dont have a serious problem with a 24 year old crime, I DO have a problem with his phoney taking of the high ground.That was a bit strong, calling him a drunk. He's probably not a drunk..drunks dont have money. Cheney has been convicted not once, but twice for oui. Now there is a suspect. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 01:13 PM (#333689) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Jim Dixon One more problem bothers me: George W. drove drunk in 1976, and he says he quit drinking in 1986. What was going on during those 10 years? Often one drunk driving conviction is enough to make someone see the light and swear off the bottle. Did it take George W. ten more years to bottom out? How bad did it get? What other skeletons are in the closet? I have heard recovering alcoholics say that the years they spent drinking were "lost years" as far as growth and maturity are concerned. This is especially noticeable in young people. If a kid starts drinking heavily at say, age 16, and doesn't quit till age 26, when he sobers up he will have the maturity of a 16-year-old, if that. It's true of adults, too, but not always noticeable, because you don't automatically expect much greater maturity, wisdom, whatever, in a 53-year-old than in a 43-year-old. By contrast, the children of alcoholics (like Bill Clinton) often seem wise beyond their years, at least in some areas, because of the problems they had to start dealing with at an early age. But they often end up with blind spots - they are often unable to give up the coping strategies that enabled them to get along with the alcoholic parent. I think an interesting book could be written on the subject of how various politicians have been influenced by alcohol in their lives. Anyway, maybe we should start thinking of GWB as 10 years younger than he really is. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 01:33 PM (#333702) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: GUEST,Big Mick Only have a second. For our more conservative friends, the fact that he got caught driving drunk has no more, or every bit as much, relevance than some of Clinton's indiscretions. It was 24 years ago, there has not been a repeat, and there but for the grace of God go I. It means nothing by itself. But measured in the light of the man's native ability, it certainly means something. He makes such a deal out of restoring integrity and honor to the office. A person of integrity running for the office of the President of the United States, especially with this as his mantra, would have come out early with this information. As Dick Cheney did. I don't like Cheney's views, but the facts are that he had the good sense to not hide this information during his confirmation process for Cabinet Secretary. He waited till he was caught and only then does he come to grips. The bit about his daughters is hogwash. I am sure they are fine young ladies, and I am sure that he and Mrs. Bush (who is a wonderful person) love them dearly. But for this guy to think that he could run for this office, and not have this come out is ludicrous. He should have been honest with them, and honest with the American people and did it early. He wouldn't have this problem then. And then he blames others for releasing it. YOU, MR. BUSH, ARE THE ONE WHO DID IT, WHY WOULDN'T IT MAKE ITS WAY OUT??????? One more example of how unprepared he is for this role. I could care less that he had the DWI 24 years ago. But his unconscious hypocrisy causes me great concern. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 01:39 PM (#333706) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: McGrath of Harlow Driving when you're drunk means you're risking killing other people. And the man was 30? That makes it seriously serious. And so does trying to ciover it up when you're making a pitch for being mister honest-and-clean.
Now I imagine the Bushaholics will be charging round like blue-arsed looking for an equivalent thing about Gore. But it'd have to be something involving putting the lives of other peiople at risk to count. Personal stuff like illegal drugs or drinking to excess (when not behind a wheeel), or being a stupid teenager, wouldn't meet the bill.
It could just get a bit interesting. I can never understand why people have such a down on "negative campaigning". It's what stops everyone falling asleep. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 02:50 PM (#333774) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall I like to see them kick the shit out of each other..IF they would stick to the issues, AND the truth! |
|
03 Nov 00 - 02:53 PM (#333785) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: mousethief Bush can't stick to the issues because he's out of step with the voters. He has to obfuscate.
Alex
|
|
03 Nov 00 - 02:55 PM (#333790) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Greg F. Just rec'd this & though it is a bit of drift, think it speaks to the "truthfulness" issue. Apologies for the length- Best, Greg (Copy Follows:) With the election drawing nigh and so much rhetoric floating around, I found this info from the folks who were there a refreshing change of pace. I'm including both the link to the page and pasting a part of the text so you can get the flavor without looking at the whole thing.
http://www.schindler.org/psacot/20001009.html#computer_industry_news
Vint Cerf is widely known as "the father of the Internet." Here's what he says about Al Gore's role in founding it.
Al Gore And The Internet By Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf
Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development.
No one person or even small group of persons exclusively "invented" the Internet. It is the result of many years of ongoing collaboration among people in government and the university community. But as the two people who designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Internet work, we would like to acknowledge VP Gore's contributions as a Congressman, Senator and as Vice President. No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time.
Last year the Vice President made a straightforward statement on his role. He said: "During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet." We don't think, as some people have argued, that Gore intended to claim he "invented" the Internet. Moreover, there is no question in our minds that while serving as Senator, Gore's initiatives had a significant and beneficial effect on the still-evolving Internet. The fact of the matter is that Gore was talking about and promoting the Internet long before most people were listening. We feel it is timely to offer our perspective.
