| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 12/24 |
| 2004/9/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33745 Activity:nil |
9/24 Kerry misquoted:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200409240008
(AKA, you got punked!)
\_ pwnd
\_ And strangely unsurprising...
\_ Not related: Kerry is now doing to Bush what Bush has been
doing to Kerry this whole campaign: taking quotes our of context
and spinning them to make the other guy look bad. Bush said that
"we can't win the war on terrorism" and Kerry has been beating
Bush up over that quote. What Bush meant was that since
you aren't fighting against a country you'll never have a surrender
like a normal war, so you really can't "win" in the classic sense.
That's a pretty deep statement coming from Bush, and he's back to
talking like a caveman again ("Freedom good. Terrorists bad.
Mongo kill terrorists!"). Way to go Kerry!
\_ There really is no reason to take Bush out of context. His
in context statements are revolting enough. By the way, have
you heard anyone harp on that line since Bush "clarified" it?
\_ Abortions for some, tiny American flags for others! |
| 2004/9/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33737 Activity:very high |
9/23 I apologise for thinking Kerry was always a peacenik wimp.
Kerry in favor of pre-emptive, unilateral attack against Iraq:
http://www.washtimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm
\_ When public opinion changes, I change my mind. What do you do
sir?
\_ i usually claim that my original position was misunderstood
and mischaracterize, and that i've had my current position
all along.
all along. this works even better when i can find some
sympathetic press to chime along.
\_ Okay guys, here's some news analysis for you. Take it for
what it is. Basically says that Kerry's Iraq position has
been remarkably consistent for years, if very "middle of the
road."
http://csua.org/u/96w
\_ like i said, it works better when there's sympathetic
press.
\_ Right, it's all a conspiracy of the libuhral media.
\_ You noticed, after all the Wall St. scandals,
analyst articles also detail the analyst's
relationship with the company. Why don't
news reporters and editorials at least self-
indentify their political leanings? Oh, because
they trained to be impartial and so their leanings
don't matter. Right.
\_ If they were truly impartial and interested in
the truth, they'd spend a lot more time dissecting
the propaganda that spews out of the White House.
\_ Let me guess, you would self-identify as a
Democrat or liberal?
\_ A social progressive who supported the
ouster of Saddam Hussein, just not the way
the President went about it.
\_ "We know we can't count on the French. We know we can't
count on the Russians," said Mr. Kerry. "We know that
Iraq is a danger to the United States, and we reserve
the right to take pre-emptive action whenever we
feel it's in our national interest."
Oh yea real consistent.
\_ Transcripts are not available. You're relying on a Republican
senator's memory. Pull trou, or get off my goddamn show.
\_ Read more carefully. He has a tape, and he shared it on
the radio, dummy.
\_ He could have faked the tape.
\_ See, that's just it. He has the tape. He's offered to
share it. It's not been reported that he did share it,
nor is there any unofficial transcript. It doesn't help
that this is being reported in a blurb column. It deserves
its own article.
\_ He's not a Dem.
\_ Or a Rep. seeking to prove that Iraq sought to buy
yellowcake from Nigeria.
\_ Nigeria != Niger. |
| 2004/9/23-24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33728 Activity:very high |
9/23 Not trying to incite another flame war but what are some of the
advantages for voting Bush? I live in S Cal and I see a lot of
pro-Bush stickers on cars. What is Bush good for and why do ppl
want to vote for him? ok thx
\_ We are voting for Bush because we are eEEeeeEEEVvvvVvvvIIIllLLLLlL
Republicans! What more did you need to know? --E.R.
\_This is dumber than ilyas. - tom
\_ Pure. Flame. Bait.
\_ no really, let's hear it from the other side. Lots of people
are voting for Bush and I want to know what they have to gain
by doing so. It's good to understand the psychie of your
enemies so that you can crush them.
\_ he's not Kerry
\_ I suspect most Bush voters honestly believe he's better for
the country. I know that's incomprehensible to you, but
Bush voters don't live in the same world you do.
\_ obviously they believe he's better, but why?
\_ I think some voters believe he might be worse for the
country but he's better for them. So they vote for him.
\_ The same could be said of "some voters" for Kerry. So?
\_ Bush is for anti-gay, pro-God, anti-abortion, pro-gun,
pro-America, anti-terror, anti-tax voters! Kerry = the reverse.
\_ pro-corporation, anti-littleguy.
\_ anti-trial lawyer, neutral-littleguy.
\_ trial lawyers gave more money to Bush than Gore.
\_ URL?
\_ Here's the breakdown by industry for Kerry:
http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/indus.asp?id=N00000245&cycle=2004
and here it is for Bush:
http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/indus.asp?id=N00008072&cycle=2004
They don't break it down by type of lawyer,
but the above poster appears to be incorrect.
\_ If they don't break it down by type of
lawyer, how does this make it appear the
above poster is incorrect? And where's your
Gore data?
\_ you are one lazy ass motherfucker.
http://www.opensecrets.org/2000elect/indus/AllCands.htm
You're right about Gore, though. I somehow
read "Kerry" instead of Gore.
\_ If you make enough money, he has lowered your taxes a lot.
\_ He's going to bankrupt social security by giving big business
all these tax breaks which was his plan all along. Transfer
money from the middle and lower classes to the haves and have
more's.
\_ Yeah, hence the haves and have more's probably vote for him.
\_ SS isn't funded by business taxes. Try again.
\_ No, but the business tax breaks are funded by the
SS trust fund.
\_ He's protecting us from the likes of Cat Stevens.
\_ YOU'RE NEXT DAVID BOWIE@!@@@@!!!
\_ Well, he did write that song "I'm Afraid of Americans."
OFF TO GITMO WITH HIM!!!!!1!
\_ I was expecting more intellectual responses, like "Bush's tax
has made X percent improvements in this and that sectors" but
it's obvious that there are no pro-Bush advocates on motd.
\_ We keep getting censored. I am not sure why. Nothing
inflammatory. Maybe that's why.
\_ that's dissapointing. could you put it in a seperate file?
\_ It's a troll. Read the motd everyday and you'll easily figure
it out. The real question is why would anyone think a man like
Kerry who did *nothing* with his *19 years* in the Senate is
magically going to fix the world as President.
\_ He broke the BCCI scandal which lead to the Iran-Contra
affair. Republicans like you still can't forgive him
for proving that Reagan was a lying scumbag like
the rest of them. He is a great muckracking Senator,
and has done lots of other stuff in his 19 years.
And you a lying FUD throwing sociopath, just like the
rest of the "power at all costs" Republicans.
\_ You live in OC, d00d. I'm in West L.A. and I see mostly Kerry
stickers.
\_ i've been seeing a lot of stickers too and wish i could get
a "i drive this piece of crap and will be cancelling out your
vote for bush" but more succinctly put bumper sticker
\_ You're both in CA. Your vote is meaningless. |
| 2004/9/22 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33696 Activity:nil |
9/22 The Kerry Tongue flick
http://www.dailyrecycler.com/blog/2004/09/roll-over-gene-simmons.html |
| 2004/9/22 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33689 Activity:nil |
9/22 John Kerry whipping up his supporters, just like they did
Vietnam
Decorated Soldier Reportedly Attacked At (Toby Keith) Concert
http://www.nbc4i.com/news/3746350/detail.html
\_ I think there has to be more to this story, simply because it
was at a Toby Keith concert. And to try and call this a Kerry
supporter is rather trollish.
\_ I was about to say that his base isn't in Germany. But then I
realized that it is.
\_ What's the frequency Kenneth?!? WHAT'S THE FREQUENCY!?!
\_ I pity you.
\_ A guy gets stabbed at a Giants game, and you're surprised someone
got punched in the head at a Toby Keith concert? Just thinking
about Toby Keith makes me want to punch someone in the head. |
| 12/24 |
| 2004/9/22 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33685 Activity:nil |
9/20 Bush has gained 10 points on Kerry in just one month in California.
At this rate, Bush will be ahead of Kerry by two points on Oct
22 and win California in a landslide:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/California%20Sept%205.htm
\_ By your logic, Bush will have over 100% support in Ca in less
than a year. Fuck off.
\_ Didn't some other motd poster claim that Gore had more than
100% of the vote in some parts of PA? So it is theoretically
possible...
\_ Just 2 or 3 precincts, but still. It made me laugh. --cons
\_ According to http://www.electoral-vote.com Rasmussen leans right.
\_ And Zogby leans left. So? Talk to me on November 3rd. |
| 2004/9/21 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:33675 Activity:high |
9/21 Don't get Tim Noah mad at you. http://slate.msn.com/id/2107041 \_ it's pretty amazing how quickly the dittohead machine gets the public discourse away from the core issues. (See below discussion) -tom \_ ^Tim Noah^Geddes \_ Both. Is public examination of your life worse than getting fired? \_ http://csua.org/u/90k (original source article) If you think the right to privacy exceeds the newsworthiness, then more power to you. \_ Yep, I know. Just make sure you don't get Tim Noah mad at you, or he'd drag your life out in electronic print. \_ I'm struggling to find the newsworthiness in Tim Noah's expose of Geddes' life. \_ The "expose of Geddes' life" seems to be restricted to his political beliefs in direct relation to why he fired the lady. Again, if you think the right to privacy exceeds the newsworthiness, then more power to you. \_ Yes, I am sure Geddes' work as a standing trustee has much to do with the firing. And certainly the examination on how he got the standing trustee job has much to do with the firing. In fact, the whole point of the article seems to be that there's no news here. \_ Okay, that part is outside the firing. As for "no news here", it was news to me -- thanks for the URL. \_ Just eyeballing it, but that part is probably 2/3 of the article. Like I said, don't get Noah mad at you. \_ IMO, an employer firing someone for having a Kerry bumper sticker is something one can get legitimately mad about. \_ Sure, get mad. But publish an "expose" of Geddes as a standing trustee? This is just Noah flexing his power to punish Geddes. \_ I believe you were the person who used the term "expose". IMO, the publicity is deserved. BTW, do you know you overwrite posts? \_ Sorry if I overwrote your post, though I did try to merge in my changes. To be honest, with all the automerging that is going on, it's hard to tell who's overwriting whom in conversations like this. \_ We place different value on privacy then. If you care about your privacy, don't get Noah mad at you, because he has a mouthpiece, and he's going to use it to punish you. \_ The publicity is deserved, IMO. \_ I think we can all agree that Geddes is a jerk. So you think it's ok to talk about his other work as a standing trustee, even though it has nothing to do with the firing. What else would be ok to talk about? Can Noah publish his past traffic violations? Any other criminal record of Geddes'? How about what books he borrowed from the library? Or what tapes he rented from the video store? Or where he web surfed? Do you have a privacy threshold? \_ I believe I already wrote that this was outside the firing, and I won't spend time defending that. This is where you say "no news here", and this is where I say, "thanks for the URL, anyway." \_ Ah. I thought you were also the guy who said the publicity is deserved, and I was responding to that. Hard to tell on the motd. \_ I'm the same guy. Basically I'm for publicity on the firing, but I'm not sure about publicity on his trusteeship. The latter is much more arguable. \_ Ah, then we agree then. I also have no trouble with publicizing the firing, but I find the bulk of the Noah article disturbing. I don't find it disturbing. If you _/ Do something political and newsworthy then media will analyze you for juicy tidbits in search of a story. Noah here got a story: that this guy profits from people having economic troubles. \_ Tough shit. This is politics. This is how the world works. If you act like an ass, you might have someone act like an ass back to you. This is why we have a free press. \_ So every facet of Geddes' life is open to inspection? Or is there a privacy threshold? |
| 2004/9/21 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33659 Activity:high |
9/21 CBS Arranged Meeting (For Burkett) With Lockhart.
http://csua.org/u/953
So the Kerry campaign was in on the fraud as well.
\_ CBS News called Bush's camp, too. Obviously they were in on it, too.
\_ What you have is the NYT, LAT, Boston Globe and Kerry campaign
colluding with 60 minutes to launch fraudulent anti-Bush
campaigns in an attempt to influence the pres. election.
\_ Tinfoil hats anyone?
\_ Yeah, I think it's just CBS News that really screwed the pooch
\_ Oh Jesus, go away TalkingPointsTroll. Or are you SwiftBoatGuy
again?
\_ You have a major media outlet perpetrating fraud in an attempt
to influence Pres. election and your response is to castigate
those upset. You're a petulant disgraceful twit.
\_ Or you have a greatly respected journalist who didn't check
his source well enough. The president's military record
questions have hung around because they are valid,
unanswered, and continually dodged.
\_ But when our president misled us into an unwinnable war in
Iraq, you told me to shut up when I complained. Don't
get upset when the same happens to you. Oh, and did I mention
that you're drawing conclusions based on paranoid conspiracy
theories? I bet you're one of those folks that think Clinton
pinned the Oklahoma Federal Building bombings on those law
abiding citizens from Michigan to avoid having to go to war
with the Muslims that really did it.
\_ No Straw Men please. -Bush basher
\_ No, that's not what that story says. It says that Lockhart
called Burkett at CBS's request, but that they did not talk
about the memos at all. Did you fail English 101?
\_ Initially Lockhart and the Kerry campaign maintained they
knew nothing about the memos or who created them. Now this
revelation. Why should I believe them or CBS now?
\_ What part of "did not talk about the memos at all" did you
not understand?
\_ Why would Lockhart randomly call Burkett at the
request of Mapes, a producer at CBS. It's your
contention that CBS, ABC, and NBC news producers
broker calls between campaign chairs and their
sources on a regular basis? Bizarre.
\_ You bet your sweet patootie that if a CBS news
director told a campaign manager (from any
campaign anytime) to call a certain person
that they would do it. Wouldn't you? |
| 2004/9/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:33651 Activity:nil |
9/20 http://news.google.com shows "What is Bush Hiding?" and "Finally, Kerry Takes a Stand" as the lead topics. Hmm... |
| 2004/9/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33627 Activity:insanely high |
9/20 Shotgun Incident Seems to Worsen for Kerry
http://www.gunlaws.com/Kerrys%20Illegal%20Shotgun.htm
\_ You know the worst of it is that I sincerely believe he is
going to lose because of this asinine irrelevant crap. -John
\_ so for Democrats the laws are irrevelant
\_ the 2nd amendment is asinine and irrelevant?
\_ You're not listening to Herr John. Read and try again.
\_ No, he's going to lose because the Dems picked a bad
canidate. This other crap is just a side show.
\_ Side show? No. Kerry had a great speech today about Iraq.
The media will ignore it in favor of OMG DAN RATHER IS
TEH GAY!!!!11!!!!
\_ They probably fell asleep as he droned on and on and
on.
\_ 1000+ SOLDIERS DEAD IN IRAQ. OWNERSHIP SOCIETY
BULLSHIT. BILLIONS SPENT ON NONWORKING MAGIC MISSILE
DEFENSE SHIELD +4. BIZARRE PLAN FOR FREE MARKET
ECONOMY AND FREE TRADE ZONE IN IRAQ POST INVASION.
\_ [all caps rant delete]
\_ Hi aaron. Your drool is showing again.
\_ Your return on SS is < 2%. Young adults
today will likely receive a large, negative return on
payments to the Fed govt. If your so gungho on giving
money to people for free volunteer to increase your
tax payments. Considering Pyongyang and Tehran are
progressing quite rapidly with nuclear and missile
technology, TMD is looking better and better. TMD
works.
\_ Moving SS to private accounts would cost TRILLIONS.
Ask your favorite wonk how it would be paid for. No
one can give you an answer.
\_ LOL its your money. An opt-in plan would cost
"TRILLIONS" - you are full of it.
\_ Are you being obtuse? SS is pay-as-you-go. Current
payout are payed by current revenue. Covering that
gap will be untenable.
\_ You are arguing with a moron. Just thought you might
want to know that.
\_ If the opt-in plan lets people opt-out of paying the
payroll tax, then if enough people opt-in, there WILL
be a defecit of hundreds of billions a year not going
to pay current and future SS benefits. Add it up for
a few years and it IS trillions added to the national
debt.
\_ tmd? missile defense? explain your acronyms - danh
\__ theater missile defense, eg. patriot and ACL.
\_ I think the bush administration is throwing billions
of dollars at a nonworking nonviable faith based
missile defense shield. go read
http://slate.msn.com/id/2106853
here's one about how the missile shield won't be
tested till after the election, i can't imagine why:
http://csua.org/u/943
\_ But that's a 2% guaranteed, real dollar #, much better
than what you got investing everthing in Worldcom instead.
the shield won't work: http://csua.org/u/944 - danh
\_ So how much is a MIRVed ICBM hitting LA worth
to you? Not billions?
\_ About 2 bucks, at least that's what I'd pay to rent
the video and watch it over and over again. -John
\_ :( -- ilyas
\_ I'm not a homicidal gun nut, but I play one on MOTD.
\_ Last week I was no guts, no brains, and before
that I was a fanatical nazi. Wow, a pattern
develops. First I thought you might have some
trouble reconciling all my fascinatingly
multiple personalities, but now it's all becoming
clear to me! Thank you, thank you, Dr.
Kevorkian! -John
\_ what do you mean no guts? you are all
guts.
\_ Has it occured to you that there might be more
than one person making jibes at you?
\_ did you read the urls? the system the
bush admin is pursuing doesn't work. - danh
\_ I don't go to motherjones for an unbiased look at the neocons;
why do you post links from gun nut sites and pretend they're
going to be unbiased with regards to Kerry?
\_ State and federal gun laws have nothing to due with political
partisanship. Were the founders around today they would
be called gun nuts by leftists.
\_ Were the founders around today, they would recognize that the
need for personal weaponry is antiquated and detrimental to
the progress of the nation. They'd also wonder how a bunch
of draft-dodgers were managing to run on a pro-war platform. |
| 2004/9/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33621 Activity:high |
9/18 Defend private property from illegal invasion, get shot by the
FBI
Federal agents surround ranch in Douglas, Arizona
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1218545/posts
\_ from one of the freeper posts a bit down on the page:
"I remember that we held our noses 4 years ago. The pubbies told us
to give him a gop House and Senate and we'd get what we wanted. We
held up our end of the deal. This year, I'm not holding my nose."
Hah! you fuckers are losing your base. It continues to amaze
me how the same people who claim to be radical opponents of
excessive government power can support the Ashcroft justice
department.
\_ As much as reality may upset you, gun toting freeper yahoos
are not the (R) base. Someone who refers to them as "The
pubbies" clearly sees himself not as the base but outside the
party and needing to be bought. Carry on.
\_ Generalizations accomplish very little - there are statists
in both parties. Exactly which provisions or actions by
Ashcroft are you upset about? I never heard
outcries from the left about Clinton's 1995 anti-terror act,
of which the Patriot Act simply ties up the loose ends.
\_ Explain this to us less tinfoil-oriented types.
\_ Because Clinton:good, Bush:evil. Very straight forward. |
| 2004/9/18 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33616 Activity:high |
9/18 Yet another goofy Kerry pic - what is wrong with this guy?
link:csua.org/u/93v
\- Dont be an ignoramus ... if you watch somebody for 5min
and have a camera that can shoot continuous, you will
get lot of mouth open, eyes half closed, hand in weird
position pictures. what takes talent is taking good
pictures ... it's the law of thermodynamics for photo-
graphy. your brain has been classified as: small. --psb
\_ If his opponent were *anyone* but this guy you might have a point:
http://www.bushorchimp.com/pics.html
\_ sorry but those pics aren't even close, one is marginal. |
| 2004/9/17-18 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33600 Activity:high |
9/17 The Fix is in: Nader put on Florida ballot by state supreme court.
http://csua.org/u/93i (yahoo news)
\_ What fix? You prefer to disenfranchise voters?
\_ Do you know what "disenfranchise" means? keeping nader off the
ballot because he didn't meet the state's requirements doesn't
disenfranchise anyone.
\_ Obviously you don't know what the term means, since
it was the Florida supreme court ruled that Nader's campaign
did meet the state's requirements. Anyway, why the vitriol
against Nader? Why don't the Dems go after the libertarians
or the Green party candidates? Hmmm....
\_ It's a c-o-n-......SPIRACY!
[please don't modify my "In Living Color" references]
\_ It's a n-e-o-c-o-n-......SPIRACY!
\_ Yeah, they should have been allowed to vote.
\_ No fix, looks like they did the right thing. -liberal
\_ Jed must have promised Florida to George again.
\_ Holy shit! Imagine people having a *choice* of candidates? That is
so horrible!
\_ Only Nader? Why not the other people who couldn't meet the
requirements? |
| 2004/9/17-18 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33596 Activity:high |
9/17 I was like "whatever" to all this news about former Clinton staff
joining Kerry's campaign, but my gawd, in the last few days I've seen:
"Bush living in a fantasy world / world of spin" coinciding with NIE
report confirming the same, $3 billion plus cost of Dubya's plan,
Halliburton waste and non-compete, and now "Bush is waiting until
November until he calls up more troops". Kerry will now be entering
the debates with excellent momentum.
\_ What momentum? Kerry shouldn't be trailing in the polls if any
of that actually mattered because, guess what, stuff like that
has been around ever since the race started. If Kerry hasn't
capitalized on it this late in the game, it's doubtful he can
during election day. The race is going to be tight, and it'll
be a coin toss on who wins. What's really bad is that Kerry has
basically squandered every softball lobbed at him so far, and he
has let crap like Swiftboat totally discredit his Vietnam career.
Kerry's like a fighter on the ropes, instead of attacking he's just
reacting. Instead of going on the offensive he's just defending and
trying to consolidate the tired old left-wing supporters like union
and the urban poor. With the country in the state that it's in,
he should be leading a goddamn revolution, instead he looks like
a flip-flopper who can't drum up one memorable battle cry.
\_ you better not be one fo the pussies who fucking winede about
howard dean. dean could have fjcu cking goene ll the way if he
wan'ttn assasinated by the fucking media. up rorz. |
| 2004/9/17 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33592 Activity:nil 50%like:33591 |
9/17 What is wrong with Kerry. Why does he take such ridiculous
photos.
http://csua.org/u/93d
\_ As opposed to Bush with a chainsaw or a huge fucking halo around
his head? Go away, freeper.
\_ When you have 100 cameras pointed at you at any given moment, there
are going to be a ton of pictures of you looking stoned, stupid, or
sick.
\_ It was probably actually pretty cool in real life, but take 500
pictures, and at least one will look pretty dumb. This one did
turn out to be pretty funny though. |
| 2004/9/17-18 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33580 Activity:very high |
9/16 Only a week left then everyone can shut up about Bush's records!
http://csua.org/u/930
\_ i don't get it, why doesn't kerry just parade around with
the iraq body counts, the state of the economy, the
erosion of civil protections, the deliberate plan to
do away with any social safety net, all kinds of cool
stuff not involving 30 years ago. - danh
\_ good unemployment figures, home ownership figures, home wealth
figures and many pther positive economic trends are not something
Kerry wants to highlight. This is all tinfoil and koolaid.
\_ why do you like Lurch? and hate america?
\_ How dare you question my patriotism!
\_ this week's This Modern World is funny - danh
\_ I was at a rally in Albuquerque, NM with Kerry yesterday.
What you describe is exactly what Kerry hammered Bush on,
with the addition of Bush's total lack of action regarding
the skyrocketing cost of health care, Bush's manifest intention
of stacking the Supreme Court to reverse Roe vs. Wade, and
other such real issues. He made only
one snipe at Bush's war record: "Some of us were playing
hockey while Bush was cheerleading!" The Press seems to be
covering the shit you mention, and ignoring what Kerry's
actually saying. --PeterM
\_ Just curious, why do you think it is the President's job to do
something to give you cheap healthcare? I want a great house
in a good neighborhood with excellent schools and no crime. Is
that his responsibility, too? Why can't we all get that?
\_ Good question! Right now we can't all get that because
the public school system is an utter mess, we don't have
enough competent cops, we have ineffective prevention
programs to dissuade youth from becoming thugs, we've
made it easier for criminals to get their hands on AKs,
and we're hemmorhaging money into Halliburton's coffers.
If you think the current Pres. is about raising the
national standard of living, you're dreaming.
\_ Exactly. It is third parties going on about the military
record issue (Except for Bush's campaign, where there were
connections between the Swift Boat folks and his campaign
\_ BZZZT! Nothing like between Kerry and http://moveon.org
and the rest of the 527's doing an end run around
McCain/Feingold with foreign money.
staff). But whatever. Bush seems fit to take Ohio and
Wisconsin in a walk which means he's pretty much got the thing
locked up. And my wife and I get to figure out what country
we want to move to. -- ulysses
\_ If Kerry can't even control his own campaign, how is he
fit to be POTUSA.
\_ "third parties" != "campaign". -John
\_ http://moveon.org == kerry campaign
\_ Like I said, if he can't even get these third parties
who are apparently on his own side to get out a
consistent message, how is he qualified to deal with
a Congress or foreign leaders who won't be?
\_ I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt
and explain this to you: the 527 law specifically
forbids these organizations from coordinating
with any campaign.
\_ And you *believe* that it really works like
that?!
\_ It's not "Like you said" at all. Why would he
have any control over people "on his side" but
part of his campaign? Don't drink so much beer
before posting to the motd. -John
\_ I wonder if the Bush crew sat around before the
primaries and said, "We're in a bad spot. Even our
own party thinks we shouldn't get re-elected.
There are a number of guys on the democratic
ticket who have a shot at beating us. Who can we
definately defeat? Hmmm.. Kerry! Let's make sure
he wins the primaries."
we want to move to. -- ulysses
\_ Probably not because our own party never thought that
Bush didn't deserve re-election.
\_ Can I get that promise in writing?
\_ I'm sorry, did I promise something? -- ulysses
\_ Look carefully at the electoral map. Kerry can still
pull out a win with Colorado, Arizona and Nevada.
It ain't over till the fat lady sings. Plus, half
the polls have the race tied, half have Bush up by
a dozen. Someone is doing something wrong.
\_ I think the polls you are referring to in your last
two sentences are the recent national polls. I consider
nat'l polls to be almost meaningless given how the pres
is elected. As for Arizona and Nevada, I am, um,
doubtful, about Kerry taking those states. I don't
know why they are having such a hard frickin' time in
PA and OH, though.
\_ NV is basically tied and has been for months:
http://csua.org/u/93b (Reno Gazette)
So is CO, AZ is a long shot.
OH has always leaned Republican and only goes
Democratic in a blowout. PA is another matter.
If Kerry loses PA it is going to be almost
impossible for him to win. He could still pull
it off with FL, but he really needs PA.
\_ Kerry is behind in Florida. That's like saying
Bush could win with CA or NY.
\_ This is one time us gun nuts can count on Kerry's
anti-gun stand to give us OH, NV, and AZ despite
what the polls say. This is why Gore lost TN and AR
\_ Gore lost TN because not even his own state liked
him. They knew better. |
| 2004/9/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33572 Activity:nil |
9/16 Poor Kerry - his speech to the National Guard was a
complete embarrassment. Actually he deserved it.
Watch on CSPAN. |
| 2004/9/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33554 Activity:very high |
9/15 Bush's Convention Bounce Vanishes as Race Tightens
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB109526872487418642,00.html?mod=todays%5Ffree%5Ffeature
\_ I think this link is what you were looking for:
http://www.electoral-vote.com
\_ electoral-vote had Kerry winning 3 days ago. It is not
an authoritative source, it aggregates results which are
not necessarily comparable. -tom
not necessarily comparable. -
\_ Nothing is authoritive. Sheesh. On November 3rd it will
all be authoritive. Until then it's just fun and games
and bullshit. "My poll is authoritive and yours is crap!"
\_ On November 3rd it may or may not be authoritive,
remember the 2000 election?
\_ It was authoritive for anyone not heavily
invested in the tinfoil or hatting industries.
\_ If Kerry wins Florida or somesuch critical
state by 5,000 questionable votes, I hope
you'll be honorable enough to remember this
conversation and not post rabid freeper
links for a month after the election.
\_ Similar, but perhaps more professional.
http://www.slate.com/id/2106527
\_ The problem with both of these is that they use results
from different by-state surveys conducted by different
organizations at different times, and they treat them as
if they are coherent. They are interesting to look at,
but even more so than other poll results, must be taken
with a grain of salt. -tom |
| 2004/9/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33534 Activity:nil |
9/14 AP Uses Fake SEAL to Back Kerry, Slam Bush
MSM caught lying again.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1214014/posts?page=1,50
\_ See, there's no point in censoring you when you post laughable
crap from http://freerepublic.com. Let me see if I can find a Mother
Jones link to keep you similarly entertained.
Here you go: http://csua.org/u/91i
Repubs gerrymander San Diego district! pimp for Military-
Industrial Complex! All liars and crooks!
\_ Well freerepublic broke the false ANG story. Authentiseal
says this guys muslim name and original name do not
exist in their database. Believe what you want, the guy
or AP author lied. SEALs take frauds very seriously.
\_ so why haven't they beaten up jesse ventura? - danh
\_ visit their sites.
\_ So, the guy may or may not be a SEAL, but, the evidence is
inconclusive. He claims to have changed his name since he
served, and as it says in the SEAL response, if he's changed
his name the search is meaningless. -motd conservitive |
| 2004/9/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:33526 Activity:high |
9/14 "Is Israel 'Swing State' That Could Tip U.S. Election?"
http://csua.org/u/916 (Yahoo! News)
"Many say their choice will be guided more by whether they think Bush
or Kerry will best serve Israel's interests than by the candidates'
stand on taxes and other domestic issues." I think any citizens who
put another country/region's interests (be it Israel, Palestine, China,
Taiwan, ...) before US interest should have their citizenship stripped.
\_ Go back to China, troll.
\_ HUH? Where the hell have you been in the past 50 years?
Do you think you'll get ANYWHERE politically if you dare
to challenge Israel? No one will be the president of the
United States unless they support what Israel does, period.
Wake up idiot.
\_ No president in the past 30-50 years has ever dared to say
anything seriously bad about Israel. All they ever do is
"Oh please don't do that".
\_ After they whacked Kennedy for his ultimatum on
Israel's nuke program, would you say boo? We're
they're bitches.
\_ J00s 0wn0rz j00!
\_ So rather than calling Israel the 51st US State, we
should really call US the 7th Israeli District. And Sharon
is actually not Dubya's son, but father.
\- hello you may wish to read: http://csua.org/u/91g
which is a book on the israeli lobby in the US by
fmr congressman. --psb |
| 2004/9/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33521 Activity:high |
9/14 So, could the guy who forged the Bush memos go to jail? Is there
any indication that Kerry was involved?
\_ Go to jail? For what?
\_ That's what I'm curious about. He forged a guys signature,
and faked military documents. I that a crime, or is it just
considered a hoax?
\_ Wait, do you have any proof they were forged?
\_ THE VOICES IN MY HEAD^W^W^W^WBLOGGERS TOLD ME!
DITTO DITTO DITTO!!!
\_ I give it even odds they were forged or not.
I give it even odds some freeper did it instead of a lefty wacko. |
| 2004/9/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33515 Activity:high |
9/13 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18982-2004Sep13.html Of more than 100 records made available by the 147th Group and the Texas Air National Guard, none used the proportional spacing techniques characteristic of the CBS documents. Nor did they use a superscripted "th" in expressions such as "147th Group" and or "111th Fighter Intercept Squadron." [There is reasonable doubt, but the preponderance of evidence is that one or more memos are either fake or transcribed -- also, the authenticity of the memos is independent of whether the events described occurred or not. -liberal] \_ Your last sentence there is probably the most interesting. To be frank, I'm pretty sure that Bush got special treatment. Kerry did to, so no real biggie there. However, none of that justifies pathetic forgeries. -conservative \_ Kerry was a really smart Yale guy who leveraged that and his connections into becoming a swift boat captain. \_ Kerry was a smart, accomplished Yale guy who leveraged that and his connections into becoming a swift boat captain. Dubya was a frat president jokester at Yale with below-average or average grades who leveraged his connections into getting OUT of the war into the Texas Air National Guard. This should be supremely obvious to everyone, regardless of political viewpoint. |
| 2004/9/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33509 Activity:very high |
9/13 Right Wing Nutjob Bloggers schooled by dailykos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/10/34914/1603
\_ You know, I think both candidates are pretty much poor in this
election, and I'd really like to think of myself as neutral in
all the mudslinging. But Kerry supporters trying to pass this off
as a legit memo is just irrational. Through this fantastic series
of coincidences - some backwater base buys this super expensive
typewriter to write memos, and some guy whose family says he could
barely type uses proportional spacing in his memos, and the word
wrapping and font just happen to be identical to what MS Word does
on the default settings, etc. etc. ... sheesh. It's fake. Deal with
it. Save your breath for an issue where you might have some
legitimacy.
\_ Yeah, go back to your hole, ya left-wing bleeding heart wannabe
independent. If the memo was real you'd be all over it like a
dog in heat trying to hump a dead tree stump. Fact is that the
memo was from the Kerry campaign. Fact is that it was a blatant
attempt by the Kerry folks to retaliate to swiftboat. Fact is
that they failed miserably and now CBS and the Kerry boys have
egg over all their collective faces because Kerry doesn't know
how to hide his trail.
\_ Speaking of slimy political maneuvering:
http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6224278
\_ Did you read the article? They refute every argument against
the memo's legitimacy. Better get in a few more quick "just
give it up"s before your whole argument falls apart.
\_ Like I said, save your breath. "Falls apart". Hah. Would
you be willing to bet a Kerry presidency on those memos
being legitimate?
\_ While the line wrapping is exact, the font is not, according
to that http://dailykos.com URL.
Also, the http://dailykos.com consensus now seems to be the IBM
Executive typewriter, not the Selectric Composer. The former
is common; the latter is expensive and not.
http://dailykos.com people are trying to get their hands on an
Executive now.
\_ Anyone know, how did line wrapping work on these electric
typewriters? Did people just guess where to hit the
carriage return or was there some better indication to avoid
going over the margin?
\_ I owned one a selectric--you could set mechanical tabs
which would either stop the carriage and not let you type
any more, or on some models do a CR/LF for you. -John
The spacing is the most suspicious, including the centered
header on another memo (although it is actually not centered
but shifted over to the right by 1 tab).
\_ This link unsatifactorily addresses two, yes only two, of
the inconsistencies found in the memo. The blog contains
only information found earlier on the 'right wing nutjob'
websites. Another example, one of the Gen. referred to
had retired 18 months prior to the memo. There are 10
or 15 more discrepancies. So, try again.
\_ As ex-Army, http://dailykos.com should realize that the abbreviations
used in the memos reveal they were written by someone who was
never in the military. He should know what a Form 180 is, and
which candidates have and have NOT signed it. |
| 2004/9/13 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:33508 Activity:nil |
9/13 Amazing. Iraq is completely gone to shit and all we can talk
about is Swift Boat and fake memos. This country deserves its shit
media and its shit government.
http://csua.org/u/90u (time.com)
\_ This is Karl Rove desperately trying to change the subject.
\_ Yeah, Karl Rove made Mr. Rather stick his own foot into his
mouth (next to Satan's dick)...
\_ Lovely debate tactic, but this isn't http://freerepublic.com. Come
back when you're ready to act like an adult.
\_ If that was a requirement for a soda account this would
be a lonely place.
\_ Dubya actually said that Iraq being a shithole for U.S. troops
is a good thing, since the enemy is preoccupied with us there and
not busy blowing up the U.S.
As for Swift Boat, a whole bunch of veterans who say Kerry is a liar
is going to do something.
\_ Why doesn't the media disclose the civilian body count in Iraq?
Or in Afghanistan? If "freedom" means being bombed into the
stone age, maybe living under the Saddam regime wasn't so bad
after all. |
| 2004/9/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33478 Activity:very high |
9/12 How can you still believe the media is not left wing biased?
http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn12.html
\_ FFS, media are not biased either way. They print shit that will
get stupid people riled up enough to buy papers. Individual media
(Fox maybe, don't know, never paid much attention to it, we don't
get it over here) are probably biased, or at least their management
or editorial staff are, but news are calculated to make money.
Repeat after me: newspapers are not (generally) lobbying tools.
They are businesses. -John
\_ are you really this stupid? Swift Boat got way more coverage
than Texans for Truth have. -tom
\_ Only after Kerry responded. They ignored it for weeks until
they couldn't any more.
\_ Please! Look at all the anti-gun lawsuits that get front
page and then page 10 when they are dismissed.
\_ How do you explain the Bush administration exposing
intelligence operatives TWICE and the media not covering
it much? The media is just a mouthpiece for very
conservative corporations, it just has liberal reporters.
\_ It was everywhere and the only item in the news for
weeks. It is still being investigated so there is
nothing "new" to report. Everytime they get the tiniest
bit of anything this is brought up again. Please try
a different story if you want to make that claim. It is
simply ludicrous to claim right wing media bias. Don't
even bother.
\_ Are you saying that media is NOT controlled by
giant corporations which are inherently conservative?
\_ Giant corporations are not inherently
conservative. This is a fallacy.
\_ conservative was probably a bad word choice.
multinationals support the repubs because
they're the ones pushing tort reform and
deregulation (read "neutering the courts" and
"lawlessness")
\_ Yeah suing for hot coffee is reasonable
\_ Clinton? NAFTA? The truth is that big
companies are always fiscally
conservative, but where they land
socially can vary a lot.
\_ NYT slaps researchers who say business headlines biased against
Republicans. link:csua.org/u/8zy
\_ I'm confused. Are you being sarcastic or stupid? |
| 2004/9/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33456 Activity:kinda low |
9/10 New poll shows Bush stomping Kerry. I guess people like it when they
know where someone stands.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/Vote2004/bush_campaign_poll_040909
.html
\_ Dubya delivered a good speech, but it's aaaaa-llll baloney.
Take it from me. -smart liberal
\_ No, the *new* poll has Bush with a two point lead. Do you really
only check the poll that Rush tells you to look at?
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh2004.htm
Has a survey of all the pollsters. |
| 2004/9/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33446 Activity:nil |
9/9 If Bush didn't go to War with Iraq, what would liberals be
complaining about?
\_ tax cuts for the rich, duh
\_ Ditching Afghanistan once it was no longer newsworthy.
\_ well, no, because if we didn't go into Iraq, there were a lot
of people that said we should have double-downed in Afghanistan
to nail bin Laden.
\_ we know where he is, we're just not going to nail him till
a few days before nov. 7.
\_ John Ashcroft, parts of the Patriot Act, etc.
\_ deciding policy based on the extremist views of a hardcore
Christian evangelical minority, completely ignoring Enron
fraudulenty pumping up energy rates in the west, using
"cut taxes" as his one and only response to anything
economic related, trying to get rid of 100 percent of the
estate tax permanently, pulling environmental crap like
gutting environmental laws and naming the bill
'the clear skies initiative', a culture of complete secrecy
and policy of never ever apologizing in his administration,
removing all civil service employment protection from
the employees of the new homeland security administration.
\_ This stuff is not being communicated to the mainstream.
The surface talk, which is all most people see, is all
about Kerry lamely defending one attack after another,
and the media showing one clip of Kerry saying economy=
bad and then another with Bush saying ecnomy=good. I
think people are generally much more aware of Kerry's
swift boat thing than the standard anti-Bush stuff
that pushed Dean to the top in the beginning, because
the other Dems weren't talking about it. Dean had the whole
thing with the grassroots funding and anti-special interests.
Kerry doesn't even really have a message these days, it's
just lost in the noise. "Can do better" is NOT compelling.
I have the feeling Kerry will flub the debates too.
\_ RAARRAGHHAAARHGH!!!1! -Dean
\_ actually it's "yeeAAAIIIIOOOURRRGHHGH!".
\_ The power of Kerry compels you! The power of Kerry
compels you! |
| 2004/9/8 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33410 Activity:very high |
9/7 "Too many OB-GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women
all across this country." -GWB
http://uneasysilence.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=6&t=1042
\_ That's nice. Now move along.
\_ Whats the problem? its an odd choice of words but
grammatically makes sense. Kind of funny though.
Why no mention of Kerry referring to a local chef named 'Toy'
as a 'he' when it was a 'she'?
\_ Sheesh, when are you gonna get it through yer head?
Democrat = good, Republican = bad.
\_ Why don't you ever make the same comment when the
opposite happens (usually in the same thread) where
Republican = good, Democrat = bad (or hates America)?
\_ Me? I just think it's funny to edit posts and insult
people. I'm in 7th grade.
\_ Me? I think it's funny to attribute specious ideas to
people that don't hold such ideas, then complain when I am
taunted for my idiocy.
--dumbass |
| 2004/9/7 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33409 Activity:nil |
9/7 Analysis: Kerry Comments in August Have Him Playing into GOP Hands
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3587-2004Sep7.html
"You are paying these guys a lot of damn money. If Kerry is screwing
up, where is our Karl Rove?" |
| 2004/9/7 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33406 Activity:nil |
9/7 Britons want Kerry, not Bush:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/040908/325/f247v.html
Insert ob red-coat remarks below. |
| 2004/9/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33404 Activity:very high |
9/7 Kerry cosponsored bill banning gun he waves
http://www.drudgereport.com/dncg.htm
\_ a waste of a great gun :(
\_ MacGyver wised up and became Colonel O'Neal
\_ pistol grips on shotguns are way less accurate then
regular grips, they should let the twinks keep them
\_ it could help in close, urban situations where accuracy
of one shot isn't the primary concern.
\_ most experts agree, pistol grips should be removed
cuz they suck in urban situations
\_ how bout for full auto shotguns
\_ TWO MILLION JOBS LOST! $9 BILLION "UNACCOUNTED FOR" IN IRAQ!
A UNILATERAL WAR BASED ON COOKED INTELLIGENCE! SHUT THE FUCK
UP YOU ASS! I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK! FUCK YOU!!!!!!!111!! --aaron
\_ Amen. There's not really enough "stfu, u teh gay" in US
politics right now; in addition to agreeing wholeheartedly
with Mr. Smith, I welcome this move to introduce better form
into the political debating process. -John
\_ You are cruel, John. -- ilyas
\_ I would like to note at this point that I just gave my
largest donation to date to the DCCC and DFA, and I now feel
much better. Thank you for your concern! --aaron
\_ lose one for the flipper! Let me tell you my impression
\_ you really should stop posting this "quip" unless you're
trying to sound totally inane.
of Kerry. I was watching him on a book interview on CSPAN.
He was asked what books he was reading or would
recommend. He stammered on for 3-4 minutes and
effectively said nothing. He stated one childrens book
he had read and something about the importance of the
Bible. The rest of his response was nuanced evasive
nonsense about what types of books, how many... on and on.
He could of named 5 books in 30 seconds and been done with
it; instead he was afraid to define himeself. Someone
with this type of personality does not make an
effective executive, especially during national crises.
\_ Let me tell you my impression of GW Bush. I was watching
him read _My Pet Goat_ for seven minutes after he learned
of the 2nd tower being attacked. He knows how to delegate
authority -- someone else was taking care of it, so he
doesn't have to worry about it himself.
didn't have to worry about immediate action himself.
\_ That wouldn't define him. naming a few books with
no explanation? I don't buy that about effective
exectutives. Bush wasn't a particularly effective
executive. (And I doubt he could give a fast and direct
answer to that question anyway). Bush had both houses of
Congress Republican. This thing about strong
leadership is some kind of folklore. Simple folks love
to think that down home backwoods wisdom always beats
fancy book learnin'. If something can't be stated in
a simple sentence they don't want to hear it. The
real world isn't black and white and involves nuanced
decision-making. People base the whole image of Bush
on "he invaded Iraq => strong!" That decision had
many consequences and many of us think it was wrong
at that time, and inadequately planned. His economic
policy is sustained by record-busting deficit spending.
Bush's only other executive experience was the company
he ran into the ground. NCLB act a funding disaster,
and a bizarre thing in principle from a traditional
conservative standpoint (taxing billions from the
states, then handing it back to them on a restricted
and problematic basis). Industry-coddling energy,
environmental, and medicare policies.
http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/top10_lies
http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/top10_flipflops
http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/specialinterests
You guys keep saying "Kerry is nothing but not Bush".
The reason this is somewhat true is that's pretty
much what we want. Bush on the other hand is nothing
but "invade the middle east".
\_ This is bigotry. You are speaking of people you
have no familiarity with. You think you are
smarter than everyone else, and thus, entitled
to tell them how they should live and what they
should believe. Inside every leftist is a
tyrant. So are so vain you can't even see
yourself for what you are.
\_ You're saying I have no familiarity with "simple
people"? I can't even respond to this because
you don't even make an argument here. You're
simply lashing out with incoherent bile. My
point with that was to criticize the idea, which
certainly exists, that intelligence and nuanced
thinking is unneeded and even undesirable in leaders.
I see this notion in the popular mythology. You
should look up what bigotry means. And inside
every rightist is a coke-sniffing pedophile.
\_ Your use of the work "simple people" is
telling.
\_ what does it tell?
\_ It's usually considered derogatory and
belittling when you call someone "simple".
\_ It's an abstract group of people. It
should only offend people who consider
themselves simple, but then they wouldn't
think it's derogatory. Or maybe they hold
the "dumb is wise" view, in which case I
I heartily belittle them.
\_ For your criticism to be relevant it is incumbent
on you, or anyone, to propose a cogent alternative
foreign policy paradigm. No such policy was ever
proposed, all you and left could offer was
appeasement.
\_ appeasement of what? Saddam did not have WMDs and
was not attacking anyone. Letting countries run
their own business is not "appeasement." -tom
\_ False. Alternative paradigms were loudly proposed.
You can even look it up and read about it, if you
choose. I can't objectively prove such alternatives
could be as cogent as "invade". It would be pointless
to go into that whole argument right now, I think we
both know what's been said.
\_ Where? What? By who? Here is concise
explanation of that which you speak: appeasement,
cede sovreignty to the UN.
cede sovreignty to the UN. You want
"nuance" terrorists, its rediculous.
\_ false again. a U.N. vote != ceding sovereignty.
appeasement applies to giving in under threat.
and the saddam <=> terrorism relevance is
primarily a concoction.
\_ So I can sum up your position as: you want
entitlements from the government? You believe you
have a ordained right to a job, free health care
and other free gov't services? Right?
\_ No, you can't, because I didn't say that. I'm not
a libertarian though, so basically the gist of
that is true for most people. Here's another case
where a little "nuance" might let you acknowledge
that there are more possibilities than pure
libertarian versus full-on communism. I don't know
anybody talking about "right to a job" and you use
that as a straw man because you have no argument.
\_ The other 50% of the country would like to keep the country as it
is and away from the likes of you. C'est la vie.
\_ There is no pistol grip on that shotgun. You are no gun owner or
you would know that.
\_ The deal is that the language of the bill defines "pistol
grip" broadly: "... grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other
characteristic that can function as a grip"
\_ That shotgun still does not have a pistol grip, even
by that definition.
\_ According to that bill, this counts as a pistol grip.
http://www.gunslocal.com/gunimages/1385.jpg
This is the one he was presented with:
http://www.berettaweb.com/semi%20auto%20shotgun/A300.htm
\_ (a) Yes, it's not 'really' a pistol grip
(b) As guy above says, the language of the bill was stupid
enough where yes, it was considered a pistol grip.
(c) I have yet to hear an effective argument from the
gun control crowd about how these regulations involving
pistol grips and 'assault-looking' weapons do anything
other than piss off gun owners. It's the stupidest
thing I ever heard. If you want to ban automatics, I
could see the argument for that (I don't agree, but I
understand it). If you want to ban scary looking
weapons you are an idiot or a fretting soccer mommy.
-- ilyas
\_ Obviously somebody thought pistol-gripped semi-
automatic shotguns were not meant to hunt game,
but whose sole purpose was to kill people.
Note that the bill is for a renewal of an assault
weapons ban on AK-47s, AR-15s, and military sniper
rifles, and is not only for aforementioned shotguns,
as some might infer.
\_ Ok, I don't understand that. Why are
pistol-gripped things bad for hunting game?
Is this because Elmer Fudd doesn't use a pistol
grip? Take a handgun. Very few people hunt with
handguns, they are generally for 'killing people'
(and going to the range, but no one seems to
bring that up).
So what? Why is this bannable? Hunting rifles
kill people just as well. I guess I don't see the
thought process at all. Also, what's a
'military sniper rifle' and how is it different
from a hunting rifle with a scope? -- ilyas
\_ Let me summarize the "answer" for you.
For many liberals, it's "How many guns
can I outlaw?". For many conservatives, it's
"How many guns can I leave legal?"
There's your answer.
BTW, a Dragunov is one of the named illegal
sniper rifles, and is obviously military-
grade; a hunting rifle with a scope is a
hunting rifle with a scope (with less
penetrating rounds, less accuracy when you
take your run of the mill hunting rifle, and
not necessarily semi-automatic or automatic).
Pistols are for "killing people", but are
strongly associated with self-defense, unlike
assault rifles. Semi-auto shotguns with
pistol grip make you think of semi-auto
shotguns used by police, except they use them
to take out bad guys.
\_ I am a liberal, and I am anti-gun control.
I believe that this is more consistent
with the pinciples of liberalism than
being pro-gun control. Personally,
I find hunting to be excruciatingly dull
and I suck at target shooting and live in
a safe area, so I have no guns, but
I support the rights of others to have
whatever guns they want.
\_ This is where I point out I know more about
guns than you. A run of the mill remington
700 with a 'decent' scope will have:
(a) more penetration than the dragunov
(308 is a bigger round)
(b) larger effective range (900 yards vs
400 yards)
(c) better accuracy than the dragunov
(dragunov is semiauto, and not that
well made, the remington uses the nice
mauser bolt-action).
By any reasonable standard, a remington 700
is a deadlier rifle than the dragunov, yet
the dragunovs are the ones that are outlawed
because of the 'scary grips.' That things
are 'associated with' or 'make you think
of something' is a dumb (and scary)
argument for outlawing anything. I realize
you may not necessarily hold the position
you are presenting -- I am
attacking it, not you. I was hoping for
a defense of 'how many guns can I outlaw?'
-- ilyas
\_ semi-auto vs. bolt action, clip ammo.
I dunno, I think it's reasonable to
think the Dragunov can be deadlier vs.
multiple targets. I don't know too much
about guns though... are pistol grips
so useless? Why then are they on all the
military rifles? --otherperson
\_ Against multiple people you use a
sprayer, not a frigging sniper rifle.
Sniper rifle = single kills. Pistol
grips are on military rifles because
they are comfy. Of course comfy
grips make it easier to 'kill people.'
*sigh* -- ilyas
\_ Well, actually, no. You don't use
a sprayer, you practice...you
know...accuracy? So you hit what
you shoot at when you pull the
trigger? 1-3 seconds of full
auto on most assault rifles is
really only useful for
suppression and making lots of
noise.
\_ I have to admit that when I'm
killing people, I look for as
much comfort as possible.
That's why I use a
Dragunov<tm>. -geordan
\_ also maybe it makes it easier to identify the
real assault weapons, if you ban lookalikes,
that might possibly be modified? |
| 2004/9/7 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33403 Activity:high |
9/7 "It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we
make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the
danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will
be devastating from the standpoint of the United States." -VP Cheney
Vote for Dubya: No danger or much reduced danger of devastating
terrorist attack.
Vote for Kerry: Danger of devastating terrorist attack.
The choice is yours!
\_ how DARE they field a candidate!
\_ Hasn't that been the basis of their whole campaign from the start?
No news here.
\_ It's been hinted at, but it hasn't been put so succinctly and
obviously until now by Cheney.
\_ Who does al queda hate more: a bush-led america or a kerry-led
america?
\_ They hated a Clinton-led America and planned to assassinate him.
Osama supports Nader.
\_ We need an arab to attempt but fail to assasinate Kerry.
\_ But not devastating from other standpoints. That's good to clarify.
But I think you mis-summarized Cheney's contention:
Vote Kerry (="wrong choice"): Danger of devastating (to US) hit.
Vote Bush: Won't get hit.
Vote for Bush if you want to live!
\_ There, I modified op for you.
\_ BTW, if you read the http://cnn.com article now, you'll see Edwards
saying what you said, and a Cheney spokesperson saying "that's
not what [Cheney] meant".
\_ Ha ha! Ok, I read it. The spokeswoman says:
"Whoever is elected in November faces the prospect of another
terrorist attack. The question is whether or not we have the
right policies in place to best protect our country. That's
what the vice president said." What utter BS.
\_ I believe this also means Cheney is pretty confident there won't
be a "devastating" attack before the election. I agree with him.
Maybe a couple "small" or "medium" ones though.
\_ Would an attack hurt or help Bush? It would mean Bush didn't
prevent it. But it would show the greatness of the danger,
and the need for anti-terror Bush. Bush is the best at fighting
terror, nevermind 9/11 and failure to catch bin laden. Hard
to say which factor would win. |
| 2004/9/7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33395 Activity:nil |
9/7 NYT on Kerry's prospects. http://csua.org/u/8y4 \_ ob article from a paper that wants Dubya to go down. -liberal (even though it's less inaccurate than "Kerry is toast!") \_ Have you read the article? \_ Yeah, just pointing out that the NY Times does want Dubya out \_ That might matter on the editorial page, but it has no effect on the news reporting. \_ ... if the NY Times didn't let their personal opinions affect their news reporting. This is the point of contention. I guess I'm not arguing for or against on that point, but I'll wait and see. \_ I predict that President Bush will win California! \_ LANDSLIDE IS THE STANDARD! \_ In every election except one since the 1930's, the Gallup poll leader at the start of September has won the election. Margin changes, intermediate lead changes, but in every presidential except the 1960 one the September leader ended up winning the election. The only exception is Kennedy 1960, when he was behind 46% vs 47% and won with 50.1% of the final vote. This doesn't mean that Kerry is doomed, since this is a very unusual election, but he clearly has history against him. \_ Never before has the convention occured just before Sep 1. Did you even read the article??? \_ Quoth me: "...since this is a very unusual election..." Apparently I have read the article. -pp \_ Your reading comprehension skills are poor then. \_ Methinks your wishful thinking is showing. \_ Of course, just because it isn't on the editorial page doesn't mean that it doesn't read like an editorial. I find little news in it. And look at the sources for the quotes: Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democratic Network Mark Penn, a Democratic pollster Joe Lockhart, a senior Kerry adviser David R. Gergen, a veteran adviser of the Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton White Houses. |
| 2004/9/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33378 Activity:nil |
9/6 Yet another anti-Kerry vet group.
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com
<DEAD>www.vietnamveteransagainstveteransforjohnkerry.com<DEAD> |
| 2004/9/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33376 Activity:high 57%like:30994 |
9/6 USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll: No bounce for Bush among registered voters,
Bush with 7% lead among "likely voters". http://csua.org/u/8xs
Poll conducted Sep 3-5. (Time and Newsweek were several days earlier.)
Was there a Beslan effect?
\_ Well, the problem (if you are a democrat) is that people are voting
against bush, and not for kerry. Traditionally this has been a
sign of a weak candidate. If you take a look at elections like the
76 or 80 elections people voted for the alternative, not against
the establishment. The 92 elections might well be described as
against the establishment, but it also had a sizable 3rd party
presence (sizable in terms of hype, movement, and somewhat of
a spoiler) in Ross Perot which offered an alternative for the
conservative basis (somewhat like Nader in 2000, but more so).
conservative base (somewhat like Nader in 2000, but more so).
In the 2000 election people who voted for Bush actually liked
Bush (neocons, religious conservatives, general hawks, etc.) vs.
people who voted for Gore didn't particularly find Gore appealing
(people liked Clinton, so in essence Gore was supposed to be
Clinton 3rd term like Bush Sr. was Reagan 3rd term). They voted
for him because they didn't like Bush.
\_ I think this time you're going to see a lot more non-likely
turnout. A _lot_ more.
\_ No, you're not. Outside your hyper active political we-hate-
Bush bubble, the Bush haters I know are the standard non-
voters who whine a lot and saw F9/11, but they'll be too
busy or traffic was too high or there was a show on that
night or they had a date. History doesn't back your theory.
The number of people voting vs. registered vs. legal to
register people is at an all time low and continue to sink.
\_ Wrong. In 2000, there were 9.5 million more votes cast
than in 1996, a 2% increase relative to eligible voters.
http://www.fairvote.org/turnout. -tom |
| 2004/9/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33374 Activity:very high |
9/6 John Kerry wanted to hit back. It had been a miserable August as he
took incoming fire about his military service from a gang of hostile
Vietnam vets. But no, campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill and other
staffers argued, the Swift Boat ads would blow over. Finally, Kerry
had had enough. For three or four days, as he campaigned across the
country, Kerry ripped into Cahill, furious that the mostly baseless
attacks on his valor were driving his numbers down. "He was very
angry," one old friend says. "The calculation had been made that this
wasn't going to hurt him." Kerry's solution was to reach for an old
ally. "Get Vallely," he screamed.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5916073/site/newsweek
\_ About freaking time. You'd think a guy would respond quicker
when his only campaign issue is under attack.
\_ On the other hand, Bill Clinton says: "Stop talking about
Vietnam!" Who to believe?
\_ Clinton. duh. vietnam can hurt either side, but it
can't actually help *anyone*.
\_ D'accord. If Vietnam actually mattered, McCain would
be president, preceded by Dole.
\_ Exactly. It really never should have been brought up,
but sicne Kerry is pretending to be someone different
than he's been for the last 30 years, that only leaves
'Nam to talk about.
\_ Bull. He spoke out against the war because he cared
about it, and then began a career of public service.
Not much need to pretend to be anything.
\_ Not much need, but he's pretending anyway.
\_ "furious that the mostly baseless attacks on his valor were driving
his numbers down." So Mr. Wolffe, when did you stop beating your
wife?
\_ "Yeah, we play dirty, but if we played fair y'all would win
all the time." [Quote from a Republican colleague on negative
campaigning against Bill Clinton.]
\_ Because you guys play REALLY dirty... |
| 2004/9/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33370 Activity:nil 70%like:33362 |
9/5 More swift boat war crimes... almost.
http://csua.org/u/8xf
porpsuk:annoyance (from bugmenot)
\_ Nearly everyone in Vietnam committed war crimes and atrocites,
including Kerry, and it was only afterwards (in his words) that he
came to understand that raping and slaughtering civilians was
against the law. He never said he had any personal moral problem
with it. Only that it was afterwards he came to understand what he
did was illegal. I assume that means if it wasn't illegal, he'd be
a-ok with it. |
| 2004/9/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33369 Activity:moderate |
9/6 John Kerry on the Senate floor talking about how "We do not need to
divide America over who served and how"
http://csua.org/u/8xn
\_ That's different. Clinton is glorious.
\_ Hi Paolo.
\_ No, but interesting guess. What made you think I was
Paolo?
\_ There's some motd person who thinks he's clever and likes
to pretend that Paolo posted some comment or another.
Just ignore him. -- !paolo && !paolo guesser |
| 2004/9/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33362 Activity:kinda low 70%like:33370 |
9/5 More swift boat war crimes... almost.
http://www.bakersfield.com/columnist/local/price/story/4918722p-4975095c.html
porpsuk:annoyance (from bugmenot)
\_ http://csua.org/u/8xf
\_ Nearly everyone in Vietnam committed war crimes and atrocites,
including Kerry, and it was only afterwards (in his words) that he
came to understand that raping and slaughtering civilians was
against the law. He never said he had any personal moral problem
with it. Only that it was afterwards he came to understand what he
did was illegal. I assume that means if it wasn't illegal, he'd be
a-ok with it. |
| 2004/9/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33360 Activity:nil |
9/5 sfgate at spin control. http://csua.org/u/8xd "While som early polls show that Bush may have gained from the convention..." Or "Early polls...showed Bush getting as much as an 8-point bounce. A Washington Post/ABC News poll...with Bush just barely ahead of Kerry 48 to 47 percent" and no more mention of the big bounce. Well done! |
| 2004/9/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33357 Activity:low |
9/4 Cheerleaders For Truth:
http://www.cheerleadersfortruth.com
\_ I've been wondering about all these [frivolous group]fortruth
groups. What does the intended audience of the original propaganda
(Vietnam vets specifically and other vets in general) think about
them? Do they come to the conclusion that the swift boat veterans
are just as silly as [frivolous group], or do they think it's just
more liberal mocking of veterans? Would they just get more pissed
off at Kerry because of his allies' implied belittling comparison
between swift boat veterans and [frivolous group]? |
| 2004/9/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33352 Activity:high |
9/3 Newsweek confirms Time magazine bounce, with even more details on
methodology -liberal
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5915140/site/newsweek
"Respondents who were queried only on Friday, after Bush's speech,
gave the Republican a 16-point lead over Kerry."
\_ Well, I don't know about you, but the RNC was a lot more
successful than the DNC, regardless of who wins in Nov.
\_ "It's a fake bounce! It's the corporate controlled media whores
doing fake polls! It is that people are stupid and watch Fox
news! People who vote for Bush after seeing F9/11 are raging
assholes! EEEEEYYYAAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHH!" -liberal mocker
\_ who cares. whoever wins will win by a razor thin margin.
\_ Sigh. Four more years I guess. Where's my vomit bucket?
\_ I fault the people who voted for Kerry. If the Dems had
picked someone more moderate (someone like Clark), they
wouldn't be struggling right now. Same thing for Bush.
The Republicans wouldn't have had such a hard time if
they picked someone else like McCain. Why is it that
each party likes to pick their most polarizing figure?
\_ Wait, is Kerry a waffler or is he polarizing?
Let me check what Rush is saying today.
\_ In what policy respect was Clark more moderate?
\_ Not so much moderate as less polarizing. Clark
doesn't have anti-war issues that has haunted
Kerry to this very day. I guess he lacks any
senate voting records which could be used against
him in an election. And Clark doesn't just have
a single Vietnam experience to ride his entire
campaign on. I think if the Dems picked clark
there would be little the Rpublicans could pick on.
\_ I beg to differ. They would have done the same
thing regardless of the candidate, along with a
willing media that only reports on three things:
1) Polls. 2) Scandals. 3) Attacks.
Sad to say I think this thing is all over.
The debates will be meaningless because Bush will
get a pass no matter what he does. These poll
numbers look bad for Kerry, but you should see
the battleground numbers - they are REALLY bad
now.
\_ Clark supplied the armor for Waco, he should be disqualified
from holding any office by default. |
| 2004/9/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33338 Activity:high |
9/3 Sigh. Big bounce for Bush. http://csua.org/u/8x3 . Yes, I know. It's unreliable. It's pre-debates. It'll disappear. It still sucks. \_ Its also an outlier with the other polls, and it was done mostly *during* the convention... \_ Yes, it still sucks. Did they do the same poll during the Democratic convention? \_ How can it be an outlier when it's the only reputable poll taken during the convention? It can only be an outlier if there are other reputable polls taken during the convention which show a small lead or none. Do not easily dismiss the Ah-nold and Giulani effect. Do not easily dismiss the Ah-nold and Giulani effect, and the fact that Dubya delivered a speech that sounds very good. \_ Zogby, through 9/2: Bush 46, Kerry 44 American Research Group, through 9/1: Bush 48, Kerry 47 \_ I found the URL for you: http://csua.org/u/8x4 Hard to tell who's right, since Zogby leans a little left and IMO Time leans a little right, and one day can make a difference (especially with the Chechens). I'd wait for more polls, but Dubya definitely has his "We got a bounce!" line, unless Time comes out saying they goofed, which I doubt will happen. \_ Apparently even the Bush people are saying this poll is an outlier, although it seems most of the data was gathered before Bush's actual speech. Its actually the media which is currently doing the "Bush GODDA BOUNCE!" dance. \_ Well, Time is. I think the news media would have no problem saying "Tiny Bounce For Bush! Race still deadlocked!" \- did the idea futures mkts move of bush v kerry? \_ Tradesports has him as a 57/43 favorite now, where it was even right after the Democratic convention. It was 57/43 about six weeks ago, just before the Democratic convention, so they cancelled each other out essentially. \_ Not that big really, since he was +2% by that same poll a week ago. So it was an eight point bounce and that poll has a margin of error of +/- 4%. So the move was less than the total margin of error. Or am I confused about my statistics here? |
| 2004/9/3 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33331 Activity:insanely high |
9/3 I don't even care who wins the election any more. I just want it to be
over so we can get back to yelling about something else. At least
once one of these idiots is elected, we'll know we're doomed and by
what degree. Who's with me?
\_ So you think we have a decent choice this time around? The
bumbling idiot or the vacillating fool? No thanks. Oh, sorry,
right, I forgot Nader: the egomaniacal Don Quixote wannabe.
\_ Actually, I'm pretty sick about people who complain that they
don't want to vote for "the lesser evil". The last 4 years
have seen secret laws, secret courts, the Patriot Act, and a
preemptive war based on false pretenses run by an
administration that doesn't even deign to address its obvious
conflicts of interest. What more do you want, Stalinist purges?
A public defecation on the Constitution (while saluting the
flag)? I'm not impressed by Kerry, but I'm utterly horrified
by Bush's friends.
\_ you've just used the "slippery slope" tactic.
\_ it makes him feel good, don't pop his balloon. i could
use the same tactic with the manchurian candidate the
dems are running but it'd be just as cheap a shot. or
more because im better at this than the slippery sloper.
\_ Public defecation on the Constitution? You mean the
Democratic trampling of states rights and the 2nd
Amendment?
\_ I know who I want to win, but almost more than that I hope it's a
blowout one way or another.
\_ I do too, actually.
\_ Coming soon to a theater near you:
Bush vs. Kerry: Whoever Wins, We Lose.
\_ Isn't that the new movie from the South Park guys, essentially? |
| 2004/9/3 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:33330 Activity:very high |
9/3 Serious question for motd conservatives, except for that Freeper
guy, who I seriously think is nuts:
Has the Republican Party become the "big government" party these
days? Bush listed a dozen Great Society programs last night
that he intends to implement. Now that the Republicans are in
power, have they discovered that they like government after all?
\_ Big government is not a part of the republican 'story,' but of
course they implement certain big government programs. Sometimes
it's to get votes (medical stuff), sometimes it's to appear they are
doing something to respond to a threat, or perhaps for will-to-power
reasons (homeland security), sometimes it's collusion between
business and government (subsidies, etc). Republican big government
policies are the corrupting delta (the difference between what they
say and what they do) given our form of government.
The problem is, democrats will do all these things, but they also
believe in big government as some sort of principle, so they will
also do many MORE things. Fixing things here does not involve
\_ What a bunch of rank bullshit.
\_ "World would be even more blowed up if Kerry was Prez"
\_ Yeah, he would have done something like let Osama get
away, fail to secure the ports, or invade a Muslim
country and then fail to send enough troops or give
them body armor. -knows you were being sarcastic
voting for someone else, I think, as the flaws are structural in
the way we run things. I am beginning to think our problems are
mostly cultural. I can't imagine the swiss implementing something
like homeland security, because they have a long and deep tradition
of decentralized solutions. -- ilyas (not a fan of big government)
\_ The Republican camp is responding to both bases of social and
financial conservatives. For FiCons, they got the lower taxes.
Then the SoCons get their "Big Government" style agenda items
passed. These big ticket items (plus the increase in defense
spending) drop the money available in the general pool. So the
\_ not in the general economy but in the federal budget which
is just fine with me, since its already bloated with crap.
the less money the feds have for crap spending, the better.
i object to your mixing and hazing out the difference beween
the general economy and the gederal budget. they are not
at all the same.
\_ I WAS talking about fed budget... Crap is in eye of the
beholder. Reps fund their pork same as Dems. However,
they aim at removing gov regs to pay for SoCon BG items.
FiCons cut government funds that regulate business. Plus those
"BG" items are not always properly funded by the Feds. They
become unfunded mandates and the states/locals pick up the tab,
which raises taxes, which brings out new FiCons, who vote in
more Republicans. The rule has always been unspent money is a
politician's curse.
\_ So if the feds pay for it, taxes dont go up but if the states
do then taxes have to go up to pay for it? you have a very
fundamentally flawed understanding of where federal money
comes from. ill give you this one: it comes from taxes.
\_ No, the Feds DON'T pay for it. But they REQUIRE it. Take
"No Child Left Behind." Costs $29B to fund, but feds put
little money behind it. States must follow Fed regs so
the cost comes from state pockets. State has no money, so
it takes it from Counties, who have to raise taxes.
\_ Hm, usually I think your posts are well-reasoned ilyas but this
is just a long slimy string of crap.