As far back as the 1970s Congressman Gore promoted the idea of high speed telecommunications as an engine for both economic growth and the improvement of our educational system. He was the first elected official to grasp the potential of computer communications to have a broader impact than just improving the conduct of science and scholarship. Though easily forgotten, now, at the time this was an unproven and controversial concept.
|
|
03 Nov 00 - 03:00 PM (#333794) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Greg F. RATS! Meant to make tyhat a clicky thing: GORE-INTERNET |
|
03 Nov 00 - 03:03 PM (#333799) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: MMario DUI not DWI - there is a difference. just being nit-picky. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 03:13 PM (#333805) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Jim Dixon DUI = Driving Under the Influence DWI = Driving While Intoxicated OUI = Operating Under the Influence (?) Other than terminology, what's the difference? |
|
03 Nov 00 - 03:21 PM (#333815) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: jeffp In Maryland, the difference between DUI and DWI is the amount of alcohol in the bloodstream. This creates two categories of intoxication with different penalties depending on which category you are in. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 03:26 PM (#333819) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: mousethief Well that's in Maryland. What's the difference in a REAL state? |
|
03 Nov 00 - 03:30 PM (#333821) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Songster Bob I have to say that not being forthcoming early on, when it was not just a "secret," like private drug use might be, but a matter of public record, just waiting to be found, indicates a basic stupidity on Bush's part. Or a too-clever-by-half-ness, if it was a "finess," as has been suggested. Neither is a character element I'd like to see much of in my leader(s). And those who say "shame on Gore" for its release (even though it seems to have been a Democrat working independently) should read the Washington Times, the local loonie-moonie paper in DC, for featuring slanted, innuendo-filled, "news" stories with little or no fact within 'em, all aimed at Clinton and Gore. And no one on that paper, it seems, sees anything wrong with it. After all, conservative voices are so rarely heard in the media, who cares about a dearth of facts? Bob Clayton |
|
03 Nov 00 - 03:31 PM (#333822) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Songster Bob Oops! That should be "finesse." Bob c. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 03:33 PM (#333825) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Peg Chaz the guest wrote: Americans, Educate yourselves on abortion. --okay, I have. Now what? In Congress they're debating as to whether or not an infant has the right to life and many democrats are saying no. --a fetus is not the same as an infant. The one cannot live outside the womb; the other can. Big difference. That's why the law is what it is. This debate arose from an awareness of the NUMEROUS times that an abortion was unsuccessful, and so the abortionist needed to finish the job in order to collect his salary. --what??? This is utter hogwash. If you knew anything about the relaity of abortion providers in this country, you would know that enough of them believe in making the service accessible to women in communitites hwere it is problematic, that they provide these services as volunteers, with no pay, or minimal pay. Educate *yourself*, why don't ya? There really isn't much difference between eliminating the life of a child inside of the womb or outside. --I would have to beg to differ on that. A six-week old cell-divider isn't conscious. A six-week old infant, that has reached full term development, is conscious. Why you can't figure this one out is beyond me. If this isn't THE most important issue in this election, than I don't know what is. I'm scared. --me, too. I don't much cozy to the idea of a buncha white guys in suits telling women what they can do with their own bodies. Why, precisely, are YOU scared? It often happens that when people actually investigate the reality of abortion, not only do they change their minds on the issue, but they become vehemently pro-life. --oh, really? Any documentation on this? Just curious to know what these statistics are in your carefully-researched argument. Know what the reality of abortion is? The reality is, birth control is still pretty much in the stone age. The reality is, women get pregnant even when using birth control. The reality is, women in abusive relationships find themselves pregnant even when trying to extricate themselves from those relationships. The reality is, accidental or unintentional pregnancy is a way of life. The reality is, the "right to life" movement, this whole debate on whetehr or not life begins at conception, was never antyhing anyone gave a second thought to...until the 1960s, when abortion became a safe surgical procedure. Woemn had always sought out abortions, from the village wisewoman to the back-alley doctor. They often died trying to end their pregnancies, but the risk was worth it to them. Once abortion became a safe procedure, people like yourslef, who cannot fathom a world where women are able to ocntrol their own reproductive freedom, well, they got upset. They thought it was wrong of women to have this sort of control over their bodies. And thus the idea that somehow, abortion was the killing of an innocent life was, you'll excuse the expression, born. This handily coincided with the rise of the anti-feminist religious right wing, and the idea that women who were starting to attain equal pay for equal work, and focus on careers over domestic life, were somehow overstepping their true fucntion as laid out in the bible. The rest is history. People (mostly men, I am sorry to say) who have no idea of what the *reality* of an unwanted pregnancy is like, should nto go shooting their mouths off about whether a woman has a right to control this most personal matter. Please educate yourselves, my friends. --Done. You do the same. There are 4400 abortions everyday in our country alone. --I would imagine htere are a similar number of children born to poverty, drug abuse and neglect. Which makes our already-overpopulated world a worse place? I can't look myself in the mirror and call myself a man if I don't do everything in my power to stop it. --I wonder what you would say if, instead of a penis, you had a vagina, and thus were forced to call yourslef a woman when looking in the mirror? I think your tune might be a different one. Thanks for listening. --yeah, you bet. By the way...I used to get my gyn exams and birth control supplies from a little Planned Parenthood clinic at 1031 Beacon Street in Brookline, Massachusetts. It was a great place to go, except for those annoying protestors who screamed at women from the sidewalk and threatened them and threw things at them. Those crazy protestors who yelled at women not to kill their babies, that they'd raise the baby for them (though oddly they never offered to put this in writing). Then one day a nutcase who thought abortion was murder (much as you yourself do) walked in with a sawed-off shotgun and tried to blow everybody away. He killed a receptionist, not an abortionist. (One might conclude he was actually anti-reception, as opposed to anti-abortion). Thereafter I had to submit to a body search and walk through a metal detector every time I wanted to get a pap smear or some birth control pills. Most inconvenient. The nutcase went a couple miles up the road to another women's clinic and did the same thing. It is a thin line between ill-informed indignation and fanaticism. Thank YOU for listening.