\_ I ll be sure to post a short, 2-line string of crap next time,
like your good example shows! -- ilyas
\_ Lemme get this straight... what you are saying is
that Republicans increase the size of government, though
they don't belive in doing that, whereas Democrats
also increase the size of government, but they do believe
in it. And somehow the former is better? Ok. And how
exactly does one differentiate between an action that
one repeatedly does, though does not believe in, with
an action that one repeatedly does and does believe
in? Oh, and BTW, the size of government increased
during the Reagan and Bush II (so far) administrations
but decreased during the Clinton administration.
http://csua.org/u/8x1 but don't let the
facts get in the way of your belief in platitudes.
\_ Republicans are unprincipled. Democrats are unprincipled
and wrong. Nader 04, etc. -- ilyas
\_ A democrat would say just the opposite.
\_ Actually, Bush's big idea is the "ownership society". Fewer
handouts, more opportunity. If you do nothing, there will be less
of a safety net for you, other than people's and state/local
governments' (not the federal government's) own charity. -liberal
\_ Did you even listen to the speech last night? He promised
more money for K-12, more money for community colleges,
more money for pell grants and other higher education funding,
more money to help seniors pay for drug benefits, more money
for the military, more money for ....
\_ and more tax cuts!
\_ Everything you mentioned is consistent with a smaller safety
net and increased opportunity.
\_ Except the drug benefits, right?
\_ Well, since the drug benefits were structured so that
the government pays whatever price the drug cos. say,
it's really just a giant piece of corporate welfare.
\_ Wrong. It is impossible for most people today to save
enough money during their normal life times to pay for
their medical expenses post-retirement. You can thank
trial lawyers like John Edwards for a big part of that.
\_ Oh. Bull. Shit. Try HMO and drug company profits.
\_ You are trolling, right? You know the numbers
show you to be completely uninformed about this
issue, yes? Asswipe. --aaron
\_ The flaw in the meritocratic model that the Repubs tout is that
the playing field is not even, and not everyone begins with the
same tools. If this were the case, then yes, effort and hard
work would out; the Republican model of believing that anyone
who works hard can succeed to the highest levels would be true.
In reality, however, there are already x number of people at the
top who exert a disproportional effect on who gets to advance
and who is passed over. As long as we have old boy networks and
corrupt politicians, the Republican meritocratic dream will
remain a fantasy. |
| 2004/9/3 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Finance/Investment] UID:33326 Activity:high |
9/3 U.S. economy added 144,000 jobs in August. June and July job numbers
revised modestly upwards. http://csua.org/u/8wr
\_ interest rate hike coming soon???
\_ In the hopes of crashing the housing market?
\_ "While the new jobless rate was the lowest since October 2001, the
drop in the unemployment rate in August came as people left the
work force for any number of reasons."
So the jobless rate is low because some people got jobs and some
people stopped reporting that they were looking for jobs?
\_ Yeah, but hasn't it always been how these numbers are calculated?
\_ Demographics. A lot of women in a large demographic are of
common marriage age. They're not reporting because they're not
looking and never will.
\_ I love that. They just left the work force. They're now eating
rocks and sleeping in parks--and they're not looking for jobs.
\_ Married women don't eat rocks and sleep in parks. Maybe your
wife would be forced to, but not most others. Nice way to
ignore previous posts while making a non-point.
\_ Its a good thing they reported that huge poverty number back in
August, in a backwater office somewhere with no reporters around.
\_ Which is why everyone knows about it and Kerry used it in a
speech. Riiiiiight. You know that pverty number includes all
people, not just citizens. So ever fresh over the border illegal
who isn't qualified to be your maid counts as being in poverty.
\_ ...and note we are 1.7 million jobs short of where we were projected
to be last February...besides, this number will most likely be
revised significantly downward just as all the other job reports
have been.
\_ Odd to say this when the job report just revised June and July
numbers upward. URL that says job numbers tend to revise more
down than up?
\_ BASTARD! Stop bringing facts to the motd! NO FREE SPEECH FOR
FASCISTS!
\_ The economy needs 150,000 new jobs a month just to keep even,
so this is actually pretty bad news. Don't look for the press
to spin it that way, though.
\_ Yeah, the BushCo controller media is at it again. Once we take
control of the press, we'll be able to show the people the true
way and the people will rise up and crush their overlords and
the country shall be a socialist utopia and we shall all be
equals, comrade! We shall appoint Chris Mathews as the Minister
of Truth and Propaganda.
\_ Nice attempt to change the topic. It just makes you look
foolish and frankly, a bit nutso.
\_ It's exactly on topic, sorry. The above brought in a bit
about the press. I responded to that. Tough shit. |
| 2004/9/3 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33319 Activity:high |
9/3 To the motd liberal who gave $100 to Kerry because he's finally
on the attack -- can you post some links? I'm getting more and more
frustrated that the Dems are not capitalizing on some of these
softballs lofted to them by the Repubs. BTW, what happened to your
post?
\_ It was a political post, someone doesn't like them at night.
The story is on every newspaper's home page, "Kerry lashes back",
Thursday night. Mainly attacks on Cheney's chicken-hawk status.
\_ goodby perl post! welcome to WWIII!
\_ It is stupid and useless to attack the VP. The country elected
Dan Quayle, among other useless idiots, to be VP. The VP could
be my dog but he'd still get into office if they wanted the P.
The Kerry campaign is run by morons. That directly reflects
very poorly on Kerry himself if he hasn't done anything about
the obviously bad advice he's getting at this point. There
is barely enough time now to do anything about it if he made
sweeping changes right now.
\_ I don't think I'd have a problem with switching VP. Not
because I don't like Cheney, but it is a little wierd
because I don't like Cheney, but it is a little weird
that the VP looks like he might keel over anytime. Isn't
he supposed to be the backup system?
\_ Exactly. The comparison with Quayle is not valid. There is
a common perception on both sides of the partisan split:
1) Cheney is in a great deal of control of the country.
More so than any previous VP.
2) For all but the party faithful, he is somewhat of a
liability for a variety of reasons.
\_ We elected Quayle! That alone is proof that no one
gives a damn who the VP is. I'd rather rather have a
man a heart beat away who is a heart beat closer to his
own death than the man he is to replace than a blazing
idiot. Attacking Cheney is just plain stupid. |
| 2004/9/3 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33317 Activity:nil |
9/2 I just made my $100 contribution for John Kerry. I do appreciate that
he's finally on the attack. -liberal |
| 2004/9/2 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33290 Activity:very high |
9/2 I figured the motd socialists would be out in force insulting the
Republicans this week during the RNC convention. You've got more
fresh speeches and material to work from right now than any other
time since 2000. I'm disappointed you can't even make something
up or take something out of context to get snarky and cute about.
\_ Go stick your head in a pig. To quote a whole lot of people on
the motd from the last convention, who watches the damn things?
They're just scripted television commercials.
\_ This would fly except y'all get so hot n bothered and spend
so much time digging up other old quotes and speeches. Sorry,
no dice on this reply.
\_ Many of my friends are depressed because they have this sinking
feeling (strictly gut-based) that Bush is going to win. One
is talking about retiring to his Tuscan villa for the next 4
years.
\_ Can we get them to promise in writing that they'll leave? I
thought it was really funny 4 years ago when a number of
celebs were recorded promising to leave the country if
Bush won, but mysteriously none did...
\_ Is there a list out there of all of the celebs that promised
to go away? I only know of one guy who actually did and he
isn't a major public celeb (some artist/writer) and already
had a place in France anyway.
\_ http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/leave.htm
\_ Sad, isn't it? That Bush can have 4 years with absolutely no
meaningful accomplishments other than looking good standing in
the rubble of the WTC, and yet he seems to have the momentum.
\_ Isn't it just as sad that Kerry had 20 years in the Senate
and his claim to fame was marrying a rich widow and being
a war hero despite a handful of medals he might or might not
have thrown away?
\_ Its certainly better than what we got now. His tax cuts
haven't worked and his war was a disaster. In the words
of Donald Trump, "I'm sorry, but you're FIRED!"
\_ His tax cuts have been working. Do you have a job? Do
you know anyone who wants a job and doesn't? The war
was the best fought war in the history of the planet.
We lost more soldiers on each beach on DDay than we
have in a year+ in Iraq. Are you trolling or simply
ignorant of basic historic facts?
\_ The best fought war in the history of the planet?
The war that found not a single WMD and has created
a virtual jihadist factory?
\_ We took over a country in record time with fewer
deaths than seen on our highways in a few weeks.
Yeah, it was a poorly fought war. You're an uber
military genius. Were you one of the scumbags
that was hoping it would turn into a vietnam style
quagmire with body bags coming home by the
hundreds every week?
\_ Hmm... so you're bragging by saying we've lost fewer
soldiers in a war aginst a militarily inferior foe
than in one of the biggest battles in the largest war
ever, against a foe our technological equal?
I guess by your logic, Bay of Pigs was a resounding
success because we only lost a few hundred people.
\_ The Nazis were our technological superiors, btw.
\_ No they weren't (except for tanks). -- ilyas
And your comparison to the Bay of Pigs is silly
because maybe you didn't notice but we won in
Iraq but the Cuban nationals lost in Cuba. They
weren't American soliders. This isn't even
apples to oranges but more like celery sticks to
Ford pickup trucks. At least get your very basic
history correct before you step up to bat.
\_ What do you mean? I'm saving $30k just from personal
tax cuts and gobs more if you count in estate tax
changes.
\_ Then you're far better off than the larger chunk of
us, and probably were not hurting from it before...
Tell us. How many new jobs have you created?
\_ Me personally? I grew my group from 12 to 17
people in the last 2 years. Before that I
started a company that went from 3 (the founders)
to 23 at its peak. Hurting? Why did it have
to hurt for me to appreciate keeping more of
the money I earn?
\_ YOUR anecdote trumps all statistics! The
economy is roaring like never before! Bush
has created millions of jobs!...oh wait, right,
he'll likely be the first president since
Hoover to have negative job growth...maybe them
pesky tax cuts aren't working out so well.
\_ He was asked how many job he created, he
answered and then you attack him for
answering! BWHAHAHAHAHA! YOU SO FUNNY!
\_ The recession started at the end of the
Clinton years. The troubles in high tech
(and certainly in the telecom space where
I play) now comes from over investment
during the boom years. Blame runaway
optimism in the 90's if you want to assign
blame. The price of getting drunk is the
hangover.
\_ Uh huh. I seem to recall Clinton pulling
us out of a similar recession in 92 quite
capably. Then again, he didn't go
starting some useless disaster of a war
either. Sorry, you're still FIRED!
\_ According to the National Bureau of
Economic Reserach, that recession
went from 7/1990 to 3/1991. It ended
well before the start of the Clinton
terms. They also said the current
recession was from 3/2000 to 11/2001.
This started 3 months after the start
of the GWB presidency, but it's still
hard to pin it on him since it started
only 3 months into his watch. Please
try to base your argument on data
instead of urban myths and silly
catch phrases.
\_ Facts just trip us up and get in
the way of our partisan frothing
and mewling. --wannabe motd lib
\_ Is this the first presidential election your friends have
voted in? This convention back and forth is typical.
\_ Late 30's, not likely their first election. Kerry can't
win this election; Bush can lose it. It doesn't seem like
Bush will lose.
\_ Still too close to call, exactly the wrong time to give
up hope. Kick your friends in the ass for me.
\_ Not really. Unless Bush rapes a nun on national TV,
the whole thing is done.
\_ In your dreams. It is not even close to finished.
It isn't even halftime yet. Do you even bother
to look at polls or do you just figure you can
predict the future better than the experts?
\_ http://hosted.ap.org/photos/R/RNC18709020300-big.jpg
http://hosted.ap.org/photos/R/RNC18809020300-big.jpg
A picture speaks a thousand words.
\_ All I can say about Zell Miller is: YEEEEEAAAAARGHHHHHHH!!!!!
\_ Really? 'Cos "sell-out" and "collaborator" are what I'd
say about the man. Mind you, that pic doesn't exactly
catch him in his best light: you know, a smoky back room....
\_ Just curious, did you feel the same way when the Senate
briefly changed hands when whats his face switched to
voting (D) from (R) a few months after he was elected
using (R) funds? Or were you cheering like a partisan
hypocrite?
\_ The difference there is Jeffords actually followed his
conscience instead of hanging onto a misnomer like Zell
does. Also, he didn't "vote (D)". He tossed his vote
to the (D)'s for organizing the Senate and to give them
the majority and changed his affiliation to (I). He
didn't necessarily vote with them on their bills. In
fact, looking at what little that session did, his
switch didn't really do all that much.
\_ Jeffords was called a traitor, etc, by the (R) side.
He did the one thing which fucked the (R) for that
entire time period. Voting however afterwards
doesn't matter as there are many in both parties who
cross lines for various things. In this case, he
fucked his party so he could get the chairmanship
of a dairy committee he wanted to control for his
dairy state. So short sighted and stupid he now has
nothing and his state got fucked twice over. What an
idiot. Anyway, as I said, you thought it was a-ok
for a (R) to turn coat but it is treason of the
highest order when a (D) does it. Hypocrite. At
least try to be honest with your rationalizations.
\_ Nah, I just meant he had some serious Howard Dean moments
last night. First he chewed the scenery up with that
speech ("unleash rage" was the headline that the AP had).
Then he goes on Hardball and keeps challenging Chris
Matthews to a duel!
\_ Well, maybe he was having a Ted Koppel moment (TK
challenged Jon Stewart to a duel on The Daily Show).
\_ It doesn't matter how it played to some motd/Bay Area
leftists. It matters that a Democrat Senator got on TV
and said his country was more important than his party
and that his party was fucked. |
| 2004/9/1 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33282 Activity:nil 80%like:34064 |
9/1 Swift Boat Flashback:
\_ Eye witness Rear Adm. Schachte is a liar? Maybe Kerry
hasn't called them liars because he knows they are
right.
\_ DUMB-ASS: No one has called Schachte a liar. He is not a
member of SBVFT, nor did he appear in their commercials.
Schachte's and Kerry's versions of the story are the same.
I have called the SBVFTs in the first TV commercial liars.
I now expect you sometime next week to post:
"Eye witness Rear Adm. Schachte is a liar?".
\_ Sorry. I didn't make this post very clear. The post you
are responding to was from a couple weeks ago. The comments
below are based on a wapo article.
Maybe he's not lying, but 1) he's a top lobbyist for a defense
contractor that recently won a $40 million grant from the Bush
administration, and 2) the chairman of the Republican National
convention is a board member of same defense contractor.
\_ My goodness, a Rear Adm. / former JAG as a lobbyist for a defense
contractor... what is the world coming to?
\_ "There is no connection of any kind whatsoever..." |
| 2004/8/31 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33246 Activity:high |
8/31 Bush is even in the polls with Kerry up double digits in CA, NY, and
IL. I am so happy that I am taking my small group at work out to
\_ Oh boy, can we have an electoral college flamewar? Because we
haven't had one of those in at least a couple of days.
a pre-election victory lunch.
\_ this is the second of these posts you've made in as many days.
I still can't figure out which guy you're certain is going to win.
Could you just tell us, for those of us to slow to follow the
x >>>>>> x inequality?
\_ If Kerry is up (say) 15% in 3 states that make up 25% of the
US population, then he's on the average down 4% everywhere
else. Of course, Bush is up by a lot in Texas and Georgia,
so that makes up for it somewhat. But overall he's still
ahead. Vote Kerry, baby!
\_ god fucking dammit! will you please stop ranting about
statistics and tell us who you think is going to win?
I still haven't figured it out.
\_ Are you a protected minority?
\_ Wow, you are very confident. Gore won IL, CA, and NY too.
Ever heard of the Electoral College?
\_ Electrical college?
\_ Wow you are stupid.
\_ Oh boy, can we have an electoral college flamewar? Because we
haven't had one of those in at least a couple of days.
\_ I just bought an 4.8is X5. If Bush wins and extends the large
truck depreciation for another year, I am buying an H1 next year.
\_ Bling, motherfucker, bling!
\_ Tax deductions, baby!
\_ MARS, BITCH!
\_ They can we declare Martian Law? |
| 2004/8/31 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic] UID:33242 Activity:kinda low |
8/30 All right, this URL convinces me that a decision by Republican mayor
Bloomberg to refuse a permit for a Central Park demonstration can
be reasonably argued to not have anything to do with toeing the
party line: -liberal
http://www.centralparknyc.org/17613/1479901
\_ yes. also this article written by Henry Stern (former NYC parks
commissioner)
http://www.nycivic.org/articles/040514.html
\_ Hm, am slightly more convinced. OTOH, he expects 50,000 New Yorkers
to enjoy the place on a given afternoon, but he's not worried about
them destroying the green? I think we need a usability assessment. |
| 2004/8/30 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33234 Activity:nil |
8/30 Recent Post, Time, LA Times, and Gallup polls all show Kerry falling
significantly on major issues and his former overall lead over Bush
disappearing. Whether true or not, and politically motivated or not,
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's TV commercials and book caused this
move. How can Kerry fight terror, excel as a commander in chief, be
trustworthy, or run the economy when more than five veterans call him
a liar on TV -- while the most Kerry can personally do is to not accuse
the veterans of being liars, but only ask President Bush to "condemn"
them and claim they are politically motivated? "Duh." The lead was
Kerry's to lose. He was cautious -- he let the newspapers research the
facts and present the differing cases. A lot of people don't have time
to read newspapers; they just want to see a man stand up for himself
(a whole bunch of your fellow soldiers just called you a liar regarding
events you should know everything about!) while getting the feeling he
is telling the truth at the same time. -liberal
\_ So what you're saying is Kerry isn't fit to command because he's
too week and wishy washy. I agree with you. --conservative
\_ What I'm saying is what happened, and the effect. My own opinion
is that these vets are all liars (I read the newspapers, source
material, and the freeper links), but Kerry never came out
strongly to accuse the vets of being liars. -op
\_ post hoc ergo propter hoc
\_ all 160 of them
\_ All 160 oppose Kerry becoming President. I am talking
about the TV commercials. -op
\_ Eye witness Rear Adm. Schachte is a liar? Maybe Kerry
hasn't called them liars because he knows they are
right.
\_ His version contradicts with Kerry's? Of course he's a
liar.
\_ I don't believe Schachte is a Swift Boat Vet for Truth.
Also, my contention is that Kerry's version and Schachte's
versions of the story are the same. Kerry probably
suffered a self-inflicted wound from shooting a grenade
too closely, and Schachte was on the boat and officially
in charge of the operation. -op
\_ Then why the PH?
\_ Because Kerry, as a boy in a politically powerful
family asked for one and got it. He has long been
known for pulling stunts like skipping ahead in
line and other nastiness with the line, "Do you know
who I am?!"
\_ You need to back this up. I say again, it was
standard operating procedure to get a PH in this
case. It qualified, anyone else in that situation
who asked would qualify, and that's it. -op
\_ With no enemy fire, NO. Kerry was denied the
first request, but applied again after
Schachte left.
\_ It was SOP to get a PH in this case.
Hibbard was even criticized by a superior for
not following SOP in this case. -op
\_ What reason do all these vets have to come out now? What
benefit is ther for them to all tell lies about Kerry? Is
there some secret payoff? Are they all RNC operatives? We
know that's not true. Now take the other side. What reason
does Kerry have to lie? His candidacy is at risk. He has
more to gain than they do.
\_ These vets are settling a vendetta for Kerry having
screwed them (their perception) in his 1971 testimony. -op
\_ They waited 33 years? Ignored his multiple Senate runs
and only came out now? All of them have a personal
and unfair vendetta for the man? Maybe when 160 people
who served with you hate you that much there's a reason
for it.
\_ Who said they waited 33 years? They've *always* been
against Kerry, and some have made pro-Kerry
statements last year and flipped all of a sudden.
Many in the public didn't want anything to do with
the vets 30 years ago. Today, in the currently
polarized election environment, they can be
anti-Kerry and be treated like patriots.
"... hate you that much there's a reason for it."
Reason: settling a vendetta for Kerry having screwed
them (their perception) in his 1971 testimony. -op
\_ All 160 of them are out to get him for his
testimony? 33 years ago? Wow, talk about a
culture of victimization. We're so far off on
different planes here I think I'll just let this
one go. No matter what is said I think you'll
find a way to rationalise it so that kerry=good,
all 160 vets=evil.
\_ That is not how I read the polling results at all.
http://www.emergingdemocraticmajority.com/donkeyrising
It helped Bush solidify his base, but that is about it.
\_ What's your favorite Kool-aid flavor?
\_ I ONLY READ FREEREPUBLIC AND BELIEVE THINGS I HEAR ON
FOX NEWS CITIZEN!!!
\_ This URL is pretty crazy. -op
\_ The URL is crazy or the analysis? If you think the latter,
I seriously don't think you are a liberal, just a pathetic
troll pretending to be one.
\_ What serious web site is going to have a picture of a
donkey kicking a map of red/blue states into all blue
states, and have a URL with "donkeyrising"?
Crazy is as crazy does. -op
\_ These guys are pretty influential in the Democratic
Party. Their books is huge. The specific entry
dealing with your concerns is:
http://csua.org/u/8u1
\_ This URL ignores the Time and Post polls, which
came out after and say the same thing as the LA
Times poll. This argument has lost what strength
it had. -op |
| 2004/8/30 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33233 Activity:nil |
8/30 Another claim about his past Kerry can't seem to get straight:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=merron/040830
(Kerry claims to have run in, and finished, the Boston Marathon "in
'80, something like that" -- but there's no official record of his
feat, and his campaign did not provide further details despite
repeated inquiries.)
\_ What an important issue. Send this to Lehrer so he can bring
it up in the debates.
\_ I heard Kerry eats French cheese!
\_ I've climbed Mt. Tam but you won't find that documented anyplace.
If I ran for office I wouldn't bother trying to document it either.
\_ Climbing Mt. Tam doesn't usually have a sign up to get on the
mountain unlike running in a marathon.
\_ He was probably on a secret CIA / Seal mission at the time, that's
why. |
| 2004/8/30 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33230 Activity:nil |
8/30 another photo of Kerry criss-crossing the country playing
costume dress up.
http://csua.org/u/8u2 |
| 2004/8/29-30 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33214 Activity:very high |
8/29 John Ashcroft, censoring quotes from the Supreme Court:
http://csua.org/u/8ta (The Memory Hole)
\_ LET THE EEEAGLE SOOOAR!
\_ Citizen! You will be added to President Ashcroft's Official
Post-Coup Blacklist!
\_ What don't you protest against Osama?
\_ What don't you protest against Osama? Civil liberties
are unequivocally the most extensive that they have ever been
in this country.
\_ Osama is against BushCo and so am I. Kerry in 2004!
\_ What evidence do you have for Osama being against BushCo?
\_ Freak. It was sarcasm.
\_ Repeat after me: it is possible to see that BOTH Osama and
Ashcroft are separately and simultaneously dangerous to our
health and safety.
\_ Unequivocally? There's a secret travel blacklist that prevents
some citizens from travelling without being subjected to
humiliating searches and questioning, and the FBI has been
questioning people on what they've been seen reading in public.
See, I seem to remember not having this situation in, say, 1994.
\_ I'm pretty sure you're trolling, but your suggestion that civil
liberties are more extensive than they've ever been is laughable.
1. Uncontestable secret access to you book-buying and library
records.
2. Terrorism suspects denied lawyers on the grounds that the
lawyer could be told secret information by the suspect.
3. Terrorism suspects denied exculpatory evidence and subject
to hearsay testimony.
4. Shopper escorted out of a mall for wearing a 'Peace' T-shirt.
5. Quarter-million person protest denied a permit to protest
because it would HURT THE GRASS.
Why don't you ask the civil liberties watchdogs before mouthing
off about how free we are.
\_ #4 is hilarious because it has nothing to do with civil
liberties. A store is a private place that can remove you
for any reason at all. #5 you're leaving out the part that
they spent roughly $8 million to fix/replace the grass about
7 years ago and the $8 million is too high a price to pay
so you can stomp around yelling about no blood for oil or
whatever this year's kewl protest statement is.
\_ Look at you. You're pathetic. You just got fucking
owned. This is the best you can do? Get bent. --aaron
\_ owned? uhm ok, whenever you stop smoking, let us know.
i tore apart the 2 easy items so i got owned? whatever.
\_ Hi bigot!
\_ Hi brownshirt!
\_ Um, that's a letter FROM the ACLU *to* the court.
\_ Yes, but the relevant quote is from the Supreme Court (US vs.
US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan)
\_ Was it really from the court or was it a summary? I don't
have the original to compare it.
\_ Direct quote. Here's the original (from FindLaw):
http://csua.org/u/8tk
\_ When you show weakness, terrorists win! -dubya
\_ Please tell me, how is this not true? In life as
well as war. Boy has living in Berkeley made you
into a beatnik. |
| 2004/8/29-30 [Politics/Domestic/Election, ERROR, uid:33208, category id '18005#14.9663' has no name! , ] UID:33208 Activity:very high 50%like:13246 |
8/29 Don't want to vote Democrat, Republican, or Green? here are
some other people who are running:
http://www.politics1.com/p2004.htm
Notice that Maralyn Chambers is running for VP! Hey, it
beats a trial lawyer or an evil cyborg.
\_ If you're not voting for the RepubliCrats then you should vote
Green, the only viable second party. --Nader'04
\_ Are you aware of the fact that Nader isn't the Green Party
candidate? Are you voting green *or* are you voting
Nader? He has no party.
\_ If the Dems would stop suing to keep him off the ballot
the Greens would have a viable second party alternative.
\_ Again: what party? The greens rejected Nader
before the fight over ballot access began. Face it:
Nader is just another lone nut, like Larouche.
If you want a viable third party, you have to
actually deal with a party, not some fucker who
runs even after he fails to win the nomination.
\_ Don't vote for Nader just because he's the only viable
third party! That's just what they want you to think, and
you'll never see change! Just vote your conscience. Every
year it's the same old third-party song and dance, never
getting anywhere. Well it's time to break the Nader strangle-
hold: I'm voting Socialist.
\_ You tried the first, now try the worst! Vote Socialist! |
| 2004/8/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33202 Activity:nil |
8/28 Even Karl Rove has figured out this is stupid, why can't you?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3609312.stm
"I think him [John Kerry] going to Vietnam was more heroic than my
flying fighter jets. He was in harm's way and I wasn't." |
| 2004/8/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33199 Activity:very high |
8/28 Statement of RADM William L. Schachte, Jr. USN (Ret.) on
Kerry's 1st PH
First hand account of the night in question
http://nationalreview.com/document/document200408280010.asp
\_ the rear admiral is angry cuz he got no lunch
\_ can I get some of that?
\_ We all know this already. There was no hostile fire before Kerry
shot his grenade launcher, he got a sliver of grenade that was
probably from his own shot (Kerry says he didn't know where it
came from, seeing as it was his first combat assignment), and
he applied for the Purple Heart, his CO said forget it, he got
it any way since this was SOP at the time, and the CO was
admonished by higher ups for not granting it. Purple Hearts are
given, even if the wound was self-inflicted, as long as it was
sustained during an action on an enemy.
\_ Is this in the NYT? WP? LAT? Any reputable news media? No.
Don't you think someone credible would have covered this if this
were real?
\_ Dewd, the gist of it is true, as I posted above. -liberal
\_ Moreoever, those "reputable news media" are so far left
\_ I've only been a conservative a few years, but the media's
distortion of the Swift Vet accusations and evidence is
the most brazen bias I've ever seen. It's really incredible
how far the NYT, WP, and LAT, and major broadcast
networks will go.
\_ I'm just wondering why many in America have been duped
by the Swift Boat Vets, and the smart people of the world
(including editors at the NYT, WP, LAT, and the network
news) are probably wondering the same thing. The SBVFT are
liars with a vendetta. I have no idea what you are talking
about when you say "accusations and evidence is the most
brazen bias I've ever seen" -- but I suppose this is why
we have the most polarized electorate anyone can remember.
-liberal
\_ "they don't understand the allegations" --sbvtroll |
| 2004/8/27 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33180 Activity:high |
8/27 Gymnastics jusges ask Paul Hamm to clean up their own mess for them.
USOC tells them to shove it.
http://tinyurl.com/6omhj
\_ Can anybody explain the error the judges made?
\_ "The 0.100 points deducted from Yang's start value in parallel
bars-- the difficulty of the routine-- was the difference
between third and first. Without the mistake, Yang would have
won gold, Hamm silver and Kim bronze."
In other words, the judges mistakenly thought that Yang's routine
on the parallel bars was in less difficult points category and
docked his starting score to reflect that. This is a kind of
handicapping system that encourages gymnasts to try harder
routines in exchange for more possible points.
\_ Exactly. Hamm has offered to give up the medal if they
fix their mistake and award the Gold officially to Yang.
They say he should save them the embarrasment and just
hand it over himself unofficially.
\_ Can you provide a URL where he says that? His line
officially now is he won't give it back unless ordered.
\_ That means the same thing. When the conterversy first
occured, Hamm said he would return the medal if ordered
to. ie, He's willing to return the medal, but the FIG
must fix their mistake, not rely on the good will of the
players.
\_ I think in this case Hamm does the right thing. "If you
guys insist that my official score is higher than Yang's,
why are you asking me to give the gold medal to Yang!!??"
But Hamm should make it very clear that his intent is to
force them to fix the score, rather than to keep the gold
medal to himself.
guys insist that Yang's score is lower than mine, why are
you asking me to give the gold medal to Yang!!??" But Hamm
should make it very clear that his intent is to force them
to fix Yang's score, rather than to keep the gold medal to
himself. He can even team up with Yang to achieve this,
like having a joint press conference.
\_ I should point out as a side note that this is particularly irksome
to the Koreas because they always fall just short of gold in
gymnastics (Or at least, so says my wife) So to get screwed out of
a gold like this is really pissing off some Koreans. As a side
note, I haven't heard this, but I'm willign to bet theres a lot of
"Those cheating americans!" type yelling in Korea. -jrleek
\_ Were any of the judges American? It sounds like the only thing
he did 'wrong' was refuse to take responsibility for someone
else's mistake.
\_ I don't know where the judges were from. That's kind of the
default cry for some people for anything America is involved
in where Korea didn't win. Hamm, hence, the problem must be
America's fault. QED.
\_ My understanding was they *also* screwed up on the Korean because
he made an illegal hold and should have lost *more* points. My
opinion is that Hamm should send the medal back to the committee
and tell them he doesn't want his name to be sullied by
association with olympic judging.
\_ If the gymanstics jusges were American, they are OBVIOUSLY
Kerry supporters. Flip-flop, flip-flop!1$! You can't have it both
ways!
\_ or Bush administration - find someone to take responsibilities
of their own mistakes. |
| 2004/8/27 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33175 Activity:high |
8/26 More from LAT polling. "Kerry trails in key states"
http://tinyurl.com/3p3h8 (nynewsday.com)
There's a bit about margin of error, but Ohio is outside their stated
margin, Wisconsin barely makes it inside and Missouri is 2 points
inside the margin in Bush's favor. I can hear $200 draining away
somewhere.... :-)
\_ Maybe we could start a CSUA presidential race betting pool.
Losers have to donate their bets to the CSUA. Between the
$200 guy and the Bush takes CA guy, maybe we could raise enough
to upgrade soda.
\_ I'm betting you're looser than yermom.
\_ Maybe you could do what I did and give money to democratic
groups instead. |
| 2004/8/26 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33169 Activity:high |
8/26 Read Kerry's 1971 book The New Soldier. Covers features
hippies and an upside down flag mocking Iwo Jima
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=NewSoldier
\_ Ah, I get it. Since the Swifties have been utterly discredited,
the next step is to simply attack his anti-war activism. Good work
guys. You've done a fantastic job of distracting a good segment of
the press from reporting on the dismal presidency of George W. Bush.
\_ If they're so discretied then why are Kerry's poll numbers
\_ If they're so discredited then why are Kerry's poll numbers
dropping and they're more in the news now than ever?
\_ Ugh. The debates will help settle down the poll jitter.
Unfortunately they're both so uncharismatic, it's hard to
handicap what will happen.
\_ I think Bush is charismatic but a poor speaker while
Kerry is uncharismatic but speaks well
\_ I hate hearing Kerry speak. His speechifying is really
annoying. Why can't he just, ya know, speak?!
\_ I don't know what you're talking about. I've
heard Kerry's speeches and they're fine, just like
Clinton, HW Bush, and Reagan's.
\_ They haven't changed their position and most of their
accusations have not be rebutted in any way whatsoever.
\_ You haven't been paying much attention. "I was in Cambodia"
"I wasn't in Cambodia" "I support John Kerry in his Senate
run" "John Kerry is unfit for command" "We have no connection
to those swift boat people" "Our legal counsel and a couple
of campaign event organizers are quitting because they are
the swift boats' counsel or APPEARED IN THE DAMN COMMERCIAL"
You're a tool. Wake the fuck up.
\_ As opposed to Kerry who has been so consistent on his
Vietnam record once challenged? If Kerry would just sign
Form 180, he'd bury them. If he's telling the truth.
\_ "have not be rebutted in any way whatsoever [sic]"?
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231
There's some rebuttal for ya!
\_ Your link is stupid. However, some additional evidence
has finally come out about the Rassman PH, but this is
not it. Link = worthless information, they don't
even understand the allegations.
\_ Your post = stupid / worthless information.
Write down what "most of their accusations have not been
rebutted in any way whatsoever" refers to, and I will
rebut it.
(Factual rebuttals have been posted to the motd over
the last several weeks, so I assume you have just been
igoring those and criticizing the non-fact-based
rebuttals, which would be incredibly dishonest of you.)
\_ I read it. It's almost entirely:
(1) Short statements from individual vets, and
(2) John Kerry's 1971 statement before congress
It's pretty boring really. The quotes are similar to senior quotes
in high school yearbooks. There are at least some claims that some
vets in the VVAW weren't actually Vietnam vets, but I don't know if
anyone has verified that the quotes in the book are all from Vietnam
vets.
\_ I like where he criticizes the VFW and American Legion calling
them irrelevant. |
| 2004/8/26 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33164 Activity:nil |
8/26 Kerry is a hero: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/la-na-rood22aug22,1,6879016.story \_ Since http://latimes.com require registration, might you provide a better summary or a login/password pair? \_ csuamotd/csuamotd still works, until Insane Motd Sociopath changes it that is. Anyway, the article is a reprint of the William Rood article from the Chicago Tribune. |
| 2004/8/26 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33156 Activity:very high |
8/26 What is this "$200 bet" thing? Did someone bet $200 on Kerry winning?
\_ Yes. I'm going to continue to post polls showing Kerry in a bad
light and ignoring positive Kerry polls until the election in a
weak attempt to amuse myself at the $200 bet guy's mild expense.
\_ I bet $150 against Bush at 2:1 odds on TradeSports. I think
it was a pretty good bet, especially since the odds have come
down to almost even.
\_ Are you the "polls don't matter this early" guy? If so,
more power to you!
\_ Sorry, "polls don't matter this early" guy doesn't gamble,
but I think his 2:1 $150 bet wasn't a bad bet at the time.
3 debates, ignored vp debate, then we vote. the rest is
bullshit and noise so the media can feed their kids. Bread
and circuses. |
| 2004/8/26 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33150 Activity:very high |
8/25 Here's another poll for the $200 bet guy:
http://www.latimes.com/news/custom/timespoll/la-na-poll26aug26,1,891368.story?coll=la-home-headlines
Not looking so good for you but I admire you putting your money where
your mouth is so early in the race. I wouldn't have bet a dime until
after all 3 debates.
\_ I wonder if we'll be hearing that this is a very liberal poll,
like we did when it had Kerry ahead by 8 or whatever...
Anyway, the last LA Times poll was 48/46 Kerry, and now we
have 49/46 Bush...still deep in margin of error territory. I'm
with "polls are stupid at this point" guy, whoever he is, but
I have an even stronger opinion - I don't think we're really going
to know until the votes are counted.
\_ Haha! Like we can trust the votes to be counted!!!
\_ Haha! Like we can trust the votes to be counted!!!
\_ Uh yeah, like the military ones the dems tried so
hard to exclude? Do you *really* want to get into
this again? Your media went over the votes with a
fine toothed comb for 6 months. If GWB could have
been made to lose they would have trumpeted it.
\_ I'm "polls are stupid at this point guy". I'm just helping out
"I bet $200 way too early" guy. :-) Anyway, I believe the
margin of error stuff is on a curve so the close one is to the
margin of error the less likely the error is in play. That's my
understanding anyway. I also don't like their polling method
which was almost 2000 randoms, about 1500 registered voters, no
information on likely voters or what the split was among called
people about their registered party and who they voted for in the
past. For these and many other reasons I am "polls are stupid at
this point guy". --op
\_ You know polling isn't exactly rocket science. Just because
they don't share their methodology with you doesn't mean
they don't know how to pick a representative sample.
\_ but to be taken seriously, they should. some polls do,
most do not. i take them more seriously when they share so
i can do that ugly thing known as 'thinking for myself'.
\_ LA Times is considered to be a solid poll, but then again so
is Gallup and it was wildly inaccurate in 2000 (Bush up
something like 8 points in popular right before the election).
I think the fudge factor involved in the term "likely voters"
is pretty large.
\_ considered solid by whom? what is their previous track
record at predicting elections and by how much?
\_ Argh, I had a link of some statisticians discussing
which polls were considered to have solid methodology
and which were not, but I seem to have misplaced it.
As I recall the "good" ones included Gallup, LA Times,
Quinnipac University, ABC/WaPo, FOX/Opinion Dynamics,
and Time. They were suspicious of guys like Zogby and
Rasmussen Reports, and highly critical of SurveyUSA
and other "automated" or "Internet" polling companies.
They also thought that we were suffering from poll
overdose, but that's another topic.
\_ So what does this mean? Bush didn't win the popular vote in 2000
anyways.
\_ Note discussion above. |
| 2004/8/25 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33136 Activity:moderate |
8/25 About the whole 527 thing. Your opinions: If Bush directly addressed
the swift boat group and asked them to stop, would that violate the
law? Would the Kerry campaign then claim it violated the law?
\_ Violate what law?
\_ Just a WAG, but Section 527?
\_ Uh.. How and why? Bush is an imbecile for not having condemned
them immediately. Big political blunder.
\_ Right... Kerry is sinking and it's just going to get worse.
Kerry can't even handle the Swifties, how would he plan
to handle the terrorists? Ask the UN to rule them illegal?
\_ Sinking? Have you even looked at the recent polls?
\_ Wow, how many times do you intend to censor my replies
to you? You are an idiot and a coward to boot.
\_ Am I supposed to feel threatened by a twit too
stupid to properly enter text into the MOTD.
I welcome comments from leftist, they always
are so naive.
\_ We welcome comments from righties, they always
are so naive.
\_ mmm. Kindergarden.
\_ I know you are, but what am I?
\_ Yeah, you "welcome" them so much, you delete them
instead of replying. You are a coward and a fool.
Once, anyone could have done, even by mistake.
Twice is a coincidence. The third time, I knew
you were just trying to run from the subject.
\_ LOL you have the wrong person. Get over
yourself already.
\_ A blunder only among you and your ultra left friends. Get
out more. Talk to moderates.
\_ Most moderates believe Kerry. The whole Swift Boat thing
has hurt Bush's standing with swing voters. It was only
red meat for Republicans, who have a pyschological need
to justify voting for AWOL coward over a war hero.
to justify voting for an AWOL coward over a war hero.
\_ Where as Democrats do it because that's what they
prefer.
\_ Well, yes that is true actually.
\_ Well, yes that is true actually. -liberal
\_ Yea you have the John Stewart demographic covered.
\_ No candidate is allowed to directly address/contact a 527 for
any reason, pro or con. It is against the law, period. Kerry
contacted the SBVs and yes that was a violation of the law.
\_ I really doubt that "contacting" them via the media while
condemning their message would hold water. Remember we
have a First Amendment still mostly intact left.
\_ Um, no we don't. McCain-Feingold gutted it (or when the
SCOTUS ruled on it that officially gutted it).
\_ Oh, please. Freedom of Speech is still alive and well;
conflicts of interest, however, are finally not being
tolerated.
\_ File a lawsuit then claiming that the Kerry campaign
violated the law by contacting the SBVFT then and
watch it laughed out of court. It doesn't even pass
the smell test and you know it. Or at least you
should know it. I am seriously starting to question
the sanity of some of the motd rightwingers.
\_ BUSH HAS MADE US SAFER FROM TERRA!!!! |
| 2004/8/25 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33135 Activity:high |
8/25 Does anyone know what Kerry's polling margin over Bush is in
CA, NY, or IL? What Bush's margin over Kerry is in TX? I know,
"huge" or "double digit". Anything more specific?
\_ Insurmountable!
\_ 18% in NY, 13% in IL, 12% in CA
\- we are on our way to a landslide victory for Dubya in California.
See URL below. -troll
\_ heh, too bad you didn't actually read the content in the
link. Train harder, grasshopper.
\_ http://www.electoral-vote.com
\_ Thanks. This is exactly what I am looking for. |
| 2004/8/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:33124 Activity:nil 68%like:33116 |
8/24 Two Russian passenger jets, taking off from same Moscow airport,
crash within five minutes of each other. One sent out a hijacking
signal before going down. 90+ feared dead.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/08/24/russia.planecrash/index.html
\_ It's a Bush dirty trick! Rove secretly bribed the pilots to
crash the planes so they can run ads to discredit Kerry.
\_ Nah, the only dirty trick we're expecting is capturing Osama
before the election, and other fiddling with the color-coded
alert system. (I think all major points of interest will go
Orange 2-4 weeks before the election).
\_ You think they have bin Laden in prison some where and will
trot him out in late October? And no one has leaked this?
\_ nah are you some right-wing weenie? guess again.
\_ If terrorism is involved, I would say its highly likely to be
Chechen rebels. They have committed plenty of terrorist acts
before. Also, this is a RUSSIAN airline we are talking about, so
you can't rule out massive equipment failure.
\_ Don't forget the pilots, drinking vodka and letting kids take
over the plane!
\_ kids?
\_ Da Comrade, one for me, one for plane. |
| 2004/8/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33123 Activity:nil |
8/24 It could be worse, he could have claimed he was in Cambodia a week
before he really was:
http://thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=1704
\_ There is still zero evidence Kerry was ever in Cambodia. And
despite the media blitz stating otherwise two of Kerry's purple
hearts continue to have gaping holes as wide as the Mekong
Delta itself. |
| 2004/8/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:33116 Activity:nil 68%like:33124 |
8/24 Two Russian passenger jets, taking off from same Moscow airport,
disappear from radar within five minutes of each other. One verified
crash, the other missing. 100+ feared dead.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/08/24/russia.planecrash/index.html
\_ It's a Bush dirty trick! Rove secretly bribed the pilots to
crash the planes so they can run ads to discredit Kerry.
\_ Nah, the only dirty trick we're expecting is capturing Osama
before the election, and other fiddling with the color-coded
alert system. (I think all major points of interest will go
Orange 2-4 weeks before the election).
\_ You think they have bin Laden in prison some where and will
trot him out in late October? And no one has leaked this?
\_ nah are you some right-wing weenie? guess again.
\_ If terrorism is involved, I would say its highly likely to be
Chechen rebels. They have committed plenty of terrorist acts
before. Also, this is a RUSSIAN airline we are talking about, so
you can't rule out massive equipment failure.
\_ Don't forget the pilots, drinking vodka and letting kids take
over the plane!
\_ kids?
\_ Da Comrade, one for me, one for plane. |
| 2004/8/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33105 Activity:high |
8/24 Kerry to give first interview on Swift Boat to Jon Stewart tonight:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27439-2004Aug23.html
\_ Whatever. "They're a bunch of liars, and BushCO is evil and didn't
show at Vietnam like I did! Reporting for duty!"
\_ did you see the clinton+daily show clip? it was
entertaining. if you're a tried and true bush supporter
you will not care.
\_ no, but I just simply don't care anyway.
\_ Don't be a turd. Stewart has a better track record than most
"real" journalists at this point.
\_ I still don't care. Vietnam is a stupid thing to elect a
President over in 2004. I'm really frustrated that we're
not hearing about a) Kerry's 19 years of Senate time, b) the
Bush 4 years as President, and c) *exactly* what each plans
to do with the next 4 years, not bullshit like "get everyone
to like us!" and "kill all terrorists, yo!" This is the
least serious election I've seen since I became politically
aware circa 1980 and vaguely in 1976. I think the 527s have
and the fake campaign finance reform have made issues even
less visible than before. Pre-fake-campaign-finance-reform,
the ads were directly from the candidates so they were almost
forced to not say stupid shit. Now that they can pretend that
Michael Moore and the Swift Boat Vets aren't related and
distance themselves from it, the 527 bullshit orgs can say
any stupid thing and it gets reported as real news. |
| 2004/8/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Reference/Military] UID:33092 Activity:high |
8/24 Not to start another Swiftboat Troll, but did Kerry Volunteer for
the Navy, or the Naval Reserves?
\_ For the navy, as an enlisted.
\_ Actually, his dad used his influence to get him into the
Massachusets naval reserves, where he failed the exam to be a
naval aviator, but was allowed to fly jets over Andover
Mass during the war instead of fight because of his dad's
influence. This isn't *so* bad, but swiftboat troll is right
to point out that it's pretty wrong that he then used his
dad's influence once again to leave early to go to stanford
Business school.
\_ No, actually he wrote himself up for a few purple hearts so he
\_ Wrong.
\_ /sbin/modprobe sarcasm_detector
could leave early and then go back and tell the world he and
his Band of Brothers(c) committed rapes, civilian murders, cut
off civilian body parts and were generally evil/bad/republican
people/war criminals so the war should end.
\_ Actually, in his testimony he said this was what 100+ other
veterans disclosed at the Winter Soldier investigation.
\_ Keep your filthy stinking facts away from the swift boat
troll, please.
\_ Navy |
| 2004/8/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33089 Activity:high 50%like:32727 |
8/24 So what exactly did the Wash Po. story on Kerry's
Swift Boat record verify?
\_ here is my question. If DoD gave Kerry a medal for Kerry's
action, shouldn't be DoD that investigate whatever is in
question?
\_ I can imagine the partisan finger-pointing now. |
| 2004/8/23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33080 Activity:high |
8/23 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21239-2004Aug21.html Interesting article that at tries to look at the facts in dispute in the swift boat issue. \_ From article: But yesterday, The Post independently contacted a participant who has not spoken out so far in favor of either camp who remembers coming under enemy fire. "There was a lot of firing going on, and it came from both sides of the river," said Wayne D. Langhofer, who manned a machine gun aboard PCF-43, the boat that was directly behind Kerry's. Langhofer said he distinctly remembered the "clack, clack, clack" of enemy AK-47s, as well as muzzle flashes from the riverbanks. \_ The real issue is why has the Bush administration so royally screwed up Iraq and why haven't they come up with an exit strategy? \_ I don't know, I'm too busy trying to figure out whether Kerry was a real war hero or not. \_ See, that's just it: which of these issues continues to get American soldiers killed? Wake up, folks, we're being conned. \_ Regardless of what the Kerry or Bush camps say about Iraq, I think most Americans feel it in a reluctance to travel abroad with their families. There is distinct anti-Americanism that is justified by: We didn't do it with a broad coalition or UN approval, we didn't find WMDs, and the world is less safe because of U.S. unilateral action. Saddam is out, but everyone hates us and we don't feel safer. \_ From the similar LA Times article a day earlier: Navy rules during the Vietnam War governing Purple Hearts did not take into account a wound's severity - and specified only that injuries had to be suffered "in action against an enemy." Self-inflicted wounds were awarded if incurred "in the heat of battle, and not involving gross negligence." Kerry's critics insist his wound would not have qualified, but former Navy officials who worked in the service's awards branch at the time said such awards were routine. [Firing on VC from boat; Swift Boat Vets say shrapnel was from his own grenade launcher, grenade exploded too close to boat; Kerry says doesn't know where it came from] |
| 2004/8/23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33079 Activity:nil |
8/23 In case you missed it, formerly neutral swift boat captain comes out
for Kerry in the Silver Star citation: http://csua.org/u/8q7
(the Rassmann rescue is Bronze Star, below) |
| 2004/8/23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33077 Activity:nil |
8/23 Now Dole says Kerry should apologize for his Vietnam War testimony
to the Senate in 1971, and he says Kerry got only superficial wounds.
Bush will say Kerry isn't condemning http://MoveOn.org ads, so it's fine
if the Swift Vets ads continue running.
Blah blah blah, it will never end.
\_ Somehow Bush seems to think that refighting the Vietnam War
will help him win this election. I think he is wrong. What
does the rest of the motd crowd think?
\_ Trotting out Bob "the last good war" Dole to criticize Kerry's
service appeals to his base.
\_ you got it wrong, Kerry's platform is Vietnam
\_ Bzzt. Kerry's platform is that America can do better than Bush.
\_ HOPE IS ON THE WAY!!!!1!!!! |
| 2004/8/23 [Politics/Domestic/Election, ERROR, uid:33074, category id '18005#1.5' has no name! , ] UID:33074 Activity:nil |
8/23 Florida Republicans caught breaking campaign finance laws:
http://csua.org/u/8q3 ( some blog ) |
| 2004/8/23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33073 Activity:very high |
8/22 The sound of the other shoe dropping: Bush denounces Swift Boat ad.
http://csua.org/u/8q1 (yahoo! news)
\_ damn, does this mean no more Swift Boat trolls? -tom
\_ One can only hope, but somehow I doubt it.
\_ Nope. The questioning of the medals was the appetizer. The
denunciation of the Vietnam War is the main course.
\_ How is this the other shoe dropping? This is the same thing
McClellan said when the first SB ad came out, and the same thing the
Bush campaign rep said yesterday on Russert: all the 527's suck,
get rid of them. Kerry will whine because Bush didn't condemn the
SB ads specifically.
\_ The SB ads were malicious and wholly misleading. They make the
fallacious flip-flop accusations look downright wholesome. It's
a sign of weak moral character for any candidate who benefits
from such ridiculous deceits not to specifically condemn them;
as much as I despise him, Bush finally did the right thing. That
it took him as long as it did is a quibble point.
\_ What a crapload. Wholly misleading my ass. Bush won't gain
anything from this because he didn't specifically condemn this
ad. And then the SB continue to decry Kerry, the Kerry-DNC-
Michael-Moore-wannabees will keep telling Bush to TAKE THAT AD
OFF THE AIR. This from the same people afraid that Bush is
infringing their first amendment rights.
\_ does anyone else think this whole episode make you feel like our
choice for 2004 boils down to Kang vs. Kodos? Arguing over stuff
that happened >30 years ago is a nice way to avoid talking about
actual issues that matter. -probably_going_to_write_in_Nader
\_ Wait for the debates.
\_ Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!
\_ And the GOP propaganda machine wins another one! The candidates
are just the same! Vote for Nader and thereby favor the
incumbent! Ignorance is Strength!
\_ Kerry started it by trying to run on his Vietnam record. He
can end it too by choosing to ignore the SB ads. He's not.
I'll probably vote for Nader.
\_ Kerry did what now? The man's message has been a very
consistent one: We can do better than we are doing right
now. His Vietnam record is just a part of his resume. |
| 2004/8/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33062 Activity:very high |
8/21 David Hackworth rips the Swifties a new one:
http://csua.org/u/8ph (sftt.org)
Even the Weekly Standard knows its a bust:
http://csua.org/u/8pi (weeklystandard.com)
\_ Wow. Is that all you got out of reading those? You are amazing.
-- ilyas
\_ Well, no, but why post a paragraph summary? Don't be obtuse,
ilya.
\_ Well, those are critical of attacks on Kerry, but in a ...
much larger context which was missing in the summary.
Your summary made it seem like you are picking and choosing
what you want to hear and ignoring the rest. -- ilyas
\_ Uh, no. Its just the motd. One sentence is enough.
\_ Ok, but you are doing Rush Limbaugh style one-sentence
summaries. It's ok, really, but don't be surprised
if people point this out. I could do a similar one
sentence summary for the weekly standard thing:
'Democrats afraid of being seen as pacifist wimps.'
*shrug*. -- ilyas
\_ Be easy, ilya -- it's not that big a deal. Really.
\_ We all know they're liars and in it for the money so why do you
waste your time trying to refute anything? You only lend them
undue authority.
\_ Without refutation, their claims are given tacit legitimacy.
It's a shame that they've become such a prominent force, and
that the Bush administration refuses to excoriate them. I
wonder if Kerry's been as scrupulous as he'd have us believe,
though.
\_ I guess you missed McClellan's comments when the first swift
boat commercial aired.
\_ I guess I did -- do you have a URL handy?
\_ http://csua.org/u/8pj (Yahoo news)
\_ Huh -- that's interesting. Thanks!
\_ Hackworth is a great read, but he's been getting a bit loopy lately.
His first priority is loyalty to the troops that serve and have
served. However, his dismissal isn't terribly valuable when it
reads just like every other dismissal I've seen--including the
motd--which have been entirely composed of ad hominem, argument by
authority, and of course guilt by association. The actual claims of
the swift boat veterans have not been answered.
\_ Thank you! Add to that shill, uninformed denials like the
performance put on by Chris Matthews when Michelle Malkin
started talking about the claims that some of Kerry's wounds
were self-inflicted. As if someone who lied about atrocities,
divorced a 300 million dollar wife for a 700 million dollar
wife, and said nothing against Farenheit 9/11's numerous lies
which served him, could suddenly be trusted against the
collective word of over 250 vets, some of whom were decorated.
\_ And none of whom actually served on the boat which he was on.
\_ Kerry's peers were eyewitnesses to his actions, not his
subordinates.
\_ Except of course for Steve Gardner.
\_ And I'm sure we're only one FOIA request away from
seeing a service record that contradicts his statements
too!
\_ Yes they have been answered. Which claim is unanswered, in your
reasoned opinion? Since you're so adamant why don't you sum it
up for us?
\_ Was the squad of boats under enemy attack during the
Kerry's 3rd purple heart. If so, why do the other
boat commanders say they weren't, why were there no
bullet holes and why was no one shot? Suppressing
fire =! enemy fire.
By all accounts Thurlow was the true hero that day.
More, was Kerry's boat hit by another mine or not?
Who's boat was Rassman on? Why was Kerry's boat
the only one to flee, 5000 m in one version, and if
it was hit by a mine how could it have sped up to flee? |
| 2004/8/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33059 Activity:insanely high |
8/20 1 of 2 neutral swift boat captains decides to take a side:
http://csua.org/u/8pc (Yahoo!)
[Yes, this is new news.]
\_ How about the actual story he wrote? Any links?
\_ My bad, won't show up until Aug 22
\_ Yes. Thank you. SBVT are liars. Pure and simple. Can we please
go back to talking about some real issues now? Fucks sake this
country has gone to the pot.
\_ True --aaron
\_ Censure, and moveon!! The American people are tired of this!
\_ The Sunday Chicago Tribune article from William B. Rood:
http://csua.org/u?8pf username/pw: ih8logins
\_ He doesn't mention the Special Ops guy who was blown overboard-
was that the same day?
\_ I think that was what Kerry got his bronze star for, and
Rood wrote about how Kerry got his silver star
[ and ilyas is a moron ]
\_ We all know they're liars and in it for the money so why do you
waste your time trying to refute anything? You only lend them
undue authority.
\_ If one familiarizes themselves with the circumstances of
Kerry's awards several obvious holes become apparent. Kerry
and his band have given several different accounts of each story,
some on the senate floor. Yes the Swift Vets have a few holes
in their story (eg. Thurlows citation), but Kerry has many
more. |
| 2004/8/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33045 Activity:insanely high |
8/20 Here's the $200 bet guy's update:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040820/D84J6PEO0.html
Not trending well in your favor, especially considering the RNC gets
their turn soon and the swift boat vet's message is sinking in.
\_ 200 dollar bet guy? huh?
\_ Yay, negative campaigning without a shred of substance driven by
lots of well organized people and loads of money works! Isn't life
great?
\_ um. Soros gives $2 million and vets only get $100,000?
\_ Playing dumb is fun, but come on. This whole Swift Boat thing
is absolutely classic Karl Rove. Don't any of you remember
2000?
\_ Who cares where it came from? The issue is whether or not
what they're saying is true. Not who organised or funded
them. If they honestly came up with all this on their own
and funded it with their own credit cards and third
mortgages on their homes would you still dismiss them? Yes.
\_ If what we've been seeing for 18 months is what the DNC called
a positive campaign at their convention I can't imagine what a
negative campaign would look like.
\_ 250 guys who knew him and 60 who served directly with him who
say he's full of shit sounds substantial. Maybe Kerry could
sign Form 180 and just bury them with the truth, eh?
\_ Is this your way of admitting that Kerry is ahead?
\_ No one is ahead. The idea is silly. I'm the one that has been
saying for months that polls are silly at this point. 3 debates,
an ignored VP debate, an election and then we'll know. I'm just
tweaking the $200 bet guy's nose for fun and profit.
\_ You must be the "Winning California by a landslide" guy.
\_ Go read the campaign finance laws. The 527s are not allowed
to co-ordinate with the parties. And yeah, you need evidence
of a crime to get the law to act, not just wild accusations.
Having made an ass of yourself, you're out to spread the love
around a little?
\_ I *must* be? Nope, sorry, I think he's deluded. You're
simply as confused as he is. Have a nice day!
\_ Proof that the Republicans have no connection to SMVFT:
\_ Evidence that the Republicans have a connection to SBVFT:
http://csua.org/u/8p7 (Yahoo News)
\_ Duh. All the 527s are very closely connected with one of the
two parties. Campaign finance reform was a joke with a (so far)
$63 million loophole for Kerry and I'm not sure how many $million
loophole for Bush. You don't need evidence to prove any
connection between these bullshit 527s and the 2 parties. It is
naivete of the highest order to assume otherwise.
\_ The law states that the parties cannot co-ordinate with the
527s. You might believe that MoveOn and the DNC are in
cahoots, but there is no evidence of this. This is evidence
that SBVFT and the Republican Party are illegally
co-ordinating.
\_ More bad news for Swiftie Boy:
http://csua.org/u/8p8 (Yahoo news) |
| 2004/8/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33044 Activity:nil |
8/20 New swiftvets ad concerning Kerry's post war activity, narrated
by POWs
http://www.swiftvets.com
\_ Wheeeeeee. As if our current domestic problems don't merit
any debate or discussion. My republic is in ruins.
\_ You tell em aaron!
\_ This is not "new" is it? But by all means, keep bringing up
Kerry's Vietnam service so that voters can compare it to Bush's
lack thereof. I am telling you, this is a losing strategy and
you guys are really blowing it here. Anyone who supported
the Vietnam war 30 years ago is not going to vote for Kerry
anyway. -Kerry supporter
\_ Actually, having everyone read the swift vets book, raising
enough funds to play the swift vets commercial in swing states
more often, and with that money creating a new swift vets
commercial with more veterans calling Kerry a liar, an
opportunist, and unfit for duty while Dubya says he never saw
the ad is a winning strategy. No, I'm not making fun of you,
that's just how it is. -liberal
\_ Sadly the above poster is correct. With an electorate as
deadlocked as this, all you need to do is seed doubt in the
minds of a few undecided voters in swing states. Go electoral
college!
\_ "Everyone" is not going to read the book, anymore than
everyone saw Michael Moore's movie. It is only going to
appeal to the already converted. Kerry is winning this
election and Karl Rove knows it. This is a desperate
attempt to turn things around. -ks
\_ I agree on the desperate attempt part and the Rove knowing
Kerry is winning part. -liberal
\_ I am also a liberal Kerry supporter, but you are both
full of crap. This election will be *very* close
if you believe the polls. It's absurd to say that
"Kerry is winning."
\_ the way we use it, we are saying: Kerry has the
momentum, and will win in November. The swift vets
ad is supposed to reverse this momentum. -liberal |
| 2004/8/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33039 Activity:very high |
8/20 Interesting how Mr. Swiftie just keeps it up after this crap has been
completely discredited. If Kerry is elected, is this gonna be like
\_ You mean like "selected not elected"?
Kenneth Starr/Whitewater all over again, with fake "pseudoscandals"
kept alive by Republican money?
\_ of course. This isn't going to go away until the republican
enemy is discredited at the national level once and for all.
\_ So how long till they demand a perjury investigation about his 1986
congressional testimony? When that fails, will they demand he be
put on trial for war crimes?
\_ Unless we reform the worthless corrupt media, yes.
\_ I think we need a new word to describe this process, like
the "borking" of a judicial nominee. "foo-gate" is tired and
really refers to something else (the fallout from a scandal
rather than the manufacturing of one).
|_ Bushwhacking? 'Roved? Kerried away? O'riled up?
Kerrycter assassination? Murderoched? Thanks, I'm here all
week.
\_ Can you play "Over There"?
\_ But the word should somehow refer to Clinton, since he
was the first big target. Or perhaps McCain, Swift Boat
target Number Uno.
\_ Link to refutation of allegations please. Actually, do you even
know what the allegations are?
\_ Oh please.
\_ I'll take that as a no.
\_ "You're arm's off!" "No it isn't!" "Well what's that then!"
<pause> "I've had worse!" "You liar!" "Come on, ya'
pansy!"
\_ You really really need to get a life. Direct evidence
that the Swift Boat guys are lying isn't enough for you?
You probably think there's aliens stored at Area 51, too.
\_ What evidence? You don't even understand the
allegations so how do you know? There are ALOT of
holes in Kerry's and his bands stories, far more than
the Swift Vets. Nor have the Vets changed their
story repeatedly.
\_ See, now you're just lying. Even trolls try to
sound vaguely plausible.
\_ Sigh. Go on with your bad self, Don Quixote.
Bill O'Reilly isn't even on your side anymore.
You're a nut. Get a grip.
\_ Instead of working yourself up in a frenzy,
repeatedly, take a few minutes to
familiarize yourself with the allegations.
If vindicated, you would be
a much more effective detractor.
\_ OK, some of the reports describing Kerry's heroism are
signed K.J.W. The SBVfT claim that these were written by
Kerry and are nothing but self-aggrandizing fabrication.
This ignores the fact that there is no 'W' in Kerry's name
and that reports of that type would have been written
higher up the chain of command. This leaves 4
possibilities.
1) SBVfT are lying.
2) SBVfT are mistaken.
3) The mission reports corroborated by current SBVfT
members 35 years ago are in error and their own
reccolections now are the truth.
4) John Kerry is so devious he impersonated a superior
officer 35 years ago to write heroic mission reports.
\_ Yeah, the allegations are that Kerry is secretly an America
hating traitor that wants to take our guns, hand over American
sovereignty to the UN and surrender to the French and the
terrorists. Seriously, you guys have been slinging around the
word "traitor" so much for anyone who disagrees with you in
the slightest about anything, you have lost the ability to
shock people with it. Give it a rest. |
| 2004/8/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33036 Activity:high |
8/20 Swift boat vets graphic showing relationship with Bush family / Rove:
link:csua.org/u/8oa
Five-page article which goes with it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/20/politics/campaign/20swift.html?hp
To summarize: How several of the swift boat vets went from praising
John Kerry last year, to criticizing him this year, and how it
probably happened.
[Okay, I'm outta here. Got to get some real work done today.]
\_ I wonder how many Texas politicos of either party are not one or
two degrees of separation from current administration.
\_ OMG my brother knows Teresa Heinz and he donated money to the
Republicans. GWB is a democratic plant!!! I plan to vote Nader
and I'm 2 hops from Heinz! Maybe Nader is just a big Democratic
conspiracy too!
\_ fuck off and die. Nader is getting lots of money *directly*
from one of the major parties, and you fucking know it.
ass-tool. please please choke on a donut and die.
\_ Since my brother 1. knows Heinz and 2. donated money to
the Republicans, we can conclude that the whole Republican
party is really just a front for the Democrats. That's
the same logic used in the graphic above. Since the
Republicans are really a front for the Democrats, and
since the Republicans are funding Nader, that means Nader
is also a front for the Democratic party. Same logic.
\_ You might be surprised, but Heinz was married to a
Republican senator. It is more likely that Kerry is
a front for the Republicans, especially since he is
a Skull and Bones guy like Dubya.
Five-page article which goes with it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/20/politics/campaign/20swift.html?hp
To summarize: How several of the swift boat vets went from praising
John Kerry last year, to criticizing him this year, and how it
probably happened.
[Okay, I'm outta here. Got to get some real work done today.]
\_ ok... who broke csuamotd/csuamotd.... and bugmenot is down too.
\_ you want to know how much of a sociopathic shithead the guy
who did this is? I posted another login and password yesterday,
and within an hour the password to that was changed also.
of course, i have access to the yahoo account it's linked to
so i changed it to something else and now i guess i won't
post it until someone figures out who's doing this so we can
go slash his fucking tires.
\_ kchang did it! with the wrench! in the drawing room!
\_ I'm just wondering what the passwd changing guy is trying
to accomplish. All of us either have our own nyt accounts
or it's trivial to create one anyway, so changing the passwd
isn't stopping anyone from reading the site. It helps nyt
with gathering user statistics, but that's the only thing
I can think of.
\_ it was egoldstein
\_ Am I missing something? There's no such user.
\_ Saying things like that can get you sent to Minitrue.
\_ Here's an excerpt about the "Truth" these guys are trying to sell
people: "An enemy solider sprang from the shore about 10 feet in
front of the boat. Mr. Kerry leaped onto the shore, chased the
soldier behind a small hut and killed him, seizing a B-40 rocket
launcher with a round in the chamber.
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth describes the man Mr. Kerry killed as
a solitary wounded teenager "in a loincloth," who may or may not
have been armed. ... ... The group says Mr. Kerry himself wrote the
reports that led to the medal. But Mr. Elliott and Mr. Lonsdale, who
handled going up the line for recognition, have previously said that
a medal would be awarded only if there was corroboration from others
and that they had thoroughly corroborated the accounts." |
| 2004/8/20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33034 Activity:high |
8/20 The Vietnam thread below is almost interesting except the
participants are speaking past each other. Anyway, what Kerry
or Bush or anyone else did or didn't do in Vietnam really isn't
important to me as a voter. Bush went AWOL and Kerry faked his
own records. They're both losers and better off not relying on
their 30+ year old stories there. I want to hear what Kerry did
for the country in 19 years as a Senator and Bush in his first
term as President and detailed plans of what each intends to do
in the next 4 years. And really, as far as security of the country
goes, ask yourself this one, "If foreigners could vote in our
elections, who would Osama bin Laden, Castro, Chavez, Chirac, and
other America haters vote for?"
\_ An idiot who's demonstrated his willingness to financially and
diplomatically ruin the US?
\_ Hussein, too?
\_ Hussein always wins 100% of the vote, so obviously he voted
for himself.
\_ In SOVIET CUBA, politicians vote for YOU!
\_ You ask too much. WDYHA?
\_ I like how you try to claim both Bush and Kerry's Vietnam
experiances are the same. Ok, we all know about Bush and the AWOL
accusations and how the documentation pretty well supports that.
But Kerry lieing about his records? Well let's see his is accused
by a doctor who claims to have treated him on the front although
there is NO documentation to support that. The same docotor
somehow remembers minor details about an insignificant wound someone
recieived in a war zone 30 years ago. Then there is the guy
claming Kerry doesn't deserve his Bronze Star because there was
no combat going on in the incident. Well, let's look closer shall
we? That same accuser RECIEVED A BRONZE STAR FOR THE EXACT SAME
INCIDENT. Oh and the "who would america haters vote for" bit is
classic. Especially lumping bin Landen (now what ever happened
to him anyway) with the rest. And Castro? Please, are you that
stuck in the 60s? Oh and why don't you care about domestic
policies as well?
\_ Sheesh, why do people keep saying the documentation supports
that Bush was AWOL? There's NO documentation to support
that. There's just a suspicion that some documents claimed
missing really exist and haven't been released that might
support that Bush was AWOL.
\_ Documentation doesn't support that he went AWOL, but there's
scant documentation that he was where he was supposed to be.
That all documentation has not been found leads some (myself
included) to believe there's a coverup, but it is also
plausible that he did serve and the papers have been lost.
\_ And that's cool. I don't mind if you have your
suspicious, heaven knows I have mine. Just don't try
to upgrade your suspicions to fact in public debate
with out evidence. Thank you.
\_ So if all the evidence supports Bush and is against
Kerry we still have a man who got out of going to
Vietnam versus a man who volunteered to go when he
could have avoided service.
\_ I think its clear that terrorists fear Bush much more than
probably anyone else. The problem is that so do many Americans.
I hate to invoke Godwin's Law, but I'm sure Muslim terrorists were
very afraid of Hitler, too. He was a dangerous man. Bush is
likewise a dangerous man. He'll attack the terrorists, but what
will he sacrifice in the process?