|
|
03 Nov 00 - 03:42 PM (#333834) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: mousethief Peg, believe it or not, some people who are opposed to abortion really think they are saving lives, and that is the foremost and primary thing they have in mind. The whole thing about "oppressing women" and "limiting women's choices" is not the issue for them at all, and seems to them a dodge from the "real" issue, which is the taking of a human life. We will never be able to talk together on this issue until we stop talking past one another.
trying to build a bridge here, |
|
03 Nov 00 - 03:57 PM (#333847) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Peg Alex, I see your point, but I think that to see this issue with such blinders on does not help legitimize someone's view. I can acknowledge that an abortion prveents a pregnancy from going to term. So why can't a pro-lifer acknowledge that preventing women from choosing what is best for them (and the potential child) is oppressive? I don't have any desire to talk "together" with someone who tells me what to do with my own body. Someone who has never experienced unwanted pregnancy. Someone who can't see the difference between a clump of fetal tissue and a living breathing baby. There is no arguing about it, apparently. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 04:13 PM (#333866) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Jim Dixon Do me a favor - if you want to debate abortion, start another thread with an appropriate title. Then I can ignore you more easily. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 04:31 PM (#333891) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: katlaughing WARNING, SKIP OVER THIS ONE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO READ ANYTHING MORE ABOUT ABORTION!!
Peg, thank you for saying pretty much the same that I feel and was going to post. Mousethief, they may believe that, but if they were to honestly look deep within and be totally honest, I think they would find that it is indeed more about control over women and their bodies, than whatever with a foetus. No matter what their motivation that is what it somes down to. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 04:50 PM (#333908) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: M. Ted (inactive) As far as I can tell, saying, "I made some mistakes in my youth, but there's no value in being specific about them" is not one of the Twelve Steps-- And if he stopped drinking at all(would it surprise you to know that sometimes alcoholics continue to drink even after telling people that they have stopped?) it wasn't by participating in any sort of rehabilitation program--his dad simply arranged for him to have a long talk with Billy Graham, which "Dubious" claimed was all it took for him to break loose from more than twenty years of lost weekends--
|
|
03 Nov 00 - 04:50 PM (#333910) Subject: RE: abortion From: mousethief WARNING THIS IS ABOUT ABORTION Kat, I must respectfully disagree. That is what it comes down to from the pro-abortion side. From the anti-abortion side, it comes down to killing babies. I've been on both sides of this issue and have seen it from both sides. It really doesn't help any for one side to say that they can tell the other side what their REAL motivation is. It's both disrespectful and counterproductive. Just as guilty are those on the pro-life side who say things like "They know deep down that it's murder but for them convenience is more important than human life." This too is disrespectful and counterproductive. Until both sides are able to accept that the other side really is in earnest in what it says is its real motive, there will never be constructive dialogue on this subject. I was amazed and pleased that a Planned Parenthood clinic in Chicago (I think it was) has joined forces with a local adoption agency. Of course extremists on both sides of the fence decry this, because (IMHO) they have become too entrenched in their shouting-match foxholes to see what the real issue is -- helping women who find themselves in "trouble." But of course it's so much easier to demonize one's opponent and project your fears onto their motives. This is what "The Handmaid's Tale" is all about, and it's very chilling. It shows better than any debate or argument that the pro-life side and the pro-choice side really aren't communicating at all. When I read the book (which is masterfully written) I was a fervent, anti-abortion evangelical Christian, and what I thought was, "boy, we just aren't getting our message across to these people." But if "these people" refuse to listen, and prefer to decide for themselves what the other side "REALLY thinks," then no amount of communicating will ever get any message across.
Alex |
|
03 Nov 00 - 04:53 PM (#333914) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Greg F. Dear Sweet Jesus, Mouse, you were determined to get into this, weren't you? Please take it HERE Thanks, Greg |
|
03 Nov 00 - 04:56 PM (#333920) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Peg thanks, Greg. That was the appropriate thing to do. I didn't start this topic in this unrelated thread, but I did choose to respond here... BTW (on topic) I could care less if Dubya had a DUI conviction twenty some years ago. I think there are afar more significant reasons not to vote for the guy... |
|
03 Nov 00 - 05:01 PM (#333926) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall I dont know if you call Maine a real state or not, but, the legal limit here is 0.08. It used to be 0.10. We have a sign as you enter Maine that says MAINE HAS A TOUGH DRUNK DRIVING LAW FOR YOUR PROTECTION. I dont drive while drinking, and, I have no pity for anyone who does. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 05:01 PM (#333927) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Greg F. For what its worth, Peg, I'm with you on BOTH counts. ;-) Managed to head this off a few days back, but was afraid the cease-fire wouldn't hold. Watch out for stray rounds & collateral damage. Best, Greg |
|
03 Nov 00 - 05:07 PM (#333929) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: DonMeixner I am amazed to see that forgiveness extends to everyone but elected officials or those seeking office. I see no relevance in opening 25 year old closets for traffic infractions. The diference tween George and I 25 years ago is he got caught and I never have. As regards to voting for Nader. I would vote for Nader any year but this one. If Nader takes away votes from Gore and gives the supreme court to Bush we can see many liberties that we now enjoy as precidence disappear with the next appointment. ( Besides Rights to choose) I can see Miranda going away, freedoms of assembly, Speach, and Habius Corpus being so narrowly defined that we won't really know what "IS" is. Its the local elections that matter in our lives far more that the who is President. Beyond picking the supreme court and opening up baseball season, we can do without the big guy completely. The Pres has nothing to do with setting taxes, creating laws, or steering the ship of state beyond the end of his veto pen. The work is done by the congress and senate. As it should be. Don |
|
03 Nov 00 - 05:09 PM (#333930) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: mousethief The thing about Maryland was a joke. Sheesh. I concur with Greg -- I will restrict any comments about abortion to the abortion thread.