\_ Have you read 'Inside an Al-Qaeda Hard Drive' in "The Atlantic"?
It had emails from Osama in 2001 basically talking about how he
wanted to get more publicity and that by attacking the US he
hoped the US would end up in a quagmire which would result in
more Muslims joining his cause and the US military too occupied
to flex it's muscle in other parts of the world. Kinda sounds
like GWB gave him just what he wanted, doesn't it? |
| 2004/8/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33032 Activity:high |
8/20 I didn't delete the Vietnam thread, I was going to reply to the
guy who likes calling Kerry a traitor. Anyway, you tried to refute
my argument by saying Kerry was responsible for Vietnamese deaths
by his anti-war actions. This is quite a stretch. By this measure,
every anti-war protestor is responsible for Vietnamese and American
deaths by protesting the war -- in your view, they are only responsible
by different amounts.
Kerry was a symbol of the anti-war movement to some vets, and Kerry
strengthened the movement by being an ex-soldier, and eloquent. These
vets feel that the anti-war movement left them as soldiers without a
purpose -- unwanted at home, wanted dead in Vietnam, with no end in
sight. They incorrectly believe Kerry labels all U.S. soldiers as war
criminals, when instead, Kerry said to the Senata in 1971: "We are
angry because we feel we have been used it the worst fashion by the
administration of this country." To these veterans, Kerry was a traitor
to his fellow soldier. However, they shouldn't be blaming Kerry for
being right.
\_ Your understanding of the history of the war is wrong.
Read the article below for a concise explanation of what I
have been saying. It's important to emphasize Kerry was
not a civilian during his activities, he was on active duty.
http://www.federalist.com/alexander/edition.asp?id=263
\_ Actually, why don't you offer a concise explanation of what
you are trying to say. You have the article right in front
of you, and you know your point.
\_ Your'e right, just read the last five paragraphs.
\_ Why don't you summarize it in one paragraph. I did,
in two.
\_ Well I don't understand what you're saying. Kerry
gave comfort to the enemy. His propaganda was
repeated to John McCain in the Hanoi Hilton. One
question, would it bother you if Michael Moore
negotiated truce terms with Al Sadr or Bin Laden?
\_ Don't you understand? By your definition,
all anti-war protestors, by calling the war
immoral, wrong, or just not worth it, are giving
"comfort to the enemy"? Your view, is that
Kerry just did it more than the typical anti-war
protestor.
About bin Laden: Don't you recall my previous
post? This is not WW2, where Japan preemptively
attacked Pearl Harbor; this is Vietnam, where
the U.S. carpet-bombed, 4 million Vietnamese
civilians died to 1 million enemy soldiers, and
we were wrong in the Tonkin incident.
\_ Upwards of 3 million died in Korea - good or
bad?
\_ Are you able to formulate a coherent response?
\_ The implication is obvious. You cite
4 million deaths to impugn the character
of the war. So I repeat, 3 million died
in Korea, do you see this as good as
bad through your Red colored glasses?
I have no problem with protesters, nor
would I elect a member of their
leadership to CIC. Are you aware of
all of Kerry's antiwar activities - from
the sounds of it I don't think you are.
\_ Fallacy of equation. While I think the
Vietnam war was fought "wrong", but on
some good premises, the Korean war had
UN legitimization. I think your debate
partner's argument that "war is always
bad because people die" is wrong. But
he is correct to say that a democratic
society should not equate opposition to
said war with treason. -John
\_ Fair enough, familiarize yourself
with Kerry's post war, FBI
documented activities; then you
decide. To me, (1) penning an
anti-war, hate america scribe with
a cover that mocks Iwo Jima with an
upside down US flag, and (2)attending
a meeting where assissinating
US senators is discussed, and
continuing to associate yourself
with that group, crosses the line.
Maybe one allows that kind of behavior
but you sure as hell don't
condone it by electing the person
as CIC.
\_ I have zero interest in whether
John Kerry should be pres or not.
I was simply pointing out the flaw
in the above argument. As for
"fit to be CIC", that is not for
you or me alone to decide, but the
electorate. The limiting factors
for Presidents are laid out very
clearly in the Constitution. -John
\_ And as for 'these' soldiers he consorted with, you do realize
a large percentage or majority of them were later proven
to be frauds, e.g. Al Hubbard? Kerry purjured himself
in front of Congress for political gain - this is not a
problem for you?
\_ You do realize that there were hundreds of wartime violoations
officially prosecuted by the miliary?
Perjury also means you are aware of falsehood when you testify.
You have not shown this at all.
\_ Well we have different perceptions of what took place.
Every thing I have read says yes they took place, but not on
the scale you believe, and they were prosecuted. However,
Kerry himself admitted to committing the atrocities.
Furthermore, its a warzone, atrocities happen. You haven't
heard stories about the Korean war and WWII? That doesn't
justify invoking the atrocities to demoralize our war
effort. After all the Vietnan War was won, the South was
free for two years. Did Kerry violate UMCJ and US statutes and
Constitutional provisions on treason or not? I think he did,
and someone of that character does not belong as CIC.
\_ By your reasoning, newspapers shouldn't be publishing
the Abu Ghraib abuse photos, as it demoralizes our war
effort. If Kerry clearly violated provisions on treason,
he would have been prosecuted for it, but he wasn't.
\_ I am asking one question. Did he or did he not
violate the statutes cited in the article? Gen.
Giap seems to indicate he did. He purjured himself
in front of Congress.
\_ I ask you one question. Did Vietnam anti-war
protestors violate the "give comfort to the enemy"
clause in the Constitution?
As for being against the war while you are serving,
we have a modern example of that. There is a
military intelligence analyst who wrote a letter to
a local newspaper criticizing the war. Someone
forwarded this letter to the military. The guy
was discharged. That's the punishment you get,
typically. Even this didn't happen with Kerry, and
your bringing it up now and associating it with
treason is quite a stretch.
\_ I think it is. Court martial proceeding were
already underway, Congress knew about it months
in advance. I sure as hell would not elect the guy
CIC.
\_ Read about Operation Pheonix. The US assassinated literally
thousands of civilians.
\_ Honestly, what would be point of sending highly trained
special-ops and snipers to kill civlians. You can't
be serious.
\_ Have you read about Operation Pheonix? The CIA
recently declassified the project, it is no longer
a matter of conjecture, but historical record.
We assassinated any political leader that we thought
might by sympathetic to the North Vietnamese cause.
As for the likelyhood of a highly trained US military
sniper being used to kill civilians in a foreign
land, I knew a guy who had done this in Nicauragua
and was dealing with the psychological afteraffects.
He was kind of messed up about it.
\_ How is this relevant to Kerry? Shit happens in
war. Are you familiar with the NVA and Vietcong
techniques for population control? Doesn't
it strike you as odd as you are now defending
the Communist side in this war,given the aftermath
of communist insurrections around the globe?
\_ Sure the other side was worse, far worse in
fact. I am not defending Communism, just the
historical record from those who wish to
rewrite it for political gain. If you don't
learn from your past, you are doomed to
make the same mistakes again and again.
\_ Vague platitude. History emphatically
vindicates the staunch anti-communists.
Kerry does not fall into this category.
\_ You are not doing yourself any favors
with the phrase "history emphatically
vindicates the staunch anti-communists"
without further explanation, when
history is replete with commentaries
about how Vietnam was a quagmire, and
the first war that the U.S. lost.
\_ Vietnam was won. How is that
a quagmire? If you want to
believe this myth created and
perpetuated by leftists, feel free.
Please, list for me the major
military battles lost in the war.
\_ Vietnam was won? Which side are
you on???
\_ LOL what were the terms of
the treaty of Paris in 1973?
I really don't think you know
what you are talking about.
I think a free S. Vietnam
(until 1975 anyways)
is a victory, don't you?
Or was Korea
not a victory either?
\_ The ToP was a good alibi
for us to disengage from
a badly conducted war,
fought for good reasons but
for a dodgy client. It was
not a victory. -John
\_ It was a victory! Until it
was a loss!
\_ Because anti-war
elements in Congress
rescinded all financial
and military support.
\_ I like how this guy twists your words into
"now defending the Communist side". This
truly is a case of "if you're not with us,
you're against us", which is one of the
problems the vets have.
\_ I like how you say "shit happens in war", as
if we are a bunch of naive idiots who didn't
know this already.
\_ Then why trumpet up these ubsubstantiated
charges of war crimes?
\_ you were kind of coherent for the 1st 9000 pages,
but then you lost me completely.
\_ Sorry for the long thread, but I believe the "Kerry was a traitor"
guy honestly believes his position, as many conservatives do, and
I was trying to "show him the way".
\_ I ask a third time - Kerry purjured himself before Congress
and violated several sections of US statute while on active
duty. Do you agree and is the behavior unbecoming a CIC? Almost
all Vietnam Vets say it is.
\_ how about desertion--is that behavior unbecoming a CIC?
\_ But Bush is a stupid monkey! Don't you see!? A stupid
monkey! -- aaron #1 fan |
| 2004/8/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33027 Activity:high |
8/19 Tapes would be sent from the United States to North Vietnam to
broadcast over Radio Hanoi to get U.S. servicemen to stop fighting in
Vietnam
http://www.aim.org/media_monitor_print/1497_0_2_0
\_ "I wish we would stop opening wounds from a war of more than 30
years ago and talk about the war we're fighting now," McCain told
The AP. "I believe [both Kerry and Bush] served honorably."
\_ So you do exactly what McCain tells you?
\_ No, it just means, gosh, you're really really stretching, and
McCain's quote is just for you.
\_ Fine go ahead and vote for a traitor. It will fit you
perfectly!
\_ The problem is you haven't shown Kerry is a "traitor".
In fact, the vast majority of Americans would not say
Kerry is a "traitor", otherwise there would be "Is
Kerry a traitor?" Gallup polls. You just sound very,
very partisan, i.e., like a freeper.
\_ to a tee. Oooh you invoked the 'freeper' word.
Go join Al Qaeda, this way you can parallel
Kerry's career.
\_ I agree, you do sound quite partisan, and like
a freeper to a tee! Your second sentence doesn't
make sense though.
\_ Yep I am one of those evil oppessors who
believes in the Constitution, self-
responsibility, and limited government.
I'll complete the analogy. Kerry effectively
fought for the NVA, so you too can fight
for Al Qaeda. Go for it!
\_ "You are either with us, or you are with the
terrorists!" You sound suspiciously like a
a traitor to me, citizen!
\_ Right, so let's give the government all of
our guns. Contradictory twit.
\_ There is so much sarcasm I'm confused.
\_ http://csua.org/u/8o7 (LA Times)
Kerry recalled his opposition to VVAW leaders meeting with North
Vietnamese officials. "I thought that would be disastrous to the
credibility of the organization," he said, "to the people we were
trying to convince about the war."
Kerry soon left VVAW, which he thought had lost its focus.
\_ Kerry met with them twice.
\_ When and why?
\_ Because he is a traitor - from the Congressional
Record:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1097828/posts
But this is forgery right?
\_ "Because he is a traitor" is not an answer.
\_ Just for starters... after the meeting
Kerry assiduously advocated the NVA
terms for truce. For example,
watch Kerry do exactly this in his
debate with O'Neill (yes of SBVFT) in
1971 on CSPAN. It's one thing to
protest against the war, but Kerry
was an effusive, vocal (maybe unwitting?)
advocate for the enemy, repeatedly.
\_ From my reading, he met with both sides, and
he advocated for a truce on terms negotiated by
both sides. He also was attempting to get
our POWs back. What is wrong with this?
It's not like the President has to honor whatever
Kerry comes back with (and the President never
did, anyway). What about any of this makes him a
"traitor"? Selling arms to the enemy, giving
vital military information, or defecting is what
a traitor does. Being anti-war and attempting
to negotiate a truce, regardless of which side
you talk to, may show disunity on your side and
is illegal for a private citizen to do, but is
nowhere on the same level as being a "traitor".
Finally, remember, this is not WW2, where Japan
preemptively attacked Pearl Harbor; this is
Vietnam, where the U.S. carpet bombed and
4 million civilians died to 1 million enemy
soldiers, and where we were wrong in the Tonkin
incident.
\_ And let's not forget that this war was
immensely unpopular back at home.
\_ Reagan met with the communists several times, the traitor.
\_ But he was President at the time. Kerry was talking
with the enemy as a citizen. |
| 2004/8/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election, ERROR, uid:33024, category id '18005#4.375' has no name! , ] UID:33024 Activity:nil |
8/20 The Ralph Nader national convention:
http://www.filibustercartoons.com/archive.php?id=20040730
\_ Better if he was handed his nomination by Bush.
\_ That's literally what's happening right now. |
| 2004/8/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33014 Activity:nil |
8/19 Washington Post gave oral sex to Kerry:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59559-2003May30.html
\_ Pretty ugh-ly, but I'm sure you can find similar puff pieces written
about every candidate that's ever run for the office of the
President.
\_ But everyone knows both the Post and the NY Times swallowed for
Dubya, until they found out he had no WMD in that spunk. |
| 2004/8/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33010 Activity:nil |
8/18 Military Records of Kerry's Critic Contradict His Version of Events
http://csua.org/u/8nu (yahoo! news)
\_ Welcome back, Swiftie!
\_ I'm not Swiftie. If you'd actually bothered to read the link,
you would would see that it pretty much demolishes Mr. Swiftie's
entire argument. The "His" pronoun above refers to the Swift
Boat guy, not Kerry. Please read before trolling. Ok tnx. --op |
| 2004/8/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33003 Activity:nil |
8/18 Hey, Obsessive Swiftboat Troll. This link is fer YOU!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13267-2004Aug18.html
\_ Actually if you read it and understand the allegations of
the Swift Vets the title belies the content, and further
substantiates the Vets. Thanks!
Now, about Cambodia, Paris, and the Senator assassinations...
I have a better link for you:
ABC, CBS & NBC Gave 75 Stories to Bush AWOL Charge, 9 to Claims
Kerry Embellished War Record
http://www.mediaresearch.org/realitycheck/2004/fax20040818.asp
\_ The guy who was rescued said he came under fire. He kept
diving to avoid it. His word is better than any. The last
time he came up, Kerry was there to pull him up.
\_ It doesn't substantiate the swift vets. All it says is that the
military records support the claim of Kerry being under fire,
which this swift vet guy disputes.
\_ Well, maybe because Kerry's crewmates support his story, and
guys who weren't even on his boat have an obvious grudge
against him for testifying on war crimes, and boy, they are
*extremely* negative in the ad. As for Dubya, you couldn't
find anyone to vouch that they remember him being there at
that time.
\_ Sorry you guys don't understand the allegations.
"For much of the episode, Kerry was not in a position
to know firsthand what was happening on Thurlow's boat,
as Kerry's boat had sped down the river after the mine
exploded under another boat. He later returned to provide
assistance to the stricken boat.
Two other Swift boat skippers who were direct participants
in the March 13, 1969, mine explosion on the Bay
Hap, Jack Chenoweth and Richard Pees, have said they
do not remember coming under "enemy fire."
Thurow did not write the citation, nor did he write
the request. The quotes above contradict Kerry's
version of the events. LOL Kerry and his band can't
even keep straight which boat Rassman was on. One
thing is certain Kerry's was the only boat to flee
the scene, the other's stayed to protect PFC 3.
\_ Since you didn't seem to see this the first time I'll
repeat:
The guy who was rescued said he came under fire. He
kept diving to avoid it. His word is better than any.
The last time he came up, Kerry was there to pull him up.
Also, Kerry's crewmates said his boat was under fire.
Perhaps other boats didn't hear the crack of the rifles,
but Kerry's people were probably the targets and best
to judge if there was enemy fire.
"LOL".
I also dispute that Kerry's was the "only boat to flee
the scene, the other's stayed to protect PFC 3". This
is an assertion by one of the Swift Boat Vets, and I
would argue that all left when the two mines exploded.
\_ You don't understand the line of events. So a
guy underneath the water the entire time, knocked
off the boat by a mine has better view of
events then 1) Kerry who fled the scene 2) the
other boats and their commanders who stayed to
protect PFC 3? Rassman was eating a cookie
before he was knocked off - in a firefight????
\_ He was getting shot at, that's why he kept diving.
The person getting shot at is the best person
to say whether someone is shooting at him or not.
This is painfully obvious.
See also my revised post on "fleeing the scene".
Here, I'll leave this for you to chew on:
http://csua.org/u/8nq
"When I surfaced, all the swift boats had left, and
I was alone taking fire from both banks. To avoid
the incoming fire I repeatedly swam under water as
long as I could hold my breath, attempting to make
it to the north bank of the river. I thought I
would die right there. The odds were against me
avoiding the incoming fire and, even if I made it
out of the river, I thought I thought I'd be
captured and executed. ... John, already wounded by
the explosion that threw me off his boat, came out
onto the bow, exposing himself to the fire directed
at us from the jungle, and pulled me aboard."
\_ But depending on the day of the week, Rassman
was on Kerry's boat or PFC 3? Which is it??
And Kerry's wound was a 'contusion', fancy
word for bruise. Are you now saying the
Wash Po is lying when they say Kerry fled?
Why was no body shot and why were there no
bullet holes anywhere?
\_ If you read the article, you would find that
Rassmann says he was blown off Kerry's boat.
Second, why does it matter? It's not like
he and all others in the engagement imagined
Rassmann got blown into the water, even
if he were blown off another boat.
Show me the URL where you have non-swift
boat vets saying "no bullet holes anywhere";
and it could be just Kerry's boat that has
bullet holes, since he was closest to Rassmann.
As for the Post article on the boat fleeing,
show me where the author (not a swift boat
vet) says "fled". It also does not clearly
identify the sequence of events. To me, two
mines exploded, everyone bolted, Thurlow's
boat came back, Kerry's boat came back, they
all left again, Kerry came back for Rassmann,
Rassmann was getting shot at by snipers,
Kerry rescues Rassmann.
\_ And Thurlow's own Bronze Star citation mentions enemy
fire. Does he really want to go down the road of
exploring the possible meanings of that?
\_ Well, Thurlow says Kerry wrote it, and he thought
he got the medal for coming back for the disabled
boat, even though the small arms fire was fabricated
\_ Right, as if Thurlow never saw his own citation?
And if he thinks he deserved a medal for just
"coming to the rescue of the boat that was mined"
then Kerry logically deserves it too. |
| 2004/8/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election, ERROR, uid:33002, category id '18005#10.2812' has no name! , ] UID:33002 Activity:kinda low 50%like:33071 |
8/18 Every vote must count! Unless you want to vote for Nader of course:
http://www.iht.com/articles/534474.html
\_ "With reports that Republicans are bankrolling and gathering
signatures for Nader in at least 10 states ..."
\_ So what? Let people vote. |
| 2004/8/18 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Others] UID:32982 Activity:very high |
8/17 Its nearly quarter to 11:00 and no Obsessive SwiftBoat Lunatic yet.
Where are you OSL?!
\_ He's on a conference call getting the new talking points for this
week.
\_ For your viewing pleasure, the cspan footage of the debate between
John Kerry and John O'Neill on the Dick Cavett show in 1971:
rtsp://video.c-span.org/project/c04/c04_rwh081504.rm
\_ Thank you OSL!
\_ Don't know if I'm actually OSL, but I'd hate to disappoint.
\_ When we pulled out of Vietnam, the dominoes never fell, which
was our original reason for going there.
\_ That could also mean that Vietnam was a success.
\_ Are you any different if you're doing as much deleting as he is
posting? Can we call you Obsessive SwiftBoat Censor Lunatic?
\_ I'm not censoring anything... If people would stop censoring
that idiot, maybe he would give up the ghost - I get the feeling
he's one of those folks that thrives on any sort of attention,
negative or positive.
\_ The incorrect assumption that it's only one person could lead
you to a false conclusion like this. |
| 2004/8/18 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32976 Activity:kinda low |
8/17 Yet another devastating poll. And again, the people have spoken:
BUSHCO LOSES!!! http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040818/law016_1.html
\_ We had a mock election like that when I was in 3rd grade.
Mondale won by about 95 to 5. Imagine our shock on election
day.
\_ Obviously the election was rigged!
\_ OMFG! His 3rd grade class was just a trial run for Florida
2000!! Has anyone reported this to the FBI of the World
Court yet?
\_ Damn it, punk, i've go $200 bucks on Kerry to win and your post
was a stupid tease. Children support Kerry, that's just super.
\_ What odds did you get?
\_ Sorry, but no poll at this stage is telling you anything.
There's a poll on November 2nd you should check. |
| 2004/8/17 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32970 Activity:nil |
8/17 "Yahoo! News - Kerry Condemns Ad Attacking Bush Service"
http://csua.org/u/8n5
What a hypocrite.
\_ How so?
\_ Since op does not explain: There's an ad out that says Bush used
family connections to get out of the draft. Kerry criticizes the
ad as inappropriate: "This should be a campaign of issues, not
insults". Wesley Clark and a retired admiral, at a news conference,
also say Bush used family connections. Kerry won't criticize
Clark or the admiral. Bush people say: Kerry is a hypocrite --
he is condemning the ad, but he's letting his attack dogs make
the same complaints and won't condemn them.
IMO, their point is weak. Kerry said Clark and the admiral have
earned the right to say what they want on this issue, as they're
veterans. Kerry has stated his opinion, already.
On the other hand, Bush never criticizes the ad by the Swift Boat
Vets For Truth. (But at least he's consistent on ignoring
McCain's call on Republicans to criticize that ad.) |
| 2004/8/17 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32962 Activity:insanely high |
8/17 I've searched the web for a number of weeks on this topic. I take
back what I wrote earlier, and it does appear Kerry said he would
release all service records, but he has flip-flopped on this. Kerry
has not offered *any* explanation for the flip-flop, and believe me,
I searched. -liberal (stop changing the sig, ok?)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040421-121056-7919r.htm
\_ Nice try. No liberal would be caught dead reading that Moonie rag.
\_ Boston Globe: http://csua.org/u/8mv
I read the above too, but I posted Washington Times because
the article was clearer and had more information. -op
\_ Boston Globe is a conservative paper as well.
\_ The facts in both articles cannot be denied. -op
\_ Globe has a long-standing vendetta against Kerry, just
thought you should know.
\_ http://slate.msn.com/id/2094235
Article saying Globe is left-leaning, but indeed
has it in for Kerry -op
\_ Nothing anyone I don't like says can be true!
\_ It has nothing to do with that. The Globe
dislikes Kerry. They have gone out of their
way to discredit him over the years. A good
comparison would be the Howell Raines led
New York Times and their vendetta against
Bill Clinton.
\_ Does anyone else here remember the good old days when "flip-flops"
were open toed shower shoes?
\_ My Australian associates claim that these are "thongs", all
evidence to the contrary. -John
\_ So what did they think of the "Thong Song?"
\_ The foot-fetishists loved it.
\_ "We are unable to locate the page you requested"
\_ The original URL was correct as posted. Someone fucked it
up by changing a "0" to a "1". Fixed now. -op
\_ Bush in flip-flops, via The Daily Show:
http://csua.org/u/8mw (Real Player)
\_ So was Kerry on secret Cambodia missions with the CIA / SEALs
or not? Yes Kerry needs to fill out a form 180 to release his
records.
\_ He very likely took part in at least one CIA Cambodia mission.
\_ LOL since when? The Kerry camp has 5 different stories.
Was it this mission that was seared in his mind?
\_ Kerry was not in Cambodia on Christmas Day.
He very likely took part in at least one CIA mission.
Now, what is your question?
\_ WTF does mean - 'he very likely took part'. This
guy has repeated the story over 50 times, and in the
Senate at least two times. Now you want to change it.
I say he has serious problems with the truth. You
can't even substantiate he was EVER there, so you make
up more lies. Man am I dealing with 8 year olds here?
\_ The only thing Kerry has changed is the date of
when he was in Cambodia.
Please substantiate how he was never, ever there.
"Man am I dealing with 8 year olds here?"
\_ You guys are sure trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.
Is the best you've got that Kerry hasn't been totally clear about
his Vietnam missions? That's not exactly a scandal.
With Bush the push to open his records is because there were
serious questions about whether he was a deserter. What question
do you have about Kerry? That he might have messed up a date or
mission description?
\_ OK so did he meet the NVA and Vietcong in Paris twice
or not? Was he at a meeting where the VVAW discussed
assisinating US Senators or not? FBI files say he was.
Why does his entire chain of command and 17 of the 23
officers he served with think he is unfit? Why could
that be, what do they know that you don't?
\_ I don't suppose it could possibly have anything to do with
the fact that the military is in general very conservative
and Kerry has opposed military funding while Bush has spent
lavishly on the military. Nope, it must be some personal
failing they hold a grudge against from 30 years ago.
\_ Someone with a 19 year Senate record who is running entirely
on his 4 months in Vietnam needs to release his entire
record. It isn't a mountain. It isn't a mole hole. It
just is what it is. He needs to fully release his records.
If he wasn't running on his Vietnam record no one would care
about it. He can't hide the record he's running on.
\_ Dude, our current president is a fucking retard monkey.
You care so much about this but you give the
drunk-driving CIA-agent-outing totally-incompetent
rudderless asshole a pass?
\_ Ooh! it's an aaronantibushrant! Tell us more!
\_ And this is worse than Obsessive Compulsive Swift
Boat Troll how?
\_ He got his tax-cut, and he'll be damned if he has to
give it up. Defecit? What me worry?
\_ "Bush is stupid!" is not an answer to why Kerry won't
fully release the records he's relying on as the core
of his campaign. Bush could be dumber than a retarded
monkey, still drunk and coked out, out a CIA agent
twice a day everyday before breakfast and be the
world's biggest asshole, yet none of that would excuse
Kerry from releasing the full record he's running on.
\_ And nothing will apparently stop you from posting
the same mindless drivel over and over and over and
over and over and over and over [... and over(n)
where n is very large ...]. By the way, your
assumption that Kerry is running entirely on his
military service is incorrect and unsupported.
Sorry.
\_ Which drivel is that? I've posted exactly
zero swift boat links. It isn't an assumption,
btw. It is an assertion. There is a difference.
And my assertion is well supported by Kerry's
own speech at the DNC convention. 70+ words on
his 19 years in the Senate vs. 50+ minutes on
his 4 months in Vietnam. The math isn't that
hard on this one. Anyway, this is all beside
the point. Kerry is running on his Vietnam
record "to a great extent" (happy with that
phrasing?) and thus needs to fully release his
records if he wants to score points with them. |
| 2004/8/17 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32955 Activity:high |
8/17 Why the "Kerry is the most liberal senator" meme is bogus:
http://gadflyer.com/articles/?ArticleID=181
\_ The Daily Show when Jon took that congressman to task over
that line was in-fucking-credible.
\_ Thanks for that tip. Pretty amazing. For the other who
haven't seen it: http://csua.org/u/8n0
\_ I'd be interested in taking this guy to task for this line:
"Is Kerry a liberal? You bet. He's pro-choice, against Bush's tax
cuts, for environmental protection, and for universal health
care, to name a few issues. Of course, so are a majority of
Americans."
\_ "against Bush's tax cuts" might be stretching it.
against an increasing budget deficit is a lot more likely.
\_ Who, Kerry or a majority of Americans? Both seem to be opposed
to ultra-rich ppl getting tax breaks.
\_ Since it is very obvious Kerry does not support Bush's tax
cuts, of course I meant a majority of Americans. If the
question were, "against Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy",
you will probably find a majority. Without "for the
wealthy", you will find most Americans scratching their
heads.
\_ I think you'd be surprised. A majority of people polled
have not perceived a decrease in their tax burden.
\_ Part of the problem is, often the democrat definition
of "wealthy" is anyone who pays taxes.
\_ This is very interesting, but the article doesn't explain the
reasoning behind the National Journal policy of dropping a category if
the number of votes in the category are small.
\_ So? Go check the National Journal's website.
\_ He voted against modernization of every weapon's since. He
pro- homosexual marriage and military. On and on...
He's extremely liberal... but has been able to hide it so far. |
| 2004/8/17 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32954 Activity:high |
8/17 The smart money around the world say Kerry is in! It's over.
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/news/story.jsp?id=2004081710130002558479&dt=20040817101300&w=RTR&coview=
\_ Hey, it isn't over until Netcraft says Bush is "beleaguered"
\_ Well, it does show press outside the U.S. show a lot more
critical coverage of Bush -- and this is 100% true from my recent
stay in Canada. |
| 2004/8/17 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32950 Activity:high |
8/17 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/story/222931p-191456c.html Ex-Navy fighter pilot Sen. Tom Harkin ... was infuriated by the veep mocking Sen. John Kerry for saying he would fight a "more sensitive war on terror." ... "When I hear this coming from Dick Cheney, who was a coward, who would not serve during the Vietnam War, it makes my blood boil ... He'll be tough, but he'll be tough with someone else's kid's blood ... It just outrages me that someone who got five deferments during Vietnam and said he had 'other priorities' at that time would say that," said Harkin, an Iowa Democrat. \_ Yep. Where was your war hero Clinton during Vietnam? This whole Vietnam litmus test is a hypocritical joke and a scam. Why won't Kerry release his military records? It's what he's running on. \_ Missed the DNC? Bill came clean and admitted that he, Bush, and Cheney all dodged their duty. And Kerry's military records have been posted on his website. Move on, son, that horse is dead. \_ Yeah now that it no longer matters to his career. And no Kerry's *complete* records are not on his website. Only selected portions. \_ So what has not yet been released? \_ The records behind all his medals for starters. All his medical records. And frankly, we don't know exactly what else but it is known that they're not all released. If we knew exactly what was in every document then no one would ask for a full release, eh? \_ So, what are you saying? That Clinton was as bad as Bush and Cheney for dodging the draft? Granted! They were all utter cowards. John Kerry and John McCain are both worth more as human beings than the other three combined. Ready to vote for Kerry now? \_ "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." -Cheney (August 2002) \_ Oh yeah, Nicaragua Harkin. A Communist dupe coming to the aid of another Communist dupe and general dork. |
| 2004/8/17 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32948 Activity:high |
8/17 LA times article written today on the swift boat controversy.
Covers the purple hearts, the medals, the rescue, the commercial,
Cambodia, the players.
http://csua.org/u/8mi
\_ I like the vague criticisms of the swifties. Nice.
\_ LAT? Should I bother reading it? I can get similar opinion from
The People's Weekly World.
\_ The article is fair and balanced. A consequence is it doesn't
come to any definite conclusions.
(You should also come off your obvious prejudice, where you
equate the LA Times with The People's Weekly World. It's like
saying: http://freerepublic.com? I can get a similar opinion from
The People's Weekly World.)
\_ You're debating an obviously inflammatory troll? Why bother?
\_ Then why doesn't the article mention that Elliot says that he
was misquoted by the Globe?
\_ "Then he issued a second affidavit standing by his first
sworn statement, saying he had been misquoted by the Globe."
\_ I have a better idea. Why don't you go to there sites and
read the accusations, which are all very well documented (e.g
photos, Congressional Records, FBI files). The question
remains, was Kerry in Cambodia with the CIA / SEALs or not?
\_ "there sites"? What do you mean?
The written evidence just shows that Kerry was not in Cambodia
on Christmas Day. Kerry also acknowledges this mistake.
As for whether he was *ever* in Cambodia, don't you think
conservatives would have loved to publish some hard facts
showing he was never there? They aren't able to, but they
can show he wasn't there on Christmas Day, which they have. |
| 2004/8/16-17 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32936 Activity:insanely high |
8/16 Question for soda liberals regarding taxing inheritance.
The rationale, as I understand it, for taxing inheritance goes as
follows: "it is not fair that some talentless, unlikeable shmuck has it
easy in life because their parents were rich, while others, much
smarter, people have to work hard for everything and still perhaps not
be as wealthy in the end." Assume I agree with this. Let's consider a
related kind of unfairness. Some people are born more talented than
others. For programmers, being gifted can often translate into orders
of magnitude difference in performance. In some sense, this is as
unfair as being born into money -- it's a complete lottery that
occasionally rewards unscrupulous shmucks, etc. Would you support
tax-on-talent? Also, (as a purely theoretical add-on) assuming we had
the technology to do 'talent redistribution', would you support it on
the same grounds of fairness as income redistribution?
-- ilyas
\_ people who make money based on their talent get taxed on it.
what a stupid premise. -tom
\_ Sure but talent brings less tangible benefits -- the respect of
your peers, academic recognition, etc. Same with things like
attractiveness, having perfect pitch, etc. Perhaps same with
things like being a white male in american society.
Does a certain equalization not seem in order, on grounds of
fairness? -- ilyas
\_ look, I'm sorry you got stuck with that brain, but really
there's nothing that can be done about it. -tom
\_w00t! Go tom!
\_ [ ad hominem deleted ]
\_ you mean like all the promotions, respect and recognition
John Nash got? Talent alone desn't get you shit. I've
seen some pretty brilliant people basically waste away
because that's all they had. This is fundamentally different
from simply being born into the right family in that to
get rich from talent always requires some effort.
\_ Nash's was a sad story with a relatively happy ending.
\_ Tom's point is succinct and exact. Everything below it
is blather. Kill this thread now, because you have been
rebutted.
\_ I agree. One thing that can be added to the discussion
is the well-known American notion of the safety net, which
is supposed to provide hard-working individuals in
hard times with something to live by.
\_ fairness is just part of it. resources should be managed by more
capable and hardworking people. you don't want it to be like good
king passing throne to idiot lazy son. why do you keep asking
these very basic questions.
\_ They may be basic to you, but they are not basic to me. I will
ask about reasons other than fairness some other time. I am
interested in fairness today. I did hear fairness given as a
justification for income redistribution in general, and for
\_ wealth redistribution
inheritance tax in particular. Thus, I am curious how far this
commitment to fairness goes. -- ilyas
\_ Simply put, material things, yes. Innate qualities, no.
Also, harm to one person is only done to benefit another.
Making me blind will not help a blind person.
\_ Ok, but assume you were smart and another person was dumb,
and there was a way to 'suck your smart out' and give some
of it to the dumb person, so now both of you are 'average.'
Will you support that? Also you not being as dumb as the
other guy _is_ hurting him, since you can compete more
effectively for things he wants (jobs, mates, etc.) -- ilyas
\_ I *am* my intelligence. I am not my inheritance.
\_ ilyas just wants to lead dumb people into arguing with him by
creating arguments based upon false dichotomies.
\_ Oh boy, here we go again.
\_ IMO, this question should be written with less of a sense that op
is superior to potential responders, e.g.:
"Tax on inheritance (some people inherit money, some don't).
Tax on talent (some people inherit talent, some don't).
How can you support one and not the other?"
\_ Where did you get this from? I don't consider myself superior to
responders, otherwise I wouldn't try to debate. Debate has to be
between equals or it's not a debate but a lecture. -- ilyas
\_ Then why does it sound like a lecture, although it is
intended as debate? (rhetorical question)
\_ I am asking questions, not normally a part of a lecture.
Would you feel more at ease if I used broken english next
time like Chicom troll? -- ilyas
\_ Socratic method. It is a style which sounds like it
is coming out of a classroom, with you as the
instructor, does it not?
\_ You know, your short version is socratic by that
reasoning. Maybe you just don't like to read long
paragraphs. -- ilyas
\_ ilyas, please argue in good faith, that is,
recognize the merits of what other individuals
are pointing out to you. Be humble. Don't
sound like you know it all, especially on
something that's debatable. I know you're
talking to the liberals, but please try.
\_ Like one of tom's clever zingers above? -- ilyas
\_ His first post was fine. The part about the
brain, well, that WAS on a personal level.
\_ Right, so let's compare. What _could_
have been said: 'I believe unfairness
due to talent is remedied appropriately
by taxation, and no other remedy is
needed' and/or 'integrity of the self is
more important than fiscal fairness.'
Instead I get a bunch of personal shit.
Why are you lecturing ME about how _I_
sound. Go lecture tom and the liberal
goonsquad about arguing in good faith.
You can say what you will about how
I argue, but I at least try to stay
civil. -- ilyas
\_ I argue that anyone would get a
virulent response if they posted with
"question for soda liberals" with an
intention to compare inheritance taxes
with a talent tax. It makes us all
sound stupid, like we can't get the
obvious similarity between the two,
when in fact there is a substantive
difference.
\_ Right, why don't you channel your
concern for the quality of motd
posts into where it's needed most.
-- ilyas
hard times with something to live on.
\_ You mistake the argument. It's not that those inheriting are
unworthy, but successive generations can create a concentration of
money which is akin to inheriting political power. This is (or was)
inconsistant with American ideals. Isn't it better that the wealth
of individuals be based on their individual talents, acumen, luck,
and work ethic? Besides even with taxes, families are left far from
destitute. In addition, vast wealth is made on the backs of a stable
government and the goodwill of the public. Redistibuting that wealth
after the death of that recipient of public graciousness will
promote the betterment of Society in general, and, through our
government, offer a chance for other dynamic individuals to succeed
and advance our society as a whole. Talent, unlike income or wealth,
cannot be accurately measured or determined from one point of time
to another leading to a completely subjective scale. As a point of
taxation, it would be impossible to use as a measure, thus unfair.
\- this touches on some deep questions in political philosophy.
you may wish to look up "wilt chamberlain argument" and
read "anarchy state and utopia" and the article "the procedural
republic and the unencumbered self". my short version of the
"problem with inquity" is that people change the rules of the
game and in some cases equality seem more more desireable
than efficientcy ... it's is ok to pay the talented programmer
more, but should he be given a priority in a heart transplant?
--psb
\_ "Only if it's me or someone I know" is the problem answer.
\_ Vast wealth does not require a stable government or the good
will of the public. If it did then only peaceful democracies
would have rich people.
\_ This is a stupid (and fallacious) argument.
\_ That wasn't even a good dodge. Your reply is useless and
makes no counter point at all. If it was really so
stupid and fallacious you should be able to trivially
refute it in the space you used to descend to the personal.
\_ Alright, first thank you for a good reply. Second, let's look at
the situation using your argument. 'Talent' is clearly an
inherited thing, although its inherited through a less
deterministic mechanism than money, etc. Talent can also cause
you to make more money, possibly very quickly. Money can be
used as a way of obtaining political power. Does this not mean
that simple genetic inheritance of traits useful in modern
society is contrary to the American ideal of prohibiting the
inheritance of political power (although admittedly in a less
direct way than inheriting money). -- ilyas
\_ [your wish is my command]
\_ You are selectively taking one part of his argument
and hammering on that, while overlooking the rest.
Is there any precedent for taxing of intangable assets
like knowledge? Do you get taxed if you learn something
from reading a book?
\_ Dude, I am not even disagreeing with him. I just want to
know where he stands. If he thinks talent is against
American ideals, that's interesting. If he thinks
talent is different from money in this respect, that's
also interesting. Why is everything about violence with
you? Relax. We are having a nice chat. -- ilyas
\_ "I'm calmer than you are, Dude." Seriously, what's
your answer to my question, Mr. "I always debate
in good faith?" Taxation of inheritence is an obvious
extension of taxation of other forms of income. What
would be an analog to taxation of talent? What is an
example when some similar intangible asset is taxed?
\_ As stated, talent may or may not be inherited and may or may
be a learned trait. However, the American ideal does not
FORCE inheritants to follow in the steps of their parents.
Not all of the talented have the desire, will, luck, or work
ethic to find monetary or political success using their
talents. This make it a fallacy to tax talent before some form
of success and assumes that even a successful use of talent
automatically leads to monetary success. Taxation of assumed
talent leads to a tyranny of those who "judge" and makes
sons and daughters slaves to their parents' legacy. This
belies the judgement of individuals on their own merits, while
not always socially possible, but held as an American ideal.
\_ it's easy to put a price tag on an inherited house; it's harder
to put a price tag on talent. Sometimes the value of "talent"
is negative -- e.g. if you accept that "talent" is correlated
with a higher risk of suicide. Would Alan Turing owe money
to the government, or does he deserve a refund? -- misha.
\_ I am not sure the value of Turing's talent is negative... and
he surely didn't end up like he did because he was talented, but
because he was gay (and the UK gvt were assmonkeys). It's true
that it's hard to put a value on
talent, but let's say we could, and let's say its usually
positive (both big assumptions). -- ilyas
\_ I do not agree with your assumptions. I do not see how
you can defend any specific tax amount -- e.g. in Turing's
case. -- misha.
\_ You may have noticed that this isn't an entirely practical
question to begin with. I am curious about an underlying
moral commitment, so I am asking about a non-real situation
where we _had_ a way to accurately determine value. If
you don't like that setup, how about sticking a big alarm
in smart people's ear, and weights on graceful people's
legs, like in that Kurt Vonnegut story, so we get a level
playing field? I am curious, ultimately, about where the
quest for a level playing field ends, and boundaries
(be they for property, integrity of the self, etc.) begin.
-- ilyas
\_ I would argue that many in the far left ARE in
favor of an inherited talent tax, although they
wouldn't put it that way. How much education your
parents had is taken into account in Affirmitive
action stuff, since it's true statistically that
people who's parents are educated will tend to be
educated themselves.
\_ That seems grossly unfair. My family makes sure
to send all their kids to the best schools they
can no matter how much it hurts the rest of the
family so it seems only right to take race into
account when deciding things like FA.
\_ Assuming a perfect method of measuring talent, there
should be no way of forcing individuals to exploit that
talent against their will. Comparing money to talent as
a concept is flawed. It's force vs. potential energy.
The waste of talent, while tragic, is not enough to
destroy an individual's rights. Vonnegut takes the
wrong extreme POV. Instead of disadvantaging the
talented, society should aid the disadvantaged.
\_ Liberals are in favor of inheritance tax as long as they don't
have to pay it. For example: Ted Kennedy. |
| 2004/8/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32935 Activity:nil 66%like:32920 |
8/16 Why is the bananasplit troll so persistent?
\_ 3 wounds and you get to go home, Kerry got 3 purple hearts
for 3 scratches and got to go home, but also made himself
and video taped himself to appear like Kennedy in
his reenactments of his wounds. Also, Xmas in Cambodia
depends on your definition of "seered"
\_ If you were in Vietnam and realized that the war was a mistake
(after the burning villages, the carpet bombing, the fact
that four times as many civilians were dying as enemy soldiers,
etc.), you'd be happy to get three scratches for three purple
hearts.
You'd still do your job right while you were there, and when
you left, even after four short months, you wouldn't be a coward.
As for Christmas in Cambodia, his people said he got the date
wrong.
\_ Stop with the "four short months". He did two tours.
\_ While the four months were relatively short, he did his
job, and lucked out with three scratches for three purple
hearts. If I were one of those guys, I'd be happy.
\_ if the dumb fuck doesnt know when Xmas is, then he
shouldn't be our president
\_ Troll. He never said he didn't know when Christmas was, he
said he didn't know what day it happened.
\_ it was "seered" in his mind that it was Xmas
\_ it was a "life changing" moment in his life, so much
so that he talked about it in front of Congress
so much so that he doesn't know what day xmas is?
\_ I believe it is an exaggerated war story. His people have
since said he was near Cambodia during Christmas, and in
Cambodia in January. In his mind, he thought, what the hey,
I was doing the missions, I was in Cambodia under fire from
both sides, and it makes a better story to say Christmas.
\_ That's fine if you're telling it to your grandkids.
But don't you think telling it to congress under
oath is kinda dumb?
\_ Only if you were testifying on precise dates of when
U.S. soldiers were in Cambodia.
\_ So lying is ok as long as you weren't asked a
direct question on the subject? Okie Dokie!
\_ I don't think this is lying, just as much as
people say GW Bush is a liar. Kerry was
mistaken, and at worst, exaggerated -- lying
is something else. Bush was mistaken, and
at worst, misled the American people.
\_ Getting an unimportant detail (the exact date)
wrong does not make you a liar. It may make you
sloppy or forgetful, but not a liar.
\_ Come on guys, you know you're just
blowing smoke now.
\_ No, actually, I believe he helped the CIA,
including a drop-off/pick-up in Cambodia.
The only question is Christmas, and we've
already established he wasn't there then.
\_ I have nothing against people trying to get out of
'nam. Just don't act like some kind of hero because of
it.
\_ He drove his split into enemy fire and personally
pulled aboard a fellow soldier while exposed.
\_ It still hasn't been documented he even went to
Cambodia.
\_ Hell, we still say we never had ANY troops in cambodia.
\_ That's patently false.
\_ I don't have a problem with Kerry using the 3-purple-heart
rule. I think there are some legitimate questions about it
that haven't been answered, and I get irritated that most of
the responses are to (1) label it as a troll and dismiss it,
or (2) use a strawman argument. -emarkp
\_ The first time it was posted, it was interesting. I'll even
grant a second and a third time. However, the repeated
posting of a topic without any new information simply for
the purposes of encouraging people to yell at one another
is textbook trolling.
\_ no no no. you don't understand. when emarkp decides
that 3/4's of the motd is "noise" and increases
SNR by deleting all of it he's being a responsible
citizen. When someone outside of the motd brownshirt
brigade gets tired of reading the *same* fucking
thing every day for three weeks we're being closed
minded. get it straight.
\_ And there's the predictable anonymous strawman
argument. Thanks for the example. -emarkp
\_ i keep posting it to show how vicious and vile the
extreme right can be, sorry
\_ Why do you hate America?
\_ It isn't extreme if it's true.
\_ Because they ask a lot of unanswered questions. Censoring them
won't make the questions go away. It only makes it look like
Kerry has a critical weakness you're trying to hide. I assume
you're the one who censors it given your comment. I've never posted
a bananasplit link and haven't seen that many. I think you spend too
much time on this.
\_ when did you stop beating your wife?
\_ I think you meant to ask the OP this.
\_ Because work is boring.
\_ Vietnam vets were spit on, called 'baby killers' and generally
villified for fighting in a war in which South Vietnam was
free until the North invaded again. Kerry LED the
appeaser crowd and effectively negotiated for the North
Vietnamese. He is a traitor, pure and simple. All of his
appeasement rhetoric was proven completely wrong and the
Vietnamese, veterans, and Cambodians paid the price for the
behavior he exemplified.
\_ The "vietnam veterans were spit on" urban legend really needs its
own snopes page. Its true that there were specific instances of
such abuse, but the general case is the opposite - most veterans
were welcomed home with open arms. This meme has perpetuated
itself rather well, probably because there are people on both
sides of the issue that stand to gain from grandstanding on it. |
| 2004/8/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32924 Activity:high 80%like:32918 |
8/16 Why does Kerry refuse to release his military records?
\_ Why doesn't Kerry sic the FBI on protestors?
\_ People always seem to be willing to discuss what Bush hasn't
released his records. I was just wondering why the same
standards don't apply to the war hero. Just because you don't
like the question doesn't mean it's a troll.
\_ that's stupid also. two idiocys don't cancel eachother out,
especially when one is posted less than once a week and the
other is posted more than once a day.
\_ Agreed. The swiftboat troll may hold the record for
persistence.
\_ With enough money and stupidity behind them, these
memes last forever.
\_ NPR reports radio ads on "black" stations calling Kerry
just another "rich, white man" and traced the money
back to...a rich, white Republican. You gotta love it.
I'd promote the Cynosure method of presidental election
if only we could strip the executive branch of any real
power....
\_ Yup, a rich white republican who has been active in
the black community for decades, attends a black
church every week for many years, etc. I'm sure you
are more in touch with them than he is.
\_ Of course is he. Democrats are always more
in tune with the poor black man than any
republican. |
| 2004/8/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32920 Activity:very high 66%like:32935 |
8/16 Why is the swiftboat troll so persistent?
\_ 3 wounds and you get to go home, Kerry got 3 purple hearts
for 3 scratches and got to go home, but also made himself
and video taped himself to appear like Kennedy in
his reenactments of his wounds. Also, Xmas in Cambodia
depends on your definition of "seered"
\_ If you were in Vietnam and realized that the war was a mistake
(after the burning villages, the carpet bombing, the fact
that four times as many civilians were dying as enemy soldiers,
etc.), you'd be happy to get three scratches for three purple
hearts.
You'd still do your job right while you were there, and when
you left, even after four short months, you wouldn't be a coward.
As for Christmas in Cambodia, his people said he got the date
wrong.
\_ Stop with the "four short months". He did two tours.
\_ if the dumb fuck doesnt know when Xmas is, then he
shouldn't be our president
\_ Troll. He never said he didn't know when Christmas was, he
said he didn't know what day it happened.
\_ it was "seered" in his mind that it was Xmas
\_ it was a "life changing" moment in his life, so much
so that he talked about it in front of Congress
so much so that he doesn't know what day xmas is?
\_ I believe it is an exaggerated war story. His people have
since said he was near Cambodia during Christmas, and in
Cambodia in January. In his mind, he thought, what the hey,
I was doing the missions, I was in Cambodia under fire from
both sides, and it makes a better story to say Christmas.
\_ That's fine if you're telling it to your grandkids.
But don't you think telling it to congress under
oath is kinda dumb?
\_ Only if you were testifying on precise dates of when
U.S. soldiers were in Cambodia.
\_ So lying is ok as long as you weren't asked a
direct question on the subject? Okie Dokie!
\_ I don't think this is lying, just as much as
people say GW Bush is a liar. Kerry was
mistaken, and at worst, exaggerated -- lying
is something else. Bush was mistaken, and
at worst, misled the American people.
\_ Getting an unimportant detail (the exact date)
wrong does not make you a liar. It may make you
sloppy or forgetful, but not a liar.
\_ I have nothing against people trying to get out of
'nam. Just don't act like some kind of hero because of
it.
\_ It still hasn't been documented he even went to
Cambodia.
\_ Hell, we still say we never had ANY troops in cambodia.
\_ I don't have a problem with Kerry using the 3-purple-heart
rule. I think there are some legitimate questions about it
that haven't been answered, and I get irritated that most of
the responses are to (1) label it as a troll and dismiss it,
or (2) use a strawman argument. -emarkp
\_ The first time it was posted, it was interesting. I'll even
grant a second and a third time. However, the repeated
posting of a topic without any new information simply for
the purposes of encouraging people to yell at one another
is textbook trolling.
\_ i keep posting it to show how vicious and vile the
extreme right can be, sorry
\_ Why do you hate America?
\_ It isn't extreme if it's true.
\_ Because they ask a lot of unanswered questions. Censoring them
won't make the questions go away. It only makes it look like
Kerry has a critical weakness you're trying to hide. I assume
you're the one who censors it given your comment. I've never posted
a swiftboat link and haven't seen that many. I think you spend too
much time on this.
\_ when did you stop beating your wife?
\_ I think you meant to ask the OP this.
\_ Because work is boring. |
| 2004/8/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32919 Activity:high |
8/15 Excellent! The motd has been stripped of anything interesting enough
to inspire more than a single reply. That leaves us all-clear to
really get it going! (2 points to Ulysses for the 'resume bombing'
comment because sometimes you gotta work with what ya got).
\_ There are two groups responsible for this: jive ass motherfucker
republicans who post exactly the *same* kerry/swiftboat troll
every fucking day, and five ass motherfucer republicans who
every fucking day, and five ass motherfucker republicans who
like to come in every morning at about 9 am pacific time and delete
everything they think is "noise," i.e. almost all politics and
most humor. After weeks and weeks of this eventually people
stop posting *or* reading since there'll be nothing interesting,
and if there is, it'll get deleted by a certain someone within
an hour.
\_ yermom is useful when stripped
\_ is it ecchang?
\_ w00t! It's all the republican's fault!
\_ *laugh* Anything bad: must be republican. Anything republican:
must be bad. I love you guys! BTW, where's the script that
tracks motd edits by political party? Does it check the voter
registration records in real time or just one per election
season? |
| 2004/8/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32912 Activity:high |
8/14 Watch O'Neill debate Kerry in 1971 on CSPAN right now.
Even back then Kerry was a very effective negotiator,
for the North Vietnamese.
http://www.cspan.org
\_ LBJ was wrong, Kerry was right.
\_ What was Kerry right about and LBJ wrong about?
\_ Prosecuting the Vietnam War.
\_ Thanks for the heads up. I got to see for myself Kerry predict that
there would *not* be a bloodbath if we pulled out of Vietnam.
O'Neill cited previous North Vietnamese actions as evidence that
there would be. History hasn't shown Kerry as very good at
prediction.
\_ Kerry, right again. There was no bloodbath caused by the
pullout, as Kerry indicated as more likely. The bloodbath
occurred during the war, from the carpet bombing. There were
political assassinations as Kerry predicted. There was also
widespread migration out of Vietnam - the refugees. The
dominoes also didn't fall, which was our original reason for
going to Vietnam.
\_umm, no. The pullout did result in a bloodbath. Try
try searching for "Fall of Saigon" and "bloodbath". If you
want to learn about some serious blood spilt after americans
left the area, add "cambodia" to your search.
\_ Thanks for reminding me about the 1 million Vietnamese soldiers
killed and the 4 million civilians. I forgot how many civilians
died in the war. |
| 2004/8/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32902 Activity:nil |
8/14 Yet more lies and distortions about Kerry in Vietnam.
Alston Never Served Under Kerry
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/002251.php
\_ Oh can't you can taste the irony? Too bad the original poster
can't.
\_ Sorry I'm not as smart as you, maybe you can explain
yourself. |
| 2004/8/13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32889 Activity:very high |
8/13 Just curious. I don't think this has ever been asked on the motd
before. Who have you voted for in the past and why? I'll start:
\_ It's kind of interesting to note who people voted for and
who's in power an election cycle afterwards. If America had
voted for Dukakis, we wouldn't have had Clinton. If we voted
for Bush Sr. or Dole instead of Clinton, we probably wouldn't
have had GWB.
\_ 1992: Perot, realized mistake later. Not voted since due to
overall disgust with available candidates, don't believe in the
lesser of two evils. I'd vote for Kerry's wife, though. -John
1988: random never heard of third party. Bush Sr, ex-cia chief or
Dukakis? Hardly.
1992: random never heard of third party. was going to vote Perot
until he claimed the cia was out to ruin his daughter's wedding.
1996: random never heard of third party. More Clinton or Dole, Mr.
"it's my turn!". Don't think so.
2000: Nutty Gore (who turned out to be even nuttier after) or the
coke head party boy? Nader.
\_ I know a guy who voted for the guy who lost all the way
back to the mid '60s. That's how I knew the 2000 election
was a fraud. He actually voted for W.
\_ Whoa. He voted Carter/Mondale/Dukakis/Bush/Dole?!
Now who's the nut?!!!!
\_ well, he voted for perot in '92 and at some point
he voted for Jesse Jackson, but you've got the rest
right.
\_ Just out of curiosity, what is it that makes Gore so nutty?
It sounds like you're just talking out your ass.
\_ What's the "never heard of" third party of which you speak?
\_ Nader is far nuttier than Gore. -tom
\_ I humbly suggest that is not saying much.
\_ Being nuttier than Gore is not saying much? You mean
Gore isn't nutty at all? Well, I basically agree with
that. -tom
\_ heh, I meant that Gore is pretty nutty, and saying
Nader is far nuttier isn't saying much because
they're all nuts at that point. Gore may be right,
but he sure is pretty nutty. I say he is nutty
based on two things: Gore is a robot; and when
he crashes, he crashes hard.
\_ Uhm, that's a really stupid basis to draw that
conclusion from. Maybe you should wait until
puberty before posting to motd or (god forbid)
voting.
\_ I don't think you understand the lack of
seriousness implied when comparing levels of
nuttiness. I'd still vote Gore in over Bush,
and I did, and I still think Gore is better
Presidential material.
\_ No, I understand it. I just think you're
nitwit.
\_ Wow! You still remember the names of failed candidates in the past?
\_ Don't worry, brother. Enemies of the party and other unpersons
will soon be forgotten. |
| 2004/8/13 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32888 Activity:very high |
8/13 Washington Post editorial: "Swift Boat Smears"
"... Mr. Kerry a coward and a liar. This smear is contradicted by Mr.
Kerry's crew mates, undercut by the previous statements of some of
those now making the charges and tainted by the chief source of its
funding: Republican activists dedicated to defeating Mr. Kerry in
November."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58315-2004Aug11.html
\_ Well lets see, he has stated he was in Cambodia dozens of times
throughout his career, further indicating he was on secret
CIA / Seal missions and fought the Khmer Rouge. Do you believe
him?
\_ Kerry's people have said he was probably mistaken and probably
wasn't there on Christmas Day, as much as it was "seared" into
him. As for the TV commercial, the Post lays waste to it.
\_ I reject your explanation outright. He has repeated this
story dozens of times, including on the Senate floor.
He has stated this was a 'transformative' moment that
defines who he is, repeatedly. Do you believe what he
has said DOZENS of times or don't you? Do you believe
he went into Cambodia on CIA/ SEAl missions?
\_ Just what explanation are you rejecting? I just posted
what Kerry's people have said: Kerry has said on the
record that he was not in Cambodia on Christmas Day. (This
is the more accurate description -- take out my earlier
"probably's".)
\_ Yeah, I think he dropped of CIA/SEALs into Cambodia.
We know that the US was doing this as part of Operation
Pheonix during the early part of 1969 and that swift
boats were sometimes used for the insertion. Why do
think that he did not? I don't think he fought the
Khmer Rouge, but it is a little hard to tell exactly
which un-uniformed guerilla army someone belongs to
when they are shooting at you from 500 yards away.
http://www.serendipity.li/cia/operation_phoenix.htm
\_ On a 50 foot PFC with twin diesels that one
\_ On a 50 foot PCF with twin diesels that one
could hear hundreds of yards away? Sorry
I don't think so.
Here's some background on Camb. incursions.
http://csua.org/u/8l9
\_ You've got your "background", and you've got
Operation Phoenix. Now what do you get?
(Also, assuming a loud boat, maybe that's why
Kerry says he was getting shot at by all sides
while on his CIA mission(s). I would want a
better boat if I were there, but you take what
the Army/Navy gives you. SNAFU.)
\_ obJawsReference
\_ Interesting story. It proves that you can get
lost and end up in Cambodia by mistake, at least.
The CIA doesn't always tell The State Dept
what they are up to, especially if they know
that State might not approve. How do *you*
think the CIA and SEALs did their Cambodia
insertions? Do you think the guys walked
all the way from Saigon or something?
\_ Not by 50' twin diesel craft where
the captain becomes lost.
\_ BUSH GOOD, KERRY BAD!
\_ He thinks that Kerry did not drop CIA/SEALs into
Cambodia, probably because Kerry admitted not being
in Cambodia on Christmas Day, the day he said he was
on the CIA mission.
\_ Obviously he got the day wrong. I already suggested
that he may have confused Tet with Christmas in
his mind. Perhaps you missed that.
\_ Well, Kerry did say he got the day wrong, but
he also said the memory had been seared into
his mind, and I don't recall him ever suggesting
himself the Tet/Christmas explanation.
\_ There are a number of events seared into my
memory, but I don't remember the date (or even
year) of all of them.
\_ Yeah, I have the memory of my first blowjob
seared into my mind, but I couldn't tell you
what day it was. I would have to think pretty
hard to tell you which year it was even.
\_ Both of the above are pretty silly. In
Kerry's story, the fact that it's
Christmas day is CENTRAL to the story.
It's kinda like if you couldn't
remember if your first blowjob was
done to your penis or your finger.
\_ CENTRAL to the story? That's arguable.
The more appropriate analogy is
remembering you lost your virginity
on your birthday or your SO's birthday,
which happened to be one month apart:
You know you "moored" your "boat" in the
"delta" and you "completed your mission"
on one of your birthdays (depositing
your "seamen" under the "moon") and
there were a lot of other "missions"
where you traveled "closer to the
target" before and after that. "Mission
accomplished", but for some reason your
wife is pissed you got the wrong
birthday, and she doesn't believe you
anymore when you said she was the first
girl you slept with.
\_ Bwahaha!
\_ The "undercut" statement is false if it refers to O'Neill. He was
defending Kerry in 1996 against a false statement, and mentioned it
in the May 4 press conference. Steve Gardner *was* a crewmate of
Kerry and is opposed to Kerry. Elliot has specifically made
chargest against Kerry which are not conflicted by his previous
statements.
\_ The editorial says nothing about O'Neill. The crew mates are
quoted in the article in support of Kerry's rescue of another
crew member. Gardner has not said anything disputing the rescue;
he has just said he thinks Kerry is an indecisive leader, putting
his crew members in jeopardy. You should quote what Elliot has
said that does not conflict with his previous statements. |
| 2004/8/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32876 Activity:very high |
8/12 JANUARY -- NOT CHRISTMAS -- KERRY IN CAMBODIA
http://drudgereport.com/dnc93.htm
\_ somewhat unrelated: was Jello Biafra's "Holiday in Cambodia"
song somehow related to this?
\_ unlikely.
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/d/dead-kennedys/38157.html
\_ OH NO HE'S TOTALLY UNFIT TO BE PRESIDENT
\_ True, all sarcasm aside.
\_ You'd prefer a "thoughtful and sensitive war" against the
terrorists, as Kerry has proposed?
\_ Thoughtful is a good thing in the conduct of a war.
Sensitive to our allies & potential allies, also a good
thing. Called "diplomacy". Saved more lives and won more
conflicts throughout history than all guns & bombs
combined. Remember your von Clausewitz? War is an extension
of politics by other means? Think about it. -John
\_ Diplomacy? Please enumerate the number of lives saved and
which conflicts were won through diplomacy throughout
history. Like how post-WWI and pre-WWII diplomacy
resulted in a lasting peace in our time with honor and
all that?
\_ cold "war". Lives saved: 5 billion
\_ Do you want me to post the quote from Bush saying the same
thing? --scotsman
\_ We've seen enough out of context quotes from you. No.
\_ Actually, it wouldn't be out of context, and really,
would you rather see out of context quotes from me on
wall or from Cheney in stump speeches? --scotsman
\_ I prefer to not see any more out of context rants
from you or anyone else on wall or motd or
anywhere else, thanks.
\_ why do you read the motd at all? - danh
\_ Because he likes having a venue for tossing
out baseless accusations without any
consequence. Go reiffin! --scotsman
\_ The motd is pseudo anonymous. Do you feel
big now? Has naming someone strengthened
your point in any way? If I cared about
it that much, I wouldn't post. Anyone who
cares can dig through the archives of either
the wall or motd for your previous quotes.
I don't care that much and I doubt anyone
else does either.
\_ Because sometimes there are interesting and
useful threads. The rantings and out of
context quotes are neither interesting nor
useful but they don't ruin the rest of it.
\_ <DEAD>www.reagan.navy.mil/bush_speech.htm<DEAD>
"Precisely because America is powerful, we must be
sensitive about expressing our power and influence.
Our goal is to patiently build the momentum of freedom,
not create resentment for America itself." -GW Bush
<SARCASM>
Clearly from reading George W. Bush's entire quote he
means building coalitions of the willing who recognize
that showing weakness will only aid terror. After
reading John Kerry's entire quote, when it comes to
differences between the Republican and Democratic
tickets on the Iraq war, Kerry's "more sensitive"
remark wraps it all up in a bow!
</SARCASM>
Why does it feel I'm writing Tom Tomorrow lines?
http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=17231
\_ Sarcasm? That wasn't sarcasm. That was you trying
to defend the undefendable Kerry again. Tell us
again how Kerry is somehow different from GWB? He
said only a few days ago that knowing what we know
now he would have invaded Iraq. The only difference
is he would have sent ~2.5x as many troops and they
would have been more 'sensitive'. And oh yeah, our
pseudo allies would have magically joined up and
freely given up the billions of dollars they were
making off Iraq just because John is a thoughtful,
nuanced and sensitive guy. Riiiiight.
\_ who are you voting for?
\_ Nader. Who'd you think? I'll write him in
if I have to.
\_ "I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful,
more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror
that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our
side." -John Kerry
Cheney is being disingenuous, to say the least. And then
here's his wife, Lynne Cheney:
"With all due respect to the senator, it just sounded so
foolish ... This is the kind of left-wing foolishness that
certainly isn't appropriate for someone who would seek to
be commander-in-chief."
\_ no. no. no. you can't apply context to right wing
talking point sound bites. now the thread will be
purged.
\_ The full quote says the same thing. Sensitive to
whom, Iran?
\_ Sensitive to our allies (not alienating them), and
not pulling on Iraqis' genitalia while in our jails.
\_ Well if its not clear to you why Russia, France
and China acted they way they did you are
naive or stupid, maybe both. Please name
an era in our's or anyone's history where a
"thoughtful and sensitive" foreign policy existed.
\_ Point 1: Powell's UN presentation was
pathetic. The "Intelligence Community's"
findings, which Powell presented, were clearly
not supported by the available intelligence,
as concluded by the 9/11 Commission. Powell's
presentation was treated coldly, and for
good reason! I strongly urge you to refrain
from labeling people naive or stupid
on this point, as it makes you look naive
and/or stupid.
Point 2: "Thoughtful and sensitive" is
Cheney's, or perhaps your quote. Don't
quote out of context, and even worse, DON'T
REARRANGE WORDS AND PUT DOUBLE QUOTES AROUND
THE REARRANGED PHRASE. Continuing on, the
entire, unmodified statement means what I
said it meant: sensitive to our allies
(not alienating them), and not damaging
our credibility by sexually abusing
those under our authority.
You should be very glad you are not signing
your name, since what you said would stick
with you in a lot of people's memories. -jctwu
\_ Please refer to the last five words of
the first sentence for reaffirmation.
\_ Point this, point that, whatever. Go back
and read the full quote. No matter how you
want to arrange the words, they still mean
the same thing. Stop defending the
undefendable and you'll be less stressed
out. Bush has fucked up a number of things
and that's unfortunate and he's not the
greatest President the country has had but
he's doing ok and he's doing a hell of a
lot better than a psycho like Gore or a
man with no vision like Kerry would do.
\_ You have several problems. Your
characterization ("stop defending the
undefendable") is inaccurate. You made
a mistake with the quote and you know it.
Finally, the last few posts by me
indicate that I have read the whole quote,
and it is clear to me it does not mean the
same as your three-word phrase which Kerry
never spoke, and in my opinion Cheney
and you wish to mislead with. I do
approve of your not signing your
name, and I say that without sarcasm.
\_ This is now he-said, she-said. There
was no 'mistake' made with Kerry's
quote. He's a flip flopping weakling
with no vision. I think it's terribly
funny that one anonymous person would
insult another anonymous person for
being anonymous. I don't care at all
either way usually but since you
brought it up.... And I say that
without sarcasm. Hah!
\_ Yup Kerry is a weakling like all
the others who VOLUNTEERED to go
to Vietnam. Real men, like Bush,
Cheney and Clinton made sure they
didn't have to go serve there.
And Bush doesn't have any
"flip-flops", unless it's about
gay marriage, or Department of
Homeland Security, or nation
building, or the assualt weapons
ban, or steel tariffs, or tax
credits for hybrid cars, or
creation of the 9/11 commission ...
Bush is guaranteed to stick to his
ideologically driven positions
unless reality forces him to change
his position.
\_ Heh, ok let's go with your line
line. Both men are either flip
floppers or have nuance. Which
term do you prefer? Since you
won't accept Bush having any
nuance and they both change
positions, they must both be
flip floppers. Yet, wait, you
say Kerry isn't a flip flopper.
He has nuance. I'm confused!
hehe.
\_ but only one has low IQ.
hehe. |
| 2004/8/12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32864 Activity:nil 70%like:32845 |
8/12 Hard fact is, Kerry froze up during the Cold War
<DEAD>www.tardrepublic.com/focus/f-news/1189962/posts<DEAD>
\_ Um, being against deficit spending is not dumb. And Reagan ==
Iran-Contra. And well, Dubya ain't no Reagan.
\_ So ceding central america to the Soviets was a good idea? The
Soviets were pouring hundrends of millions into Nicaragua.
Why don't you condemn Carter in Afghanistan? |
| 2004/8/12 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32854 Activity:very high |
8/12 For those trying to get to the bottom of the Swift Boat Vets vs. John
Kerry issue, here's a good link which collects some info:
http://centerfeud.blogs.com/centerfeud/2004/05/kerry_dissed_by.html
The May 4 2004 press conference of the veterans is here (Real format):
rtsp://video.c-span.org/project/c04/c04050404_antikerry.rm
\_ Here's also Kerry's 1971 testimony:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/02/20/1535232
If you ask me, this is what's happened:
#1: They're pissed that John came down on the hippie, flower-power
side when they're the ones volunteering their lives for their
side when they were the ones volunteering their lives for their
country.
\_ He did alot more than just come down on the hippie side. He
was effectively allied with the Vietcong, fighting domestically.