Alex |
|
03 Nov 00 - 05:34 PM (#333960) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: M. Ted (inactive) What "Dubious" has been doing *this year* is to concealing the fact that he was convicted of what is considered to be a serious crime-- (An aside, Don, when you say "he got caught and I never have" it sound like you still drive while under the influence, and that you don't think it is a big deal--I hope that neither of these things is true, and that you were just writing in a hurry) |
|
03 Nov 00 - 05:38 PM (#333963) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Bert It's a question of integrity. He won't 'fess up to the indiscretions of his youth, but he's got hundreds of people incarcerated in Texas for those same 'indiscretions'. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 06:01 PM (#333980) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll M Ted, you don't HAVE to go through any kind of rehab program to quit drinking. I know. I've been dry for 19 years. I have friends who say that since I haven't been through a 12-step program, I'm in denial.Maybe so, but that denial has held for 19 years. There are plenty of things you can get Bush on. Leave his fight with alcohol alone. He says he's in recovery from alcoholism and I,for one, believe him. troll
|
|
03 Nov 00 - 06:28 PM (#334000) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: DonMeixner Ted, Thanks, You are correct, it should have said "..and I never did". And I guess it reads like I have been a drunk all my life. farthest from the truth. A sixer of Killians last weeks at my house unless five friends stop by. O guess the point is isn't there a stuate of limitations on somethings? Bert's point is far more salient I see now. An appology on the air may be good enough for GWB but what about the student with a 1/2 a joint in her purse. Or the premed guy who had some speed to get through finals. Another no good answer thread. But a good debate none the less. Don |
|
03 Nov 00 - 06:54 PM (#334030) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: McGrath of Harlow "Traffic infractions" - surely those are things like parking in the wrong place, maybe going a bit above the speed limit, maybe having the car adjusted wrong so that it's got too many emissions.
Driving when you're drunk is different. It's not a trivial technicality to be shrugged off and concealed while you're coming on as an open honest good guy crusading against all those shifty politicians with their weasel words who-wouldn't-know-the-truth-if-it-bit-them.
|
|
03 Nov 00 - 07:00 PM (#334038) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: mousethief Driving while drunk is an awful lot like attempted murder: if nobody gets killed, it's only because of luck, not because of the perpetrator.
Alex |
|
03 Nov 00 - 07:09 PM (#334044) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall I dont blame him for a 24 year old violation. I DO fault him for taking the moral high ground. He lied, just as Clinton lied. He is a hypocrite. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 07:10 PM (#334047) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: M. Ted (inactive) Troll, I am glad that you overcame your problem. And of course, you are right, it is possible-- It really isn't a question of that--I am just disgusted with the fact that on one hand, we are told that he has overcome his problems, and then we are told that it is none of our business--except that when it is a democrat, the republicans insist that everything must be dug up, no matter how insignificant, no matter how long ago, because everything was questionable-- "Dubious" was the driving force hehind the mud slinging, dirty campaign that his father ran (George Sr apparently was uncomfortable with it, but allowed it to go on because it worked), and the anti-Clinton mudslinging continued, and continues to this day, but it isn't fair to speak unfavorably of either or any of the Bushes-- "Dubious" has a particularly vicious behind the scenes manner with journalists who have been critical, which is to say, journalists who have raised questions that he does not like--he makes abusive, late night phone calls, not only to the journalist, but also to the editor, managing editor, publisher, CEO, relevant stockholders, and owners(many of whom are part of the Bushes Ivy League/Wall Street network) The stories of "Dubious"'s trangressions, both youthful and more recent, have been documented, and even covered in Texas, it is just that the national press corps are all afraid to be the first to bring something out-- A small example of the lengths to which the media go to "Be fair to Bush", when the polls would show Bush had 44% to Gore's 43%, it would be noted that Bush was ahead--when Bush had 42% to Gore's 47%, it was said that it was "virtually a dead heat, because it is within the poll's margin of error". |
|
03 Nov 00 - 07:23 PM (#334061) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Bill D When I was 20ish, I drove a vehicle maybe 2-3 times when I had had too much to drink, mostly due to ...well, youth and inexperience. I soon learned NOT to, and perhaps GW has too...we DO know that if he is elected, he will have drivers. In any case, DUI by itself is not a BIG deal. If he had continued 'problems' with controlled substances, this tells me something about a general personality trait that bothers me, even if he seems to have it mostly under control. |
|
03 Nov 00 - 07:24 PM (#334063) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall Who dared to tell the truth about Ray-Gun while he ruled? No One |
|
03 Nov 00 - 07:49 PM (#334088) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: M. Ted (inactive) Kitty Kelley said that when she was researching her book on Frank Sinatra, famous for his alleged bad temper and mafia connections, no one hesitated to talk to her--it was when she was researching her book about Nancy Reagan that she came across many people that were afraid to talk-- |
|
03 Nov 00 - 08:08 PM (#334100) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: McGrath of Harlow Twentyish may be one thing, 30 is a little different. And driving when you're drunk is "a big deal". Suppressing the truth when you're applying for a job is quite a big deal too. In fact it's justification for terminating the employment even when you've been given the job, let alone while you're still going through the selection process.