\_ Hehahhahahhahahhahhahahhahahahhahhahhahahahahahhahaha.
Oh wow. Thanks for the laugh. That was a good one.
Next you'll be accusing him of appearing at rallies alongside
Jane Fonda.
\_ Haven't you heard of the secret meetings with the Gen.
Giap where he promised the other side better negotiating
terms if they would hold out on signing a peace treaty
until after he was elected president???
#2: The hippie, flower-power side is right, insofar as what Kerry
said in his speech. (I doubt they can deny the substance of what
he said -- if they really read major parts of the testimony, instead
of isolated quotes.)
#3: Kerry genuinely laid blame on the Administration rather than
the soldiers.
#4: Kerry wishes he could have made this distinction clearer,
perhaps by talking more about the soldier's plight -- it's not
a soldier's place to question where their President sends them --
and regrets missing the chance back then.
#5: The talk about Kerry wavering in combat is garbage. This is
just stuff made up to justify point #1, and just not liking the man
because of it. Most of his crewmembers support him, and that's
what says it all as far as combat.
Here's your homework: Quotes from the swift vets for truth
http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/index.php?topic=SwiftVetQuotes
Compare to Kerry's 1971 testimony from the previous URL. Judge
for yourself.
\_ Nice effort, but it will go ignored. The only people that
care about these Swift Boat turds are some Freeper nuts on the
Internet, and they won't listen to a word you're saying.
\_ it was a weak effort. i'll reply later. its lunch time now.
\_ You're right. People will make their choice between
re-electing president McCain and Kerry based on their
*merrits* not on the basis of some rightwing smear
campaign...Oh, wait a minute...There *is* no President
McCain because those fuckers' tactics actually work.
\_ no, McCain had my vote until he turned into a big crybaby
during the primaries. i don't want some unstable whack
job as president. if ya can't take the heat during a
primary, you're not fit for command.
\_ I didn't ask you. I just posted the link. I think your #'d
items are assertions without basis. |
| 2004/8/12 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32845 Activity:nil 70%like:32864 |
8/11 Hard fact is, Kerry froze up during the Cold War
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1189962/posts
Kerry's senate record critiqued. |
| 2004/8/11 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32837 Activity:high |
8/11 Looks like that Swift Boat slander is working real well for
you guys. Keep it up, please. I am serious:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm
\_ I'm not interested in slander. I think Kerry's
post-Vietnam activies deserve publicity and vetting.
\_ Cool! So let's open the book on Bush's war non-record
and concealment of same non-record, and his use of
controlled substances.
\_ I agree. I think the race should mostly be about this,
but the Republicans have bizarrely fallen for the bait
Kerry provided for them at the convention...
\_ So you approve of Kerry and VVAW meeting with the
Vietcong and NVA in Paris? This might be
equivalent to today Michael Moore going to meet
Osama Bin Laden to negotiate terms of a truce.
\_ Not really, but didn't Nixon do the same thing
with Kissinger? And Micheal Moore doesn't have
the authority to negotiate a truce, anymore than
the VVAW did. |
| 2004/8/11 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32836 Activity:high |
8/11 so were ANY of the swift boat vet guys actually serving
on the same boat, as kerry, AT THE SAME TIME? I saw
some of them sliming away on the 700 club yesterday,
and one of them claimed to actually have served with
kerry, at the same time, on the same boat, and i'm
not sure if i believe him. - danh
\_ One was, several others were on different boats in the
same engagement.
same engagements.
\_ Steve Gardner served under Kerry, and never got along with him.
The rest of Kerry's crewmembers support him.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp
\_ 7 of them were members of Kerry's 6 man crew at various
times. I don't think this set consists of all those
who served under Kerry. Kerry's entire chain of
command is with the Swiftvets and only one of 23
other officers there supports Kerry.
\_here's some words from a guy in the chain of command:
March 2, 1970 evaluation from Admiral Walter F. Schlech:
... one of the finest young officers with whom I have
served in a long naval career.
\_ "Only 2 of John Kerry's 23 fellow Swift boat commanders
from Coastal Division 11 support his candidacy today."
2 support him, 15 oppose, 4 are neutral, 2 are dead.
As for higher-ups, there is an admiral who definitely doesn't
like him.
\_ Bush and Cheney were much more heroic in Vietnam,
of course. And who gives a crap what his fellow
commanders think?
\_ Well, Bush hasn't made his national guard service a
central plank in his campaign, whereas Kerry is making
\_ and he would like a moron if he did so - danh
a big deal out of his having served.
\_ It is a big deal -- Remember Clinton the draft
dodger? Clinton avoided going to, and that was
a strike against him.
\_ Then only 1 out of 7 members of Kerry's crew oppose his
candidacy?
\_ We've seen a lot of quotes from Swift Boat Veterans For The Truth.
For balance, let's have one supporting Kerry. You may understand
why those who served under him support him:
"I can still see him now, standing in the doorway of the
pilothouse, firing his M-16, shouting orders through the smoke and
chaos ... Even wounded, or confronting sights no man should ever
have to see, he never lost his cool. I had to sit on my hands
[after a firefight], I was shaking so hard ... He went to every man
on that boat and put his arm around them and asked them how they're
doing. I've never had an officer do that before or since. That's
the mettle of the man, John Kerry." -- David Alston |
| 2004/8/11 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32832 Activity:high |
8/11 Kerry states he was in Cambodia multiple times, and compares
himself to Martin Sheen in Apocalypse Now. Nevermind
Kerry's swift boat was 50' long.
http://instapundit.com/archives/017129.php
\_ Why do you read Instapundit? The guy has been so wrong so
many times and he never admits or corrects his mistakes.
\_ http://www.falloutshelternews.com/BushHitlerLinks.html
\_ Hitler? Ok.
\_ Tet 1969 would actually fit his story perfectly. We started
bombing Cambodia in March 1969, I am sure we sent in some
guys undercover to do recon just before that. Did Nixon
make some speech like that during Tet?
\_ Tet was Jan of 1968.
\_ Tet is every year. It is a Vietnamese holiday similar
to Christmas or Chinese New Year.
\_ Oh, a wiseguy, eh?
\_ I am just telling you the truth. You can't handle
the truth! |
| 2004/8/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32818 Activity:insanely high |
8/10 Another Wash-Post quote by Kerry about being in
Cambodia as a CIA agent. WTF!??
http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59559-2003May30?language=printer
\_ Your reading comprehension skills must be rather paltry. His
swift boat was responsible for taking agents and special forces
upriver to drop them off. The quote says nothing about him being
in CIA.
\_ "It was no accident that I got to be the caretaker of
Colonel Walter E. Kurtz's memory - any more than being
back in Saigon was an accident. There is no way to tell
his story without telling my own. And if his story
really is a confession, then so is mine."
\_ Except his patrol area was Sa Dec, 50 miles from the border.
\_ CIA mission led them furthest inland, they weren't sure
where they were. Here you go:
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200408101318.asp
If anything Kerry is guilty of boasting over a "secret mission
to Cambodia", where he probably did the drop off closer to
the border than other boats had.
\_ The part about not 'knowing where you are' is
bullshit. I have personally navigated sea craft
from charts, its not hard. If a commander or navigator
of a boat doesn't where he is he should be reprimanded.
Not to mention you don't randomly drop of CIA agents
if you don't know your location.
\_ You're right, he probably did know where he was:
Closer to the border than any other boat had been that
night, not in Cambodia, but it sure made a good story
to say "close enough!" and say he was, and then blame
Nixon for it (although he wasn't President at the time).
In any case, his buddy just wanted to back him up.
\_ Have you personally navigated seacraft in tricky
inland waterways at night, in the jungle, under
blackout condition? I kind of doubt it. The idea
blackout conditions? I kind of doubt it. The idea
that he was at least a bit lost is not outlandish.
And I can tell you from personal experience in the
Airborne, the military drops people miles off target
routinely. -ausman
\_ Were not talking about dropping someone from
an airplane. Navigating a boat is significantly
different. You are telling me they were lost
in the middle of the night and just decided
to willy-nilly continue in any arbitrary direction?
The riverways were heavily mined, it just doesn't
make any sense.
Just like the Bhuddist Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge
Cambodians were celebrating Christmas.
Face it - Kerry is lying.
\_ It was fun watching your "fact" about the Khmer
Rouge change.
\_ So you believe he engaged the Khmer Rouge?
\_ If anything it is easier to figure your
position in the air than in the jungle. I spent
three weeks in the Panamanain jungle and my unit
was pretty much lost the whole time. They don't
call them SNAFUs for nothing. Kerry might or
might not be lying, but I wouldn't be so
confident about it just yet.
\_ wow i might actually read a url from the wash post - danh
\_ DAMN THAT LIBERAL MEDIA!
\_ Why does he keep on bragging about his war record when he said he's
anti-war? Trying to be a two-headed snake and please both sides?
\_ What's anti-war about him saying he stands by his vote for
authorizing force, and he would have had a plan to win the peace?
\_ He is proud of his military service and record. he also came to
believe the war itself was a bad idea (disagreed with top-level
leadership). In the same way, we can support and respect our
troops currently fighting in Iraq even if we disagree with the
leadership that managed them and got them there.
\_ Who are you going to believe, Patriotic Matt Drudge or the
liberal media???
lying liberal media??? |
| 2004/8/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32811 Activity:nil |
8/10 All of the mailing lists I am on have degenerated into
50 Kerry guys boiling in outrage over the latest Bush
atrocity vs that one Bush guy who uses mighty rhetorical
devices like "It was in the NY Times, the paper of
record! It must be true!", well except for that one
Nader guy who needs to be sent to the Negative Zone.
I can't wait until November when Bush wins and ushers
in 3000 years of darkness so my mailing list traffic
dies down. - danh
\_ Maybe you're on the wrong mailing lists. It sounds like you got
exactly like what you signed up for.... |
| 2004/8/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32802 Activity:very high |
8/9 Kerry's 'Christmas in Cambodia'
http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040809-090612-9480r.htm
Does Kerry have any credibility left at all. He has
now perpetuated this lie for years.
\_ Fuck you!
\_ Why bother posting?
\_ As aaron would say, all this talk of Kerry being a lizard is all
well and good, but it's much more important to get that other lizard
out of office.
\_ So Kerry can what - cede the US to the U.N.???
\_ Straw Man arguments are not very convincing.
\_ Then stop using them against GWB. It's boring and a
waste of precious motd bits.
\_ No motd bit is precious.
\_ Exactly. So stop it.
\_ So he can institute a communist, gay, atheist state and
provide free abortions for illegal immigrants as part of
the welfare bureaucracy which will take away your guns.
\_ Don't forget a maximum wage! -- liberal #1 fan
\_ what is wrong with being atheist state?
\_ what is wrong with allowing people to practice their
non-violent religion? --atheist
\_ Yes, it is unfortunate if true. I think everyone who has been in
the military inflates their accomoplishments a bit, but this was
the basis of some of his anti-war claims. It is still a tempest
in a teapot. But worse for him, imho, than the idiotic Swift Boat
smear campaign.
\_ That's bullshit. My grandfather served in WWII. In infantry
reconnaissance in Red Army. You know, the guys who crawled
reconnaissance in the Red Army. You know, the guys who crawled
around in small teams on the frontlines and captured German
'tongues.' When I was a kid I would always ask him for war
stories and so on, and he never said anything. I never
understood why until much later.. -- ilyas
\_ In soviet russia, war criminal becomes you!
\_ This is very similar to why my father finds Kerry
creepy. Normal people don't like to talk about their
experiances in war, Kerry brags about it constantly.
\_ no he doesn't
\_ yes he does
\_ Silly. It is the entire basis of his run for office.
He spent 19 years in the Senate and spent 73 words over
a 55 minute speech. Most of the rest was about his
stay in Vietnam which was only slightly longer than
his speech.
\_ I know several Vietnam vets. I didn't even know most of
them were there until I knew each one for a few years and
even then they barely mentioned it and sure as hell didn't
tell me any war stories. All of them fought and not for
Kerry's *four months* of bullshit. Kerry is just creepy.
The fact that he signed up and took footage and did all
the rest 30 years previous in a planned effort to become
President later is just freaky and wrong.
\_ Kerry's "four months" was his _SECOND_ tour in Vietnam.
\_ Huh? So how long was he in 'nam total? Link?
\_ According to the Navy, 16 months.
\_ That's right. His first term was sitting on a missile
frigate far from any action. Playing cards all day
takes a toll on a man.
\_ Have you ever played bridge with the devil in
the pale moonlight?
\_ This, from Yahoo News, was posted on 2/17:
(http://csua.org/u/61g but the link expired)
"Others call Kerry's protest activities the reflection of a
man so ambitious for a career in politics that he
consciously held on to his own medals, now displayed in his
Washington office. During the protest at the Capitol,
Kerry, then 27, threw the medals of two other servicemen,
along with his own ribbons."
\_ Better than a man ambitious for a career in keggers
and blow.
\_ I wonder how those two other servicemen feel today.
\_ My grandfather was also in WW II, despite being in his
40s. He was Jewish and escaped from a concentration camp.
He lived in hiding until the war ended. He rarely mentioned
anything about it. Even his wife didn't really know what
happened in all that time, except that he escaped and
spent some time blowing up railways. All he ever told
me when I asked him is: "You don't know anything about
war" while brushing me aside. My girlfriend's entire
family is military and served (as officers) in Vietnam
and they don't talk much about it either. This seems
typical to me. --dim
\_ My grandparents and several aunts and uncles lived through
the Japanese occupation during WWII. Never heard any of
them say anything about those years.
\_ Is story this in the NYT? No. The WP? No. The LAT? No. Is it
in any serious paper? No. Any serious media? No. Obviously
this is not a serious story.
\_ Uh oh, it's mr. i-hate-moonies guy. Go away, troll.
\_ he does have a good point. and moonies still suck. - danh
\_ no he just has a personal bias which you share and are
confusing with a good point in order to completely dismiss
a source of information that sometimes contradicts your
political agenda. it is always easier to dismiss for
personal reasons rather than respond to a contrary
viewpoint. I thought better of you.
\_ The Washington Times is trash, less factually accurate
than the Drudge Report. If you refuse to admit that
to yourself, you will end up with a head full of lies.
\_ Yes, yes, mr. anti-moonie has been trolling here for
years. I keep asking for something other than the
ownership records to back up this claim but I've
given up. The anti-WT crowd had their chance to
come up with something, anything, for the last few
years and has 100% consistently failed to do so.
I will be trolled no longer.
\_ If you can't be bothered to type Washington
Times media watchdog into google, then there
is probably no hope for you, but here goes:
http://www.fact-index.com/t/th/the_washington_times.html
http://www.dailyhowler.com/h120899_2.shtml
http://www.fair.org/media-outlets/washington-times.html
They *routinely* run editorials on the front
page, disguised as "journalism." They are
as bad as Salon. |
| 2004/8/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32792 Activity:high |
8/9 All right, all right, Mr. Kerry. You are young. We get the picture.
http://csua.org/u/8j1 (Yahoo News, Kerry balancing on train tracks)
\_ I think that if athleticism were all you wanted from a president,
you'd be pretty happy with both choices in this election.
\_ I think the goal is to find pictures that make Mr. Kerry look
silly.
\_ So how does this make Kerry look silly?
\_ It's too obvious what he's trying to achieve with this
pose. He should instead arrange something more subtle like
being caught unexpectedly by reporters while jogging. --OP
\_ First, you must assume the mindset of a freeper, as
illustrated by op above.
\_ the photo shows him talking to two park rangers
\_ click next (i believe that's what OP was referring to)
\_ All right, all right, Dubya. We know you couldn't find WMDs in the
lake, either.
http://csua.org/u/8j2 (Yahoo News, the President fishing) |
| 2004/8/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32784 Activity:nil |
8/9 So the motd censors couldn't allow a single attempt at non-partisan
political discussion? It's sad really.
\_ Nah, I don't think it was censors, I think it wasn't very active
and didn't really cover much new ground. *shrug*
\_ do you mean that drudge crap?
\_ No. The one that started "in an effort to rise above the
partisan bickering".
\_ I liked that post, but it's kinda old already.
\_ It wasn't even 24 hours old. -op for other thread.
\_ It was pretty stale -- not much activity.
\_ what drudge crap? the one where druge busts the boston globe
on their lies about who wrote the kerry book, that guy who
misquoted the anti-kerry vet? |
| 2004/8/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32776 Activity:high |
8/9 Poignant critique of John Kerry:
http://www.rmf.net/cockburn07312004.html
-- liberal dem
\_ Radical muckracking critique is more like it. It makes charges
without giving evidence. Look, I'm sorry that Ralph doesn't have
a chance in hell of winning the election, but trashing Kerry as a
Bush clone serves no one's interests but Bush.
\_ This is what Cockburn does. A certain class of leftist thinks
he's the shit. I guess it's useful to have somebody keeping
tabs on the minutiae of people's leftist cred and that's about
the nicest thing I can think of to say about him. -- ulysses
\_ Which points do you feel are unfair?
- Appointing antiabortion judges
\_ urlP
\_ #t
\_ Bitch type in "Appointing antiabortion judges" in google.
and hit "I'm feeling lucky"
- More cops => increasing the war on drugs
- Stay in Iraq longer, more troops
\_ I thought he announced today or yesterday that as President he
would set a hard deadline to get out of Iraq?
- Environment "drill everywhere else like never before"
\_ urlP
\_ #t
\_ http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/2/25/125814.shtml
I have issues with the complaints of:
- Attacking the deficit instead of focusing on job recovery
- Raising minimum wage to "only" $7/hr by 2007
- Reconstruction of worldwide alliances
\_ Doesn't this just mean bribing everyone with even more tax
payer dollars?
\_ No it means saying "France, je t'aime"
\_ What's w/ this urlP bullshit? Cockburn isn't that sloppy of a
journalist, he doesn't just put shit in quotes randomly (he didn't
quote the source, which he probably should have). You can disagree
w/ his arrogance or style, but I'd like to see some URLs countering
what he has to say. I hate you liberal bush-haters. --liberal
\_ Fuck you, bush-fellater.
\_ Methinks the lady doth protest too much. |
| 2004/8/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32774 Activity:very high |
8/9 Since you morons thought it was so shocking that Kerry was holding
up an ear of corn while campaigning in Iowa, here's a picture of
your candidate holding up an ear of corn:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/09/politics/campaign/09letter.html
\_ But that makes sense. It doesn't for Kerry. And why you'd
want to compare your guy to the other guy like that baffles me.
\_ Um... why? Because Bush is cornier?
\_ Because the closet Kerry has ever been to uncooked corn
off the campaign trail is at 30k feet flying over it.
\_ And Bush had a cob broken off in his ass during his
Skull and Bones years. So what?
\_ Well, I'm given to understand the pretzel he choked on
had some corn oil in it, so that counts too, right?
\_ Hey! Sharp reply! With wit like that you are sure to
convince people and rally them to your guy!
\_ Reread this whole thread, brainiac. You're both
coming off as idiots.
\_ I did. And? Thanks for joining us this morning.
\_ Kerry once shot a vietnamese kid for running w/ a husk of corn
\_ If only it had been you.
\_ Another winning zinger! You're on a roll today!
\_ Wait, you're attacking witty zingers and not utter
nonsense posts? Get some perspective.
\_ It wasn't witty. You think "I wish you had been shot"
is a witty zinger?
\_ Bush killed millions waging an unjust war for oil.
\_ Millions? You're a nut or a bad troll. There were fewer
people killed from day 1 to now than Hussein was killing
of his own people every 3 months.
\_ By your stated rate, Iraq would have been unpeopled
by now.
\_ you're really in college?
\_ some people here never made it through. i think
it's funny that he ignores what i said, make me
say something i didn't say, and then tries to make
me look stupid for having said what i didn't say.
very weak. he should be ashmed but he isn't smart
enough to understand that.
\_ 50k people a year... post your source.
\_ Post your source for 50k people killed as a
result of the invasion.
\_ ~12k killed in the invasion.
http://iraqbodycount.net
\_ 12k != 50k. Where are your other 38k?
\_ Dude, reread what was posted above.
The claim is Hussein was matching
our body count every 3 months.
\_ Where's your other 38k? Where are
the 'millions dead' that was the
original numeric claim on this
thread?
\_ Bush and Cheney, especially Cheney,
is no better than Hitler. Cheney
will not hestitate to kill millions
if it means he will gain moneyfrom
it!
\_ Way to pull stuff out of your ass.
\_ Post your source for 'millions dead' in Iraq. |
| 2004/8/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32769 Activity:insanely high |
8/8 So in an effort to rise above the partisan bickering, let me ask a
serious question: what do you really believe Kerry has to offer?
I'm interested in any answer other than !GWB
\_ For me personally, the most important issues are addressed
in this document:
http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/technology/plan.html
In particular, the current visa system for foreign scientists
is in a *crisis* state, and seriously threatens America's
dominance in the sciences. I've never heard Bush even mention
this. Letting the good guys in is actually more important
for longterm security than keeping the bad guys out. Also,
I think Kerry will be much more agressive about investing in
new technologies that will lead to cleaner energy and a generally
higher standard of living around the world. yes, i do give Bush
credit for the hydrogen power initiative. I think it's one of
the few really great things bush has done, but I think a Kerry
administration would do a lot more in that direction.
There are many other reasons I'm voting for Kerry, but i have
a feeling you would classify most of them as "!GWB" type
reasons.
\_ While I disagree re "good guys in is actually more important for
longterm security than keeping the bad guys out", thanks for the
reasonable response. That's also part of his platform that I
hadn't seen. -op
\_ For me it's 2 things: 1 is that he seems to consider things
deeply rather than shoot from the hip- long run this will be
important for reducing/eliminating acts of terrorism. The other
is that he has seen war, and he spoke out against it- ordinarily
this wouldn't be an issue for me, but in the present climate I'd
like the guy in charge to have a sense of what's going on in the
trenches.
\_ What examples suggest "he seems to consider things deeply"?
Also, do you take issue with Kerry for voting for the war? How
about the "I voted for it before I voted against it" bit? This
suggests to me that he's just saying what is politically
expedient rather than noodling it out and finding the best
solution for the country. -op
\_ Now you're just trolling; "he voted for it before he voted
against it" was about a bill where he voted for an amendment
which would have changed the bill, the amendment failed, and
he voted against the unmodified bill. Nothing about political
expediency.
\_ I'm not trolling. I know what he meant. But when he said
that it appeared that he was trying to say he was for it
and against it. Furthermore, the amendment was to remove
some of the tax cuts. Instead of a rider, he could have
sponsored a separate bill and while I would disagree with
the bill, I wouldn't be criticizing him for political
expediency. -op
\_ This is how Congress works. It's built into the system
now, and while I tend not to agree with this sort of
tactic, a congressperson whose policy was never to try
this would be cutting themselves off from a fairly
political tactic.
\_ And how would that have changed his "no" vote?
\_ GWB needs to pay for his failures, which are significant.
(note this answer is different from "he's not Bush")
\_ Looks the same to me. -!op
\_ I dont' know where to start. Foreign policy: picking fight with
wrong nation such as China, Iraq, Iran, while completely ignoring
real threats. Fiscal policy: run deficit off the roof while still
gave tax cut to the wealthy. Running government in secrecy (energy
task force, classify numerious documents which suppose to be
declassified), remove all the check and balances created a legal
blackhole in Cuba and Iraq... stripping civil liberty (ear dropping
without any oversight?), and worse, ask subordient to bear the
consequences for things he has done.
\_ You know, an excoworker of mine now works for the FBI, and
he explained much of the reasoning behind the Patriot Act
to me. It actually makes a lot of sense to me.
\_ This all looks like !GWB. How is Kerry any different? BTW, who
do you consider to be the right nation to pick a fight with?
What are the real threats you mention and how do you figure we
should go about dealing with them? Cuba? WTF are you talking
about re: Cuba???
\_ His current statement is that he voted no because the
amendment failed. If really supported the ongoing
effort in Iraq, he could have voted yes on the
$80B funding, and then if the tax rollback failed he
could hammer the president for not being fiscally
responsible. -op
\_ (!GWB answer deleted) |
| 2004/8/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32763 Activity:insanely high |
8/7 Drudge busts leftist media and Kerry campaign in blatant lie.
Globe/Kerry lying:
http://csua.org/u/8i5 [Boston Globe online]
\_ Oh, you mean a guy with no credibility who has been caught
making false claims REPEATEDLY is crowing about "gotcha?"
I'll wait until this gets debunked just like the cranks of SBVAK.
Globe/Kerry lying:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation
washington/articles/2004
/08/07/veteran_claims_misquote
_on_kerry_globe_stands_by_its_story?m
ode=PF
Original:
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:cxZw7yd
SwWsJ:www.publicaffairsbo
http://oks.com/publicaffairs
books-cgi-bin/display%3Fbook%3D15
86483145+kranish+kerry+edwards&hl=en
"Cleaned":
http://www.publicaffairsbooks.com
/publicaffairsbooks-cgi
-bin/display?book=1586483145
\_ Ever heard of http://csua.org/u
\_ CARRIAGE RETURN IS THE STANDARD!!!
\_ This is the most horriable miscarriage ever!
\_ http://csua.org/u/8i5
http://csua.org/u/8i6
http://csua.org/u/8i7
\_ Can someone explain what all this is about?
\_ I think kchang wrote a NewsMax bot - danh
[restored and will keep getting restored until it is not censored for
as long as any other random thread]
\_ Get over yourself. This was probably deleted because you fail
to understand the basics of rows/columns. As for the link, it's
pretty feeble. -John
\_ feeble? as far as i can tell, the first one is broken, the
second one is bogus, and the third i just a link to an ad
for a book. What the fuck? Yeah, people tend to delete
unexplained dead links. It's not censoship.
\_ No free speech for facists!
\_ The links were to a google cache of the promo for the
Kerry/Edwards book which mentioned an introduction by the
Globe columnist who claimed one of the swift boat veterans had
retracted his story. The non-google-cached version doesn't
say the introduction is by the reporter.
\_ the links were broken, badly explained, and directly
off of this weeks Republican Talking Points list.
Personally, I don't censor any links, and hate any
censorship of any political link ever. However
when a link is broken, it's just useless. I got tired
of seeing your idiocy on the motd, so i just went to
drudgereport and got the link to put in http://csua.org/u
myslef. |
| 2004/8/7-9 [Politics/Domestic/Election, ERROR, uid:32761, category id '18005#14.3125' has no name! , ] UID:32761 Activity:very high |
8/7 News flash: Nader has failed to get enough signatures to be on CA
ballot. Nader claims that his signature collectors were verbally
abused and so they quit. And people complain that Bush is the one
preventing opposing voices?
http://csua.org/u/8i8
\_ Damn! You know what else? I'm not going to make it on the
california ballot for president either. And since I have not been
endorsed by *any* political party, including my own, have no
relevant experience, and tend to piss people off, I have a lot
in common with Nader. Unqualified assholes with no base of support
unite!!! Of course, there is *one* difference...I'm not claiming
to be running a presidential campaign.
\_ No free speech for fascists!
\_ If you still vote for Bush after seeing F911 you are a raging
asshole.
\_ If you believe anything in F911 you are a mindless tool.
\_ But, I read that on the csua wall so it must be true!
I think you're one of those raging assholes who is going
to vote for Bush after seeing F911!
\_ Nope, I'm going to vote for Bush and I haven't seen
F911. Heh.
\_ Ignorant AND close-minded! You must be proud.
\_ Unwilling to give money to Michael Moore actually.
I've read enough reviews/criticisms/apologetics to
know what the factual errors are, TYVM.
\_ right back at ya babe
\_ "Who are you going to believe, me or your LYING EYES?"
\_ Wow, you mean I can't criticize Bush for misusing his office
unless powerless yahoos in CA are nice to Nader employees?
Thanks for setting me straight. --aaron
\_ WTF are you talking about? Are you ok?
\_ I've gone nuts! --aaron |
| 2004/8/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32759 Activity:insanely high Edit_by:auto |
8/7 Drudge busts leftist media and Kerry campaign in blatant lie.
Globe/Kerry lying:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2004/08/07/vetera
n_claims_misquote__on_kerry_globe_stands_by_its_story?mode=PF
Original:
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:cxZw7ydSwWadsfasdfsaasdfqwerqwerqw
erqwerqwerqwerqwerqwerqwerqweryqwetqwerytyyyyyysooooiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiyougotap
rettymouthsJ:http://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/publicaffairsbooks-cgi-bin/display%3Fbo
ok%3D1586483145+kranish+kerry+edwards&hl=en
"Cleaned":
http://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/publicaffairsbooks-cgi-bin/display?book=1586483145
[restored and will keep getting restored until it is not censored for
as long as any other random thread]
\_ Get over yourself. This was probably deleted because you fail
to understand the basics of rows/columns. As for the link, it's
pretty feeble. -John |
| 2004/8/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32744 Activity:high |
8/6 Hey, where's Bush-will-win-because-of-the-economy guy?
http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/ap/2004/08/06/ap1494858.html
\_ Wow, 32k new Walmart slaves! Meanwhile, ~170k new workers
entered the job market during that same month. --aaron
\_ Also, Bush-California-landslide guy:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/08/06/BAGT383NU21.DTL
\_ Yawn, this keeps coming up. The reply is always the same. There
will be 3 debates, then we get a final poll which will probably
show the candidates are still within the margin of error, then we
vote and find out who the President is. Nothing else matters
between now and then unless there's some catastrophe or aliens
land or something.
\_ Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
\_ You slime! Kang has my vote!
\_ I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.
\_ Are you willing to bet on Bush winning California? -tom
\_ I never said he'd win CA. I'm willing to bet that there will
be 3 debates, a flurry of final polling, a vote, and then
we'll have a President for 4 years. Are you willing to bet
on Kerry winning Texas?
\_ no, but I never predicted that he would. Some anonymous
MOTD coward predicted that Bush would win CA in a
landslide. -tom
\_ I'm pretty sure that was a troll. I thought it
was then too. Get over it. |
| 2004/8/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Reference/Law/Court] UID:32735 Activity:very high |
8/6 My dad just got biten by a neighbor's dog (maybe some kind of German
Shepherd) that was not on a leash when my dad went outside to our
driveway. It was unprovoked. The paramedics and police arrived.
We've a police report. Is there anything that we can do? Would
lawyers take up such small cases? Can we at least get the owner to
cover for all of the medical expenses incurred?
\_ just say put the dog down or i put you down
\_ Most likely the owner will volunteer to pay for the medical expenses
for fear of further legal action. And unless your dad sustained
some serious or permanent injuries, don't bother suing them; it's
just not worth it.
\_ Call John Edwards.
\_ Can you believe that shyster might actually help someone get
money for their medical expenses! Has he no sense of decency?
\_ <Replying to myself> And to the inevitable "channeling a
dead girl" reply: Yes, he was manipulative. That's what good
lawyers do: manipulate the jury to get a favorable verdict
for their client.
\_ Tucker Carlson characterized a teenage girl having her
intestines sucked out by a faulty pump as a "Jacuzzi case".
\_ That reminds me of the clip someone posted a while ago
where a crab gets sucked into a hole much smaller than
its body, and exploded instantly.
\_ You mean?: /csua/tmp/crabvspipe1.mpg
\_ Yup. Disturbing.
_/
For those looking for context here (like me):
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2004/07/27/tucker/?source=RSS
\_ You should contact animal control.
\_ Judge Judy awarded someone with $3000. He was bitten by an
unleashed dog in a park and sustained some relatively minor
injuries - scratches and bite marks on the side of his body
and hands. So: you can take your neighbor to small court.
It would be helpful if you had a witness who is not family.
\_ Nice to see the motd has no morals. Go motd!
\_ Hey, he asked about lawyers, which implies he's already
interested in suing.
\_ No morals? are you f'ing serious? If your unleashed mangy mutt
*attacks* and injures me, damn right you deserve to pay
compensation for your negligence.
\_ Small claims court is made for this kinda stuff. But make sure to
try and get a settlement from the guy before taking him to court.
\_ Before you think about suing and lawyers and so on, why don't
you talk to your neighbor and work something out. It is much
better to be on good terms with your neighbor than to get a
few hundred dollars out of him/her. On the otherhand, if your
neighbor is a jerk, maybe you need to sue.
\_ His insurace may cover it, which is probably better than a lawsuit. |
| 2004/8/5 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32712 Activity:very high |
8/5 John Kerry: The Chameleon Senator (from 1996)
http://www.usvetdsp.com/story10.htm
\_ Assertion: We shouldn't have gone to war in Vietnam; we didn't
understand it was a fight to form a new nation more than a
Communist one. When they saw Americans coming over, they thought
we were just colonialists like the French.
Kerry returned after fighting for four months, and opposed the
war. He got it right before history did.
\_ he got it right, um. a communist nation was formed
where everyone got their wealth stripped and freedom taken
\_ ~ 5 million Vietnamese (North and South combined) died
in that war. I wonder what percentage of the population
that was.
\_ since millions died in WWII , we should have just let
Hitler take over the world without fighting back
\_ What percentage of the population was 5 million
Vietnamese back then? WWII was clear -- Vietnam was not.
At what price do we fight a war which the U.S. people
aren't certain about?
\_ http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/23/kerry.vietnam
Rapes. Razed villages. Ears and heads cut off. Random shootings of
civilians. Bodies blown up. Wires from portable telephones taped to
genitals, with the power then turned on. Food stocks poisoned. Dogs
and cats shot for the fun of it. ... To those who were against the
war, he was a courageous hero standing up for the truth; to those
who supported it, he was a treasonous pariah aiding the enemy.
\_ that's only the things Kerry admitted to doing,
for being only their 2 months, he has weak character to
immediately start committing those atrocities
\_ are you ted rall now? - danh
\_ hehe, http://www.ucomics.com/rallcom
\_ can I say "troll" yet
\_ Wait a minute, some of the quotes in this seem to have Kerry
as either saying, "I lied then," or "I would lie if asked
the same question today."
\_ You should be more careful in your use of quotation marks.
I doubt you can find a politican ever saying, "I lied" or
"I would lie" about anything.
\_ It would have looked very funny without the quotes.
Just imagine Kerry saying "some bitter sysadmin from
UC Berkeley lied back in the 70's, and may lie again!"
\_ So, what do you think he lied about back then, and which
part would he lie again today about? (referring to the
article)
\_ Well, he talked about all this rape and whatnot. But
the article says: "The senator concedes he wouldn't
say the same things in the same way today, that talk
of "atrocities" back then was over the top." "I'm
older, I'm wiser. I'm farther from it. But they were
the words that came out of my gut at that time, based
on the anger and frustration that I felt back when it
was happening." So... they weren't true, they just
came out of your gut? Huh?