|
|
03 Nov 00 - 08:31 PM (#334118) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: GUEST The issue is more than what he did thirty years ago. When questioned by a Texas newspaper in 1996 he could have fessed up. "Have you been arrested since 1968?" His answer was NO. And he hass the gall to call Gore a liar. Lucius |
|
03 Nov 00 - 09:56 PM (#334176) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Big Mick And that quote is also in The New Republic. The issue isn't about whether or not he has a DUI/DWI/OUI. Remember the standard that they held President Clinton to? It wasn't the sex as much as he lied about it. When the reporter who was questioning him with regard to his arrest in 1968 for a college prank asked him if he had ever been arrested since them. His answer was an unambigous "No". Then he started to qualify it and his handler took him by the arm. He chose not to refute it. There is a line from Shakespeare that applies. "He doth protest too loudly". His hypocritical statements about integrity and honor as if Al Gore doesn't have it ring very loudly today. All he had to do was come clean and there would have been no problem. Mick |
|
03 Nov 00 - 10:17 PM (#334189) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Bill D and to me, the overall sense of what Bush IS and why I'd NOT vote for him is shown in this list of Bushisms ....wouldn't he and Quayle have made a team? |
|
03 Nov 00 - 10:32 PM (#334199) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll Yeah, Bill. He's a fumble-mouth all right. Good reason not to vote for him. troll |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:31 PM (#334227) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Bill D he is more than a 'fumblemouth'....so many of those quotes show a man who never bothered to 'learn' and who fakes his way through life with vague approximations. I can just imagine the translators at a summit conference trying to render his ramblings into Russian... |
|
03 Nov 00 - 11:52 PM (#334235) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: GUEST,Barry Finn I can't believe what's written here the man commited a crime that carries a jail sentence not when he was a kid but when he was 30. And I do have a problem with drunk drivers even if it's 20 or 40 years ago. Ask the loved ones of a victum if they've forgotten their loss. At least in some state you couldn't get a cabbie's licence or drive a bus or work a day care center if it involved driving kids WHY?????? But you can become president, you couldn't get hire by the CIA, the FBI, the AFT with that on your record no matter how long ago it happened but as president you can oversee them? He's had a drinking problem at least since his Animal House frat days that didn't stop until he turned 40, give me a break I wouldn't have the man helping my grandmother across the street. Clinton says "but I didn't inhale", he didn't get busted or endanger anyone except maybe himself & there were many that thought that this was enough to can his election OK so Bush drove drunk what's his come back "but I didn't kill". To have hid that from ones family speaks in it's self, never mind what he would'nt tell those he didn't know but still elected him. "Still it happened so long ago" PLEASE, it doesn't make it OK it it doesn't make it go away at 30 he should at least be held responsible for his actions or maybe we should postpone that responsibility until he's out of office. Yup, you're right I don't like the man & no I've never in my life driven drunk & I'm just about 50, & no I don't expect to get your vote nor do I want it but I'd rather see a career criminal in that office before him, they admit that they knew right from wrong when they're caught they knew the risks & they knew the consequences from the start & are prepared to take what's coming to them in the end & they don't do what they do out of weakness it's out of choice & you won't have to listen to them whin about getting caught or who spilled the beans & no fair because of timing & it's sinful to no present the truth when someone else is hiding it. There are many reasons (that goes twice because of his bad sense in chosing a running mate who's got the poor judgement to have 2 DWI's)why he wouldn't get my vote or my shoulder. First I'd hate to see what would become of us if the two of them couldn't take the heat & both fell off the wagon, not an unusual thing to happen (being a clean ex junkie for the past 25 yrs I can say I can qualify as being an expert on the falling off of wagons & turnip trucks & the like) second using family values & pro life as a running platform & he's endangered the lives of others, still sees the death sentence as an answer to those that get caught but can't buy their way out & then he can't even tell his own family what he's done. Next I don't think it possible to give the top 2 jobs to people who wouldn't be allowed to drive a truck or a cab or a bus or a crane or operate heavy equipment or hold the many jobs that the common folk have to work at if they had had the same offense lurking in their past. I'm not gonna keep at this any longer. Barry
|
|
04 Nov 00 - 09:29 AM (#334389) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall Well said Barry. |
|
04 Nov 00 - 11:36 AM (#334434) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll And of course Gore, et al, have NEVER driven while they were drinking and so are above reproach. Yeah.Right! I'll bet every one of us has something we wouldn't want our loved ones to find out about. Bush was found out and, to his credit, admitted it without trying to excuse or minimize it. That, to my way of thinking, takes courage. Should he have admitted it early on? Probably. He has admitted to a drinking problem. Could he fall of the wagon? Of course. But whoever is elected could crack beneath the strain and START using drink or drugs to help them cope. The fact that he has been dry for years in the dog-eat-dog world of big business is a strong indicator that he WON'T crack. Understand, I'm not voting for the man. I just want to see him get the fair shake that I would want for any recovering abuser. troll |
|
04 Nov 00 - 12:04 PM (#334443) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Lucius I've already disquallified myself from public office. I've never hoisted a moral standard, but if I did then I would expect to hang on it if I were caught. Its not just that he lied, its also that he made such a grand fuss over Al Gore's exaggerations. Lucius |
|
04 Nov 00 - 12:14 PM (#334446) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Jim the Bart Troll - In my first post I said that it's not the OUI that matters now, it's how he has dealt with it and how he will deal with it's revelation. All he has to say is that there are no other surprises waiting to be sprung - and he can't do it. All I want to see for this to go away is CANDOR from the man who said "what you see is what you get". I see a guy who'e hiding something. Assuming that Al has something to hide is totally unfair and uncalled for. I know plenty of people who have never even colored outside the lines and Al strikes me as that type (Although my sister says that he displays a lot more depth in private - I believe she recommended an interview in Redbook - than in his "candidate suit"). Some people don't have the kind of imagination that it takes to transgress, some people have the will power that it takes to resist. I think Al falls somewhere in between. I commend GWB for getting sober, but he has put himself in a position where this won't be forgiven or forgotten until he 'FESSES UP. |
|
04 Nov 00 - 12:32 PM (#334454) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall How do we know he has been clean all these years? He lied about the conviction, why wouldn't he lie about being sober? He is a caught liar, and I dont trust him. |
|
04 Nov 00 - 12:34 PM (#334455) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: M. Ted (inactive) Troll--Is it more important that we select a competent leader to the most powerful position in the world, or it is more important that we give a recovering abuser a chance to prove that he's changed? Wait, let me change that, that we give a recovering liar a chance to prove that he's changed? |
|
04 Nov 00 - 12:38 PM (#334460) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Lonesome EJ I heard a telling quote from Bush regarding this story. He said "the American people know about me,and based on that they have made their decision...rather,are making their decisions." As close as this election is,George seems to be thinking he's got it in the bag.Hey GW,remember Thomas E Dewey? |
|
04 Nov 00 - 01:27 PM (#334491) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll So you'll vote for a known liar instead; the inventor of the internet, the inspiration for "Love Story", the list goes on. Bart, I agree. Bush should open up the files and come clean on everything. But even if he did, there are those who would not believe him. Gore has been less than candid in regard to fund raising. Who knows what else is there. One does not rise in the ranks of power without gathering a few skeletons along the way. Kendall, you know as well as I do how hard it would be to hide alcohol or drug abuse for that many years in as public a figure as Bush has been, at least in Texas. No, I'm afraid that dog won't hunt. But this thread does show one thing; that , at least in some peoples eyes " Once a drunk, always a drunk" and always under suspicion. troll |
|
04 Nov 00 - 01:43 PM (#334501) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: McGrath of Harlow "Bush was found out and, to his credit, admitted it without trying to excuse or minimize it."
If you get found out and it's something that's a matter of public record, you don't have much option to admitting it. And of course he's been trying to minimise it - what is saying that it doesn't really matter but minimising it?
"That, to my way of thinking, takes courage."
Not courage. A lot of nerve, maybe. Or Chutzpah - yes, I think that's the most fitting word.
Still, I suppose the number of voters who've driven when they are drunk outnumbers the number who have had family members killed by drunk drivers, so I imagine he'll gain votes rather than lose them over this... |
|
04 Nov 00 - 02:16 PM (#334522) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll Clinton got caught and lied about it all the way up to impeachment. But thats OK 'cause he's a Democrat and a liberal. For your information, McGrath, I do not approve of driving while drinking. I think that ANYONE caught DUI should lose his/her license FOREVER and if they are ever caught behind the wheel again-except in police verifiable life or death situations- should do a long stretch in jail. There are all sorts of ways that Bush could have tried to down-play that DUI; his spin-doctors could have worked on it. But he didn't. He simply said that yes, it happened, he wasn't proud of it,he quit drinking and lets move on. What would you like; sackcloth and ashes? That he drop out in remorse? Maybe there IS more to be disclosed. Don't you think Al Gore has a task force working on that right now? Why can't everyone give the man the benefit of the doubt. He made a mistake. He paid what the law required. He has, to all reports, quit drinking. If there were more to be disclosed, I think it would have come out by now. troll |
|
04 Nov 00 - 02:24 PM (#334528) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: mousethief You've missed the point, troll. The point is not the dui, it's the mr. self-righteous, better-than-thou, squeaky-clean honest guy tone Dubya has been taking throughout the campaign. Then we find out he has made a big goof -- in fact in April of this year he told a reporter point-blank that he had not been arrested since 1968 (heard this on NPR). So he LIED. And after all this sh*t he's been dishing about Al's honesty, it's stomach-wrenching. Funny how the Republicans said, about Clinton's tete-a-tete with Lewinsky, "it's not the sex it's the lying." And yet when it's a Republican in the same position (no pun intended), the lying is not the issue at all, it's the infraction, which was long ago and not all that bad so they suggest it doesn't matter. You can't have it both ways. Is it the honesty, or isn't it?
Alex |
|
04 Nov 00 - 02:29 PM (#334534) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall Troll BECAUSE HE LIED thats why. The creep flat out lied to a reporter. I heard him say he had not been arrested since 1968. Then he takes the moral high ground..damned hypocrite. How could a public figure get away with that? How did JFK get away with it? He was high on pain killers during his whole time in office. Furthermore, Clinton was cleared by republicans and democrats. Our own two senators, both republicans, voted against impeachment. |
|
04 Nov 00 - 02:40 PM (#334540) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll OK. He lied. He thought he could get away with it and he didn't. But a lot of people are focusing on the DUI and the drinking problem as if thats a major flaw. To me, the fact that he COULD quit says a lot for his will-power. The fact that Bush was caught out doesn't make Al Gore any MORE honest,it simply proves what the less naive have always known:politicians lie. Very few will admit it until they are caught. Some won't admit it then. Take your choice. troll |
|
04 Nov 00 - 02:48 PM (#334545) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall Right again Troll. We gotta quit agreeing..we might stagnate |
|
04 Nov 00 - 03:06 PM (#334560) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: mousethief Again troll you have missed the point. Sure Gore prevaricates like a politician. But he hasn't made being Mr. Honesty the keystone of his campaign. Dubya with his "My opponent is a liar and I'm an honest guy" bullsh*t has finally been smoked out. He's a liar. I could accept that a lot easier if he hadn't been so holier-than-thou about being so goddamned honest.
Alex |
|
04 Nov 00 - 03:47 PM (#334606) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: DougR I feel truly honored to be in a community where all of it's members are without sin! This thread reminds me of the preacher preaching to the believers. I haven't read any comments from the majority contributing to this thread on the lies Gore has been caught telling. What about the Buddist Temple fund-raiser? "No legal authority?" Why don't you hold your candidate to the same standards you expect of Bush? Bush didn't lie. He just didn't volunteer to reveal something that he knew would cause a feeding frenzy by the press. Since it was a matter of public record, and some enterprising investigative reporter had not reported it, the Bush folks may have figured that it wasn't that important. It certainly was a miscalculation if that's the case. That's about all you have seen on TV the past two days. I still wonder why the press hasn't spent even a small percentage of time investigating and reporting on Gore's transgressions that they hve spent on Bush, unless, there is some bias in the press. Surely not. DougR |
|
04 Nov 00 - 03:53 PM (#334609) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Big Mick Courage and integrity would have been to fess up before he got caught. If no one had ever found out, he would have never confessed, and would have continued to berate the Vice President for lack of moral courage and integrity. This is a shallow man, and his convictions run as deep as they need to to get elected. And more importantly, he is a hypocrite. Mick |
|
04 Nov 00 - 04:05 PM (#334617) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll Mick. Agreed. But that's politics in this country and has been for a long time.Carter was probably the best example of what a President should be a insofar as character is concerned. He just wasn't real effective. But he makes a helluvan ex-President. troll
|
|
04 Nov 00 - 04:25 PM (#334632) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: McGrath of Harlow Surely all this goes to prove what a regular lad Bush is, tells lies to protect himself just like the rest of us. Only a Goody Two Shoes would ever own up to something like that until he'd been nailed...
Seems that Bushkin wins both ways. When he hasn't been caught lying, it's such a refreshing contrast to that rascally Al Gore (even when that Internet "lie" is confirmed as nothing of the kind) - and when he gets caught, that's just because he's human, and all the better for a few imperfections.
But how come all these pundits have been saying that Bush is the kind of bloke most red-blooded Americans would sooner have a drink with - but there's no way the man would ever have a drink anyway? And if he's got any sense, he would stay away from anywhere that regular drinking is going on. Which would include the White House, I suppose... |
|
04 Nov 00 - 04:40 PM (#334640) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll Yes, McGrath, I know that Gore was instrumental in getting funding for the internet but he embellished his role just as he has in other instances. For example, he supported some changes in a major tax bill (something to do with capital gaines? I don't recall) and then claimed responsibility for the bill itself, which had passed two years BEFORE he was elected! So you don't like Bush. Fine. No problem. I don't care very much for him either. So why not state the real reasons instead of flogging this dead horse? troll |
|
04 Nov 00 - 05:25 PM (#334662) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: GUEST,Stackley Doug, was wondering what became of you-this was really worth waiting for! I haven't laughed so hard in years!! What a flippin' hypocrite you are! go back and read yopur own posts, fer chrissakes. Your boy got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, fair and square and you're STILL trying to weasel him out of it. Bloody marvellous. You're a pip. Cheers. and I'll save you from having to append your usual witty reparteé- I know "its only my opinion". |
|
04 Nov 00 - 05:33 PM (#334669) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: M. Ted (inactive) The arrest was not exactly a matter of public record--it had been expunged--and the arrest details that Bush gave were not accurate, either--see the following, from Michael Moore's mail list:
>Delivered-To: michaelmoore-l-outgoing@cloud9.net |
|
04 Nov 00 - 06:37 PM (#334720) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll If a reporter broke the story, why is the democratic candidate for governor of Maine taking credit for it. I have a feeling that all the facts aren't in yet. troll |
|
04 Nov 00 - 06:40 PM (#334723) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall Doug, the thing I have against him is he lied.Then, he claimed the moral high ground. This makes him a hypocrite. |
|
04 Nov 00 - 06:42 PM (#334726) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall Doug, the thing I have against him is he lied.Then, he claimed the moral high ground. This makes him a hypocrite.I've said it before, I'll say it again..there is only one candidate who is qualified to run this country. Al Gore. He does not inspire respect or admiration in me, but, he is the best we have to be able to handle the job. |
|
04 Nov 00 - 06:49 PM (#334730) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll Kendall, if the arrest record was expunged, that means it is as if the arrest never happened. A small point, I know but the case could be argued from that point of view. Exactly who did break the story. you said it was a Maine newspaper? troll |
|
04 Nov 00 - 07:45 PM (#334755) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Greg F. No, Troll, the case CANNOT be argued from that nonsensical point of view. Please look at what you wrote. It means the RECORD was expunged. It doesn't un-do the ACT, for God's sake. And what does it matter "who broke the story"? It's not a "story", its an official public record. Best, Greg |
|
04 Nov 00 - 07:49 PM (#334756) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: McGrath of Harlow Michael Moore for president! That's an interesting open letter of his to Bushkin. I liked that bit about Bush claiming that his favourite book as a child was one that wasn't published until after he had graduated (which is something that seems to have less attention than Gore getting mixed up about which union song he was supposed to hear in his cradle).
|
|
04 Nov 00 - 08:01 PM (#334765) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall A local lawyer whom I have met overheard a judge talking to a lawyer about Dubbyas arrest. He is a loose cannon in the democrat party, and, he went to the local Fox affiliate with the story. The reporter went to the Police in Kennebunkport, and the rest is history. I dont think it will hurt Bush, too late for that, and, anyway, we have had 8 years of a liar. Now we might have a liar and two boozers. We really do get what we deserve. I voted for Bradley. |
|
04 Nov 00 - 08:50 PM (#334800) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Frankham DUI is a minor traffic incident? We're in big trouble. Can we really trust this guy? He calls Gore on character but as the old saying goes, point a finger and three point back. There was a former president who had a credibility problem when he lied to Congress. In those days, they called it "plausible deniability". I'm afraid that it's too late to bring this DUI detail to the attention of the public. The so-called "dirty trick" is ill-timed. If it were going to work, it would have had to surface earlier. Gordon Liddy wouldn't have done it this way. He'd allow for more lead time. It's a nasty business when you call someone a liar. It's a nasty thing to do and reflects poorly on the office of the presidency. So much for honoring the highest office in the land. I'll vote for Gore although I like Nader's policies, he wouldn't make a good pres IMHO. I consider him divisive. Frank
I'm afraid the country is about to make a tragic mistake. Frank |
|
04 Nov 00 - 09:52 PM (#334843) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: DougR Guest, Stackely: Thank you. One of the most satisfying things in life to me, is providing you with good belly laughs. No one responded, though to my question, which was, why don't you Gore folks hold your candidate to the same standards that you expect of Bush? Hmmmm? Never mind what Bush says about Gore, I'm interested in what you think about Gore's integrity. DougR |
|
04 Nov 00 - 10:07 PM (#334857) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: kendall I'll answer you Doug. Gore stretches the truth, Bush flat out lied to the reporter who asked him if he had been arrested after 1968. He said "NO" Now, it turns out that he has been arrested not once, but three timesin his earlier past. Gore has never been arrested ever. He got a speeding ticket. You seem to be willing to let Bush up on the lie thing..now let Gore up on the Buddist temple thing.At least, there is SOME room for doubt there. |
|
04 Nov 00 - 10:08 PM (#334859) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll Greg, if the record was expunged, the ARREST does not exist legally. Of course the act still exists but legally the arrest never happened. If Bill Clinton can argue that fellatio isn't sex, and Al Gore can claim no legal authority in the Bhuddist temple fund raising, then George W. Bush COULD CONCEIVABLY argue that he did not lie about his arrest record because LEGALLY the arrest did not exist. Thats what I meant and thats all I meant. I asked about who broke the story because I was and am interested. I've read several conflicting reports and I'd like to know the truth. troll |
|
04 Nov 00 - 10:16 PM (#334863) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Greg F. Yes, that's true, and I could conceivably argue that the world was flat. But that wouldn't make it so. Sorry, Troll, that dog won't hunt. Best, Greg |
|
04 Nov 00 - 10:18 PM (#334866) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: CarolC Sorry, just can't help myself... |
|
04 Nov 00 - 10:21 PM (#334867) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll I never said it was a GOOD defense, merely a possible one. At any event, both candidates seem to be ignoring the whole thing anyhow. troll |
|
04 Nov 00 - 10:27 PM (#334873) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: GUEST,Stackley Oh, you're very welcome, Doug-- but I don't admit that an attempt on your part to change the subject answers any questions about o'l Dubya, does it? Nice try- and I don't think anyone could have done it better, but the task's too heavy, even for an old hand like you. But please keep at it, you're cracking me up! You should take your act on Comedy Central- much too good to restrict it to the 'Cat. You could be the new Henny Youngman: "Take my candidate- PLEASE!" Cheers. |
|
04 Nov 00 - 10:31 PM (#334875) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Greg F. Carol- I LOVE IT! Best, Greg |
|
04 Nov 00 - 10:40 PM (#334880) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Troll THANK YOU CAROL!!! troll |
|
04 Nov 00 - 11:03 PM (#334887) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: GUEST,Stackley Oh, and Doug- I almost forgot- GREAT one-liner about Dubya's problem being PRESS BIAS!! PRICELESS!! ROFL!! Great stuff. That was Tricky Dick's problem, too, wasn't it? He wasn't a crook, the PRESS was OUT TO GET HIM!!! Too much, Doug!! Look out Jay Leno! Cheers. |
|
04 Nov 00 - 11:08 PM (#334894) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Greg F. Continued HERE |
|
05 Nov 00 - 12:19 AM (#334927) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: Thomas the Rhymer Well now...., Did anyone see Bush's paid political speach that was played on the networks? It was long, and he read it from a prompter by the camera... I can still see his eyes twitching! The approach he took was generally fumbling over words and dull, the word choices were unnaural to him and it may have contained words he didn't understand or use... at least that's what it sounded like. DUI. Lying about it. Playing the "character card" like it was trump... Allowing his handlers to tell him what to "think", hiding behind "not leaving any kids behind" with the CEO's and their tedious strings attached... Why yes, it is true! Bush is a puppet dictator waiting to be born! He has no creativity, no origionality, and maybe no conscience either... polution and death in Texas... But by golly the boy EVENTUALLY does what he is told... I for one, would like to see Clinton discuss nuts-and-bolts with Bush on policy, foreign policy, human rights, economics, political history, etc.... Clinton is a Rhodes scholar! He did his homework! Bush on the other hand... He is simply an idiot. The lights are on, but there is noone home. His convictions are mostly vague " 'cause I belong in the White House, that's why..." arguements. Bush is bunk. The people who want him in office are just plain "out of touch". It is as if they are saying... "BRING ON THE 1984 VERSION OF OUR DISNEY_WORLD STYLE SUBURBAN RETIREMENT THEME_PARK!" "...OH,... AND ONLY THE VERY WEALTHY NEED APPLY". Anyone remember "TRICKLE DOWN"? |
|
05 Nov 00 - 01:52 AM (#334957) Subject: RE: BS: Dubbya, Gore and DUI From: DougR Happy to oblige, Guest S. Keep laughing! It's good for you. Carol C: why couldn't you? DougR |