\_ My interpretation is that, although the things he
said were described to him by other fighting soldiers,
if he had another chance, he would have put more
blame on the Administration rather than the soldiers.
\_ You're trying to blame him for haveing overly-passionate
opinions when he's young? He overstated his case a
bit 30 years ago and that somehow makes him a bad man?
Let he who is without exaggeration cast the first stone.
\_ I don't call late 20's young.
\_ So Bush wasn't young when he was a boozing
coke-head drunk driver?
\_ No, I'm saying that if a congressional committe
asks you about the facts of what you say, you
should probably stick to the fact regaurdless of
your opinions.
\_ I'm not the one you responded to, but I believe
Kerry did tell the truth: Remember, he did
qualify his remarks by saying they were stories
told to him by other soldiers
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/02/20/1535232
\_ w00t! We descide world affecting issues
on hearsay!
\_ Hell, happens on wall all the time.
\_ "I... I heard about this Kid? In Vietnam?
His name was Mai Kay? And like, so
this GI? Like, gave him some coke, and
like, some pop-rocks? And the kid? His
head, like, totally exploded man. It
was crazy. Serious war crimes, man."
\_ Actually, re-reading the transcript, I got
it wrong. The stories were told by 150
honorably discharged soldiers -- some soldiers
personally confessing to atrocities. All you
other losers didn't bother to check the URL
at all. |
| 2004/8/5 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32711 Activity:very high |
8/5 For the person who brought up Kerry's meeting with Madame Binh:
What are we supposed to glean from this one time meeting? Or
from his meeting with Ortega (out of which sprung the investigations
into Iran-Contra)? That he's a traitor by association? The same
argument can be applied to nearly everyone in the current administ-
ration. Cheney for his company's dealings in countries with standing
sanctions, Rumsfeld for his handshakes and arms sales to Saddam after
him gassing his own people, and yes that picture of Bush holding
hands with bin aziz. The difference in my eyes: Kerry was trying
to open a dialog to end a conflict that we couldn't afford, even if
he may have been very naive in the manner. It's 30 years later. I'd
like to think his goal is still the same but his execution has been
seasoned by experience. -scotsman
\_ You are imagining reasoned dialogue with people who still think they
are fighting communism and/or that the Vietnam war wasn't a bad
idea. -- ulysses
\_ The fight against communism isn't over yet. The great dragon
and the fine cigar remain.
\_ you forgot the old ginseng and the yummy pho
\_ and I see the fight against communism in Yemen and Afghanistan
turned out *REALLY* well. Why don't you continue your policy
of supporting Islamic Fundamentalist?
\_ Don't be an idiot. I've never met anyone who thought
Vietnam was a good idea. The amazing thing about Vietnam
was that _everything_ was done wrong. The other thing I
always find amazing, is that every wrong thing was done by
"liberals," and yet conservitives are always blamed. Wierd.
Just because getting in the war was a bad idea, doesn't
mean that wasting thousands of lives and allowing South
Vietnam to fall were GOOD ideas.
\_ South Vietnam government were puppet government set up by
French / American. North Vietnamese government were
underground organization who fought French and Japanese
occupation years before S. Vietnam was created. S. Viet
never had a chance.
\_ You need to write a book:
"Vietnam: The Liberal Failure - The Republican Scapegoat"
\_ the beauty of this idea is that if you put Kerry's picture
on the cover, you can have it ghost written by a total
hack, and still make millions of dollars. good idea.
\_ Well S. Vietnam was free for over a year until N. Vietnam
invaded. Do you think S. Koreans would say their was a
good idea?
\_ actually, they probably would, i don't know why but
a lot of south koreans believe the propaganda and somehow
think the presence of US troops is keeping them
from peacefully reuniting with their n. korean
brothers. they might be right, except for the
peaceful part.
\_ that is very true. American want a base in Pacific
Rim. If Koreas are united, there will be no reason
for having a US military base there. For that reason
alone, USA will do everything to prevent Koreas to be
united.
\_ "their?"
\_ Ha! Where'd you get this load of BS? The
communist World Weekly? Not to mention, even if
the Koreas did reunite, there would still be reason
to have army bases there. Every here of a friendly
little country call China?
\_ Where the hell do you think chicom troll is from?
\_ I don't think n. korea is as benevolent and fun
as some s. koreans believe.
\_ It's basically the same as similar movements we get
over here. The college students with a poor knowledge
of history and poor critical thinking skills descide
that NK is run by friendly teddy bears. Korea is very
nationalist, and they'd like to be re-unitied. This
leads to the usual set of wackiness by certain groups.
-jrleek
\_ I posted it, and if you can't distinguish between what Kerry
did and those other acts I think your judgement is lacking.
There is difference between meeting an
enemy or official in a public capacity and assiduoulsy
advocating his position. Kerry is repeatedly guilty of the
latter.
As for Kerry's Vietnam activities, his contemporaries vets are
much more articulate than I:
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=Letters
Lastly, have you bothered to learn what actions these groups
are most upset about?
Doesn't it bother you Kerry published a book mocking Iwo Jima
with anti-war figures and upside down flag? |
| 2004/8/5 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32710 Activity:moderate |
8/5 And McCain says it better than I could:
link:www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/9327026.htm?1c
\_ from http://bugmenot.com:
login:jsmith123@hotmail.com
pw:1234567
\_ "I wish they hadn't done it," McCain said of his former advisers. "I
don't know if they knew all the facts." So he condemns it without
knowing if it's true? My respect for McCain is waning.
\_ perhaps he thinks they acted before they knew everything?
\_ That's how I read it too. The PP sounds like he's saying
"Dear God! He formed an opinion based on an assumption,
rather than a gauranteed fact!"
\_ Three veterans on Kerry's boat that day -- Jim Rassmann, who says
Kerry saved his life, Gene Thorson and Del Sandusky, the driver on
Kerry's boat, said the group was lying on all fronts. They say
Kerry was injured, and Rassmann called the group's account "pure
fabrication." ... McCain: "It was the same kind of deal that was
pulled on me ... I can't believe the president would pull such a
cheap stunt." ... The ad, scheduled to air in a few markets in
Ohio, West Virginia and Wisconsin, was produced by Stevens, Reed,
Curcio and Potham, the same team that produced McCain's ads in
2000.
\_ How does what McCain says bear any factual relevance to what
Kerry did when he returned from Vietnam? Why won't any of you
leftists answer this question?
\_ He's calling the commercial a dirty political trick, and compares
it to what the Bush campaign did to him 4 years ago. What Kerry
did after Vietnam was condemn a war of which he had firsthand
knowledge, a war which didn't need to be fought and which killed
far too many young men.
\_ Easy. McCain says the Bushies found some vets to smear his
record in vietnam. If McCain is telling the truth, it would
suggest that the vets dissing Kerry now are also making stuff up
for Bush's benefit.
\_ How many times do I have to repeat this. I'm interested
in facts not the messenger. Why are leftists so impassioned
about OPINIONS.
\_ Okay, let's discuss: What fact are you looking for?
\_ There are no facts to discuss. There's only what I think
about what McCain thinks about what some people are saying
about Kerry. Don't start a conversation about people's
opinions and then complain that you wanted facts.
\_ The facts are what Kerry did in Vietnam, and more
more importantly what he did AFTER Vietnam.
\_ This thread is about anti-Kerry attack ads on
the Vietnam War. If you have an issue with what
Kerry did after the war, you would do us a big
favor by saying what exactly it was, and maybe in
a new thread. Or, you could stay as you are,
wondering why leftists aren't answering your
question.
\_ I have, repeatedly. They are deleted.
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=Timeline
http://www.stopjohn.com/movies/winter-soldier.htm
http://www.stopjohn.com/movies/hanoi-john.htm
\_ Dewd, you're not going to get very far
with laundry lists from partisan web sites.
Pick one or two individual items you like, and
post it. After you have established
credibility, the sky's the limit.
\_ Partisanship in the Congressional record...
I see. The audio is fake and so are the
pictures?
\_ Please don't forget the advice I just
gave you. Start with one or two items.
New thread. |
| 2004/8/5 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32709 Activity:nil |
8/5 I just ran the numbers again, and I was wrong. Even if Bush wins
Florida, I have Bush leading Kerry a little on electoral votes, before
counting seven medium states in a dead heat. |
| 2004/8/5 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32705 Activity:moderate |
8/5 http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/rnc/9574/index.html Norman Mailer and son discuss GWB, RNC in NYC, McCain, Kerry, Nader, others. \_ Who is this guy? \_ Mailer is about as U.S.-friendly as Chirac is \_ Ah, attacking the patriotism of those who disagree with you. \_ Why do you hate nationalist jingoism? \_ Why do you hate the Jews? |
| 2004/8/5 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32704 Activity:moderate |
8/5 a funny poke at bush, kerry and friends set to this land.
flash, probably not work safe: http://csua.org/u/8gy
\_ http://jibjab.com <-- fewer characters
\_ jibjab again. |
| 2004/8/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32700 Activity:nil |
8/4 http://barlow.typepad.com/barlowfriendz/2004/07/dancing_in_the_.html Come dance with John Perry Barlow in Manhattan |
| 2004/8/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Computer/SW/OS/OsX] UID:32697 Activity:nil |
8/4 Two hotbutton topics for the price of one!
Picture of John Kerry using a macintosh:
http://i.timeinc.net/time/covers/1101040719/teamup/images/03.jpg
\_ http://www.theapplecollection.com/various/Celebrity/GBush.html
\_ Mamby pamby liburls and they're macintushes! |
| 2004/8/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32695 Activity:very high |
8/4 I wish Kerry would drop the Vietnam schtick, but the Dems
keep at it. So... watch the new TV ad.
http://www.swiftvets.com
\_ read http://mediamatters.org/items/200405050004 . thanks - danh
\_ Most of the information on this site is from the evil,
conservitive, FOX News! I don't believe a word of it!
\_ I highly suggest you look into the people
behind this site.
\_ I have. What should I know, that they are Republicans?
How is that relevant, Kerry is the issue not them.
A more important question is have you looked into
Kerry's post-war behavior?
\_ They are Bush operatives. John O'Neill also had plenty
of fine, baseless things to say against John McCain during
the 2000 primaries.
\_ Sorry but meeting with Madam Binh in Paris
while the war is still going on transcends
political divisions. I'm willing to listen,
what assertions are apocryphal?
\_ Why can you not understand that the source of information
isn't relevent if the information is true?
\_ More important is his at-war behavior. His bullshit medals,
his war criminal quality activity, his viciousness and
callous disregard for his fellow man. I'd rather have a
coked out drunk than a killer and a thug as President.
\_ you shouldn't buy into the two party system like that.
there's also the egomenaiacal shithead trial lawyer who
couldn't even get the endorsement of his own party.
\_ With Bush, you get both.
\_ Snarky but stupid. |
| 2004/8/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32685 Activity:high |
8/4 Dubya's Fighter jet vs Kerry's speed boat, who wins?
\_ A Dubya who goes AWOL versus a Kerry who plays dead for a splinter?
Tough choice.
\_ I love how people with really poor critical thinking skills
can trash a guy's volunteer service under fire because one
of his wounds wasn't "serious" enough. Yeah, what an idiot
he was for getting medical treatment. Fuck you.
\_ Did Kerry release his medical records for public scrutiny?
How do you know it wasn't more than a pin prick?
\_ Try to have some perspective on the choice you are
facing. Do you need to know which one can jump higher
or is a better speller? Bush is incompetent, and you're
holding Kerry to much higher standards than you are the
boy king.
\_ Whether you think Bush is competent or not depends on
your set of special interests. The same applies to
Kerry.
\_ One of his purple heart wounds required an
equivalent of neosporin. They both volunteered, Bush
\_ Don't attack him for deciding to get treatment for a
wound that could get infected. You could attack the
government for giving out Purple Hearts too easily, but
nevertheless he still has what, like 3?
\_ Didn't Kerry have to lobby to get authorization for
that purple heart?
\_ I've never heard that. Do you have any
evidence?
\_ Apparently an error in my recollection. Mea
Culpa. The purple heart did show up
mysteriously though. Here's a link:
http://csua.org/u/8gm .
for National Kerry for Navy. Both would have
been drafted. |
| 2004/8/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32684 Activity:high |
8/4 I didn't erase the Kerry with two ears of corn URL. But in the
interest of being balanced, here's a jpeg of Bush:
http://csua.org/u/8gd
\_ How is helping the crown prince walk unusual?
\_ If you're personal freinds with the dictator of one of the most
evil regimes in the world and would sell out your country for
a nickel? nothing.
Ok this is the weirdest picture of Kerry yet:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1184727/posts?page=1,50
\_ How is holding corn in Iowa unusual?
\_ Erm. How do you (or the freepers) figure? |
| 2004/8/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32670 Activity:very high |
8/3 Kerry FlipFlops on technology.
http://news.com.com/2010-1028-5291476.html -fifth columnist
\_ We've turned the corner!
\_ What's next week's talking point?
\_ You need to go look at some of the posts out there on the
web from people who have been victims of Declan's idiocy.
He fudges facts and loves to attack basically anyone. He
has all the idiocy of a mainstream journalist, but with the
mean streak of a motd flame warrior. Here's a start:
http://www.lessig.org/blog/archives/001617.shtml
\_ At least you've never had to work with the guy.
\_ please elaborate. you worked with him?
\- kerry flipflops on SCIENCE:
http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=17231
Bush knows the answer: Jesus is the Light. --psb
\_ Partha, what are your politics?
\- Personally, heavily Kantian. Publically, a mix of
Kantian and Utilitarian which is too involved to be
summarized here. I believe Bush should be defeated
not so much because of future policy directions but
because he is a liar of low character who surrounds
himself with even sleazier people than he is. --psb
\_ You need to talk more about rights for me to place your
politics, Partha. You can be a Kantian anything. -- ilyas
\- i will if you send me a paypal payment of $5.
or you can send me a sufficiently interesting
multiple choice exam. --psb
\_ Meh. I don't care enough. You don't either. -- ilyas
\_ Meh. I don't care enough. You don't either.
Although you know, to an outside observer it DOES
look like you just threw a dead philosopher label.
A label which doesn't really discriminate anything.
-- ilyas
\_ You're in a desert, walking along in the sand when
suddenly you look down and see a tortoise. It's
crawling toward you. You reach down and you flip
the tortoise over on its back. The tortoise lays
on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun,
beating its legs trying to turn itself over but it
can't. Not without your help. But you're not
helping. Why is that?
\_ Thats interesting. I dont know. Im a republican?
\_ Sigh.
\_ Double-sigh to you. That was Tom Ammiano's
response when The Wave tested SF Mayoral
candidates.
\_ All very nice but all your wall/motd statements make you
look like any other soda leftist. Nothing special going
on there. Perhaps you think Kerry has surrounded himself
with people of good will and strong hearts? Whatever.
\_ Oh no. I've been reading his stuff for years now and psb
is interesting because his mind does change. He spent
quite awhile being hawkish online a year or so ago. I'd
guess tom is the motd liberal you are looking
for, though brain is the one I'd really like to hear
more from. There are too few advocates of pure evil on
the motd. -- ulysses
\- writing currente calamo ...
1. years ago during George I's First Gulf War, for
the same piece of commetary, i was simultaneously
accused of "writing for the baghdad daily" and
for writing for the jerusalem post. so i knew i
was doing something right.
\_ Years ago? What have you done for me lately?
2. since you are writing anonymously, there is nothing
in it for me to prove you wrong on my leftist
leanings. i'm certainly on the record as "flipflop-
ping" on George II's Gulf War II, but as John Maynard
Keynes said " "When the facts change, I change my
mind - what do you do, sir?".
\_ My anonymity has *nothing* to do with your
postings. This is a weak cop out. You're here
on the motd and most people post anonymously.
If that was such a problem for you, you should
have just ignored me entirely instead of writing
a numbered 5 point rant.
3. sure kerry is ambitious. sure he was a member of
skull and bones. nevertheless he's someone who
took trouble to get himself into the lines of
fire. bush probably has the most honorable service
record of his coerteie of chickenhawks ... which
says something. you wont hear me saying anything
uncivil of john mccain. i suppose at a certain level
you have to respect BUSHCO for even getting a
sup ct justice in their crony cabal. maybe some of
kerry's advisors are not morally pure, nevertheless
someone like sandy berger had the deceny to quit.
\_ You call Berger decent? Holy shit... The man
stuffed high security level documents down his
pants and destroyed them. With twisted standards
like that anything else you say about morals or
decency is utter crap.
\_ Actually, he's been cleared of all of that.
Try a news source other than Fox News.
\_ Not pp. Link that he's been cleared?
They find the docs or soemthing?
4. do you respect somebody who opposed the 9/11
commssion existing, then limited their subpoena-like
powers/his cooperation, would not testify under oath,
did not have the balls to show up "Dickless" ... and
now rather than stand on execitive privilage or sep
of power, is attempting to coopt the agenda.
\_ You're putting words in my mouth. Standard
leftist pap. I didn't say anything at all either
way about GWB or anyone in his administration.
I call red herring on this one. It has nothing
to do with what I said. Weak distration from
what I said which is that you're a leftist, not
some intellectual non-partisan who exists on
some higher plane of political discourse.
\_ Err ... I am sure you are intelligent enough
to understand psb's question was directed
at the general audience. I know, self
importance can lead to temporary idiocy.
As it now stands, the only thing in your
gabhole is your big smelly foot, and
you shoved it in there all by yourself.
5. as tacitus wrote in the annals, "My only regret is
that insults and perils have made my old age unhappy
... it is because I disklike criminality."
--psb
\_ Yes, very nice. You get 2 bonus points for an
ancient name drop reference/quote and another
bonus point for the quote almost sounding like
it has something to do with the topic but not.
You're a leftist. Nothing wrong with being a
standard Bush hating liberal. There's lots of
them and not all of them are idiots. Some have
actually know why they hate Bush. I just don't
think you're one of that set. Be a liberal,
live it up, hate Bush, whatever. Just don't run
around claiming you're better than everyone else
through false claims of being different somehow.
\_ If you have read psb's posts over a long
period of time, and don't think psb is
"different" in any way from "normal," i'm
curious to know what circles you normaly
run in.
\_ nice ... when you can't win the argument ...
just throw labels at your opponent.
\_ Dubya didn't ask his dad for advice on Iraq; he submits to a
Higher Father.
\_ I always wondered: do people who post this stuff think
they're clever/funny or what? Is it troll bait? I don't
see the point in this sort of post.
\_ "There is a higher father that I appeal to". --Dubya,
to Bob Woodward. Troll 1, You 0. -John
\_ Uh, yeah whatever. This doesn't answer my question.
\_ OK I'll bite. It's called "sniping", otherwise
known as the "paenut gallery." Some people
find it amusing, you obviously don't. Let it
lie. -John |
| 2004/8/3 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32665 Activity:very high |
8/3 Oh wow, a politics purge. You're an asshole.
\_ I second that.
\_ The politics on the motd are something like 95% noise 5% signal.
Everytime someone tries to point out the truth (at any place in the
political spectrum) he's drowned out by inanity. It's truly sad,
IMO. But as a result, I'm not crying when the political threads get
nuked. -emarkp
\_ aren't you the guy who deletes swearing? don't you have
a couple of kids you should be teaching how to sharpen
an ax instead?
\_ 1) fuck you.
2) I know you're responsible for some of the purges.
\_ I won't ask you how you "know" -- I see far more claims about
people knowing than are likely true. Yes, I've done my fair
share of purging, typically when the garbage ratio goes too
high, when factual responses get repeatedly deleted, or the
thread gets partially deleted. And? -emarkp
\_ I don't think it's reasonable for you to appoint yourself
the arbiter of motd political-thread 'accepatbility'.
It's often interesting and informative to see what people
are thinking or saying about current politics. If a thread
offends you don't read it: motd doesn't need a self
appointed nanny to cleanse threads based on obscure
and subjective metrics -- especially if they don't take
activity into account.
\_ don't fuck with him. he has root power and can nuke
a lot more than just motd. he could make a lot of
"accident" happen to your account. be wise.
\_ On a world writable forum, we're all nannies. I'm not
appointing myself "THE" anything. When I purge, I try
to purge obvious noise or the whole thread, not simply
points with which I disagree--unlike other people.
-emarkp
\_ there are exactly two types of purges that don't
make you a fucking asshole:
1) purging old stuff, as in more than two days old
2) purging stuff that has been messed up in some
way, like when some tool uses a script to
reverse all the words.
\_ So you're appointing yourself as the nanny now?
-emarkp
\_ Don't get all huffy, dude -- just stop
censoring the motd.
\_ from /csua/adm/doc/policies/motd
Destruction of the MOTD (by repeated
deletion, jive, or any other method) is
severly frowned upon and will result in the
termination of your account.
i'd argue that 1) doesn't count as destruction.
as for 2) its a grey area as messed up text is
sometimes still readable. i would count selective
purging based on what one considers "noise" to
be destruction under the above policy. -erikk
\_ Gee, I wonder where the policy police is
when people repeatedly fuck up my posts
(Delete a few lines, change some things,
sign my name to things I didn't write, etc.)
This entire thread is bullshit. Apply
'The Policy' uniformly, or don't bring it
up at all. -- ilyas
\_ Ilyas, 'The Policy' can't en enforced
in your favor if you just sit back in
silence and allow yourself to be
violated. And no, one line quips
probably aren't enough to make it clear
you're being victimized. If you're not
going to stand up for your rights, then
I have a hard time understanding your
tone here.
\_ Last time some mental giant decided
to sign my name to some shit I didn't
write, I made a post about it to the
motd, which got promptly ignored and
soon deleted. People regularly edit
and delete my posts, it's pretty
clear if you have been paying
attention. I guess next time it
happens I ll just snitch to the
politburo... *sigh*
It's clear to me people have a huge
double standard for 'The Policy.'
When some people do stuff, it's
harmless fun and pranks, when others
do it, it's Censorship with a capital
C. These days, my policy is, if I
see someone fuck up (which is different
from an overwrite) what I wrote,
I nuke the thread. As far as I am
concerned, the conversation is then
over. If that's a violation of
'The Policy' take it up with people
who fucked up the thread first.
-- ilyas
\_ I do pay attention, and you're
not the only victim by a long
shot. So why do you sign your
name? why does anyone sign their
name? I still don't see the
advantage, and I see many
disadvantages.
\_ I don't always sign my name.
When I do, it's because I want
to own what I say. The
proper response to a macaque
having fun at someone else's
expense is to not stop
signing like a coward, but to
make sure the macaque
understands its fun will soon
end if it does it (i.e the
thread will get nuked).
-- ilyas
\_ I still don't see the point.
How exactly do you "own"
your posts? who cares?
you know you posted them,
and i'll read them
regardless, so who cares?
I think a lot of the
funniest, most interesting
stuff is by anon. posters,
and some of the most
useless drivel is by the
name-signers (I'm not
talking about you here.)
\_ So this is some sort of vague threat? Or is
it just a lesson that those who nuke threads
should remain anonymous? Seriously.
-emarkp
3) fuck you.
4) some of us get a lot out of those discussions that you
identify as "noise."
\_ So identify "us". I've seen the same rabid partisan
back-and-forth for years now. I have learned a few things,
but the biggest thing I've learned is that most people
aren't listening to each other, nor do they care about the
truth. Most people on the motd are partisan nutjobs.
-emarkp
\_ I guess you missed the poll a couple weeks back of how
long people have spent doing background research relating
to a motd discussion. One guy spent a month researching
WMD claims 20 hours a week. I spent two weeks
researching the 2000 election debacle because of a motd
discussion, and ended up reading the supreme court
decision and actually changing my opinion on the issue.
I'm afraid it is you who are the partisan nutjob
if you're incapable of seeing that people are getting
something real out of these discussions, in spite of
all the flameing.
\_ Just out of curiousity, what's your current
opinion of the 2000 election?
\_ That it was a total clusterfuck, and that neither
side really cheated. I had previously bought
the democratic party line that the republicans
had "stolen" the election, but became convinced
that the things that were broken in florida
were just good ol' fashioned bipartisan idiocy.
I was also amazed at how much other idiocy there
was outside of florida that no one cared about
because it didn't come down to so few votes.
There was one county in South Carolina where the
official tally had one vote for Gore, one for Bush,
and several thousand for Nader and Buchannan.
and several hundred for Nader and Buchannan.
\_ What? Are you serious? How did that
happen? (about the county in SC)
\_ well, I got it from this paper:
http://elections.fas.harvard.edu/pc01/node5.html
But for details, you'd have to look up
the reference from there.
That paper is *really* worth reading,
by the way, if you want the whole story
about the "butterfly ballot."
5) did i mention fuck you?
\_ You know he's responsible for some of the purges, huh?
Why, because he's got the guts to sign his name and you
don't? Oooo.. that's ome pretty hard evidence. -jrleek
\_ Look, the Mormons are banding together! You know what,
sometimes the trolls annoy me too but I don't want your
self-appointed cleansing going on with active discussions.
If other people are using the motd then you're just a
stupid dick to wipe it all out. But hey I'll be a dick
too: I only care to see that Doom 3 thread.
\_ Yeah, that's mature. You're really swaying my opinion
with your masterful argument. -emarkp
\_ I'm not the "fuck you" guy by the way but I agree.
Re: your "truth", do you have the truth? I think
not. That's the point of discussion.
\_ Again, why do you keep claiming I, or he, have
wiped anything? I've personally never deleted
anyone else's stuff from the motd on purpose.
Hello? Any proof, at all? No? Bye troll, I'm
done. -jrleek
\_ emarkp admits it a few posts up.
\_ Whoops, didn't see that. I stand corrected.
-jrleek
\_ What does my being Mormon have to do with anything?
Besides, if you want to criticize our connections,
complain that he's my brother-in-law, not just that both
of us are Mormons. -emarkp
\_ We already know you guys are all related.
\_ Aren't all mormons in-laws of each other?
\_ Hope you didn't pay much for that bait. I
don't think you're gonna catch any billy-goats.
\_ Those who don't participate don't care.
In any case, it's not so hard to nuke the political threads
at the end of the day when everyone's gone home and eating
dinner instead of in the middle when people are loafing. |
| 2004/8/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32642 Activity:high |
8/2 Read what Schanberg, friend of Dith Pran (Killing Fields),
has had to say about Kerry:
Kerry hit by Vietnam flak for 'betrayal' (2004)
http://www.powmiafamiliesagainstjohnkerry.com/presspow/p030704.htm
John Kerry: The Chameleon Senator (1996)
http://www.usvetdsp.com/story10.htm
\_ As much as I'd like to support these people (I dislike Kerry
more than I do Bush) I think that we need to let go of the MIAs
of Vietnam. It may seem cruel and heartless, but we can't continue
to fight the ghosts of the past ad naseum. I also think that
perhaps with normalization of relations with Vietnam we might
be able to find out more about the MIAs/POWs than without
normalization. This is of course more hope than reality, but
there is little chance that we will ever find out anything about
the MIAs by continuing investigations like we have in the past.
\_ Why don't we just nuke Vietnam?
\_ Because we've dismantled a huge number of nukes and don't
have enough left to spare on something like that.
\_ Bwahahhaha! Sniff. That's a good one!
\_ Summoning all the moral authority of a liberal Rush Limbaugh that
I can, I say: "Sounds like Kerry-haters to me!"
\_'kerry-haters' = military
\_ and rightly so.
\_ Liberal Rush Limbaugh? Is there some inside joke there? |
| 2004/8/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32640 Activity:very high |
8/2 Washington Post article shows convention reversed voter distribution
on which candidate is trustworthy / honest:
http://csua.org/u/8f6
\_ Not according to NewsMax!
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/8/2/90109.shtml
\_ NewsMax is saying Kerry didn't get a 10-15% bounce, and everyone
knows that. However, not everyone knows that on some
issue/character-related questions, Kerry saw a big jump, which
is what I posted.
\_ Yawn, yes, we've been over this. The polls will go up and down
in all directions every week until the election. The conventions
don't mean squat. People will watch the 3 debates, ignore the vp
debate and vote based on how they feel after they've seen or heard
about all 3. No poll is worth a bucket of spit until after the
third debate. I know you're all psyched and this is your first
election and all and it's really exciting and you think this stuff
is important, but really, I promise, it isn't. If there were a
20+ point lead then we'd know who was winning.
\_ I think you need to give motd posters more credit than this.
I realize that there will be ups and downs -- however, this
result shows that there is a bump for Kerry on trustworthiness,
when it's entirely imaginable he would have screwed this up. |
| 2004/8/2 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32636 Activity:nil |
8/2 I almost misread this quote on CNN pull: "Will President Bush's
intelligence help thwart terrorist attacks?". I missed the
'reform' between intelligence and help. :)
\_ Bush = Strong Leader ; Kerry = Flip-flopper
\_ Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth.
\_its what drives the Liberal media, it seems to work.
it brainwashed you twink.
\_ I think you are more brainwashed than you think.
\_ Anybody who thinks the media is liberal is out
of touch with reality. |
| 2004/8/2 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32622 Activity:nil |
8/3 Why is it that, in order to get elected, Kerry seems to think he
has to pretend to be a republican? That strike anyone else as wierd? |
| 2004/8/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32616 Activity:insanely high |
7/31 I've been busy so I'm sorry if this is old for the motd. I saw Kerry's
speech. I thought it was bland and very 'safe'. He didn't present any
details at all of how he'd fix anything or do anything better or
differently than GWB. In an hour long speech he spent about 6 seconds
talking about his 19 year Senate record and 55 minutes talking about
his 4 months in Vietnam 30 years ago. Although he didn't fuck it up,
I don't think it was very good either. It was safe. What do the rest
of you think?
\_ I thought it was trite. It just shows that nobody can deliver
a speech (or write one) as good as Clinton. Can't wait to see
\_ Some how I dont take your review too
seriously.
Bush fuck up his speech. But yeah, I wasn't all too impressed
with Kerry's.
\- i thought it was pretty good. the bland speech was edwards.
Kerry said he wouldnt privatize SS, would repeals the bush tax
cuts for +$200k ... i dont remember if he said something about
dividend taxation [that would have been a bad idea in the speech]
so i think you and all the other people saying he didnt say anything
gutsy, are not being fair ... and even more ridiculous is
the "no diff between kerry/bushco". i thought the obama speech
was overrated ... "edwards and obama have now eclipsed hillary
clinton for 2008/2012" etc. i dont agree with everything he said
but at a rhetorical level in style and delivery, the Rev Al was
the best speech, I think. I think the "reporting for duty" was a
pretty good beginning to the kerry speech. i bet mccain and possibly
the Gubernator will give decent speeches at the RNC. --psb
\_ I've read both good/bad about the reporting for duty thing. I
think it was just fluff but I don't hold it against him much.
I place that in the same category as the rest of his focussing
on his 4 months in Vietnam 30 years ago and ignoring his own
19 years in the Senate. I only heard a few minutes of Edwards
so I don't know. Nice accent :). TheRevAl always speaks well
in public. If he didn't we wouldn't have ever heard of him.
I think the RNC will put McCain up as the local RNC war hero
to counter Kerry's 4 months and the Governator always does well
in public, too. I think most poor speaking is just stage
fright since the speeches are all written by professionals who
theoretically know what they're doing. The Governator isn't
going to get stage fright both due to core personality and his
years of performing in front of the camera and on stage for
live audiences. GWB, well, the person above thinks he'll fuck
it up for sure. He might. He has a hit'n'miss record. You
can always tell when he hasn't had enough time to practice. If
he doesn't make the time to practice the shit out of this one
then he should forget the whole thing. He only has to not fuck
it up. It isn't necessary for him to give some fantastic speech
we all remember and get taught in college rhetoric courses years
later like the I Have A Dream speech. BTW, if you haven't seen
the entire IHAD speech on film you should go find it at a
library or something. I saw it in rhetoric class as a sophomore.
It was truly deeply amazing in a way I can't describe. --op
\-I'm actually most interested to the Evil Cyborg vs. The Trial
Lawyer. that's a weird matching. --psb
\_ how do you figure cheney is a cyborg? of course he's a
hard crusty old bastard, but cyborg? where's that come
from? i suspect edward's trial experience won't translate
that well to the debate format and he'll get stomped in a
blizzard of policy details but the vp debate is just a
sideline entertainment anyway. --op
\- I read it in the Economist. --psb
\_ hard and crusty? i vote for "dour and scheming".
\_ what politician isn't scheming? dour is part of
being a crusty old bastard. |
| 2004/7/31 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32606 Activity:high |
7/31 Post-convention Newsweek poll: Kerry/Edwards 54, Bush/Cheney 41.
\_ Newsweek about as left as can be.
\_ What struck me most about the Dem. convention was who was sitting
next to Teresa during Kerry's speech, none other than
Robert Rubin. The same Robert Rubin of Enron, LTCM, and
Mexico bailout fame. It should be pretty clear who controls
Washington, at least on the Dem side.
\_ The desperate mewling of the neocons as they go down in flames
is highly amusing. Please continue, I'm putting together an
almanac of quotes to mock you with post November 2nd.
The official post convention numbers are here, in the graph
at the top. Nader included is first, Nader not included is
second. The rest listed are out of date.
http://pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm
Here's the Newsweek story. Given the negative spin they
give these numbers for Kerry, the "left as can be" quote
from above is pretty funny.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5568072/site/newsweek
\_ Do you know anything about Robert Rubin?
\_ Now I'm not a conservative or anything, but your "going down
in flames" claim is a little silly. Most of the country
is deadlocked and either 99% sure they're voting for Kerry
or 99% sure they're voting for Bush. One side will win in
november by getting a majority of the *very* small group
of undecideds on their side. This will not constitute either
side "going down in flames." If Kerry wins, we can expect
the Republicans to start their usual shitfest at once,
probably looking for some way to impeach Kerry within a few
months. |
| 2004/7/30 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32594 Activity:high |
7/30 Kerry's Disloyal Nicaraguan Journey
http://csua.org/u/8e5
\_ Kerry's not even loyal to his own Military servicemen,
in fact, he is a war criminal by his own words
\_ Why are you so filled with hate?
\_ That's all they have: hate and fear.
\_ I don't think 'fact' means what you think it means.
\_ "I committed atrocities!" - kerry
\_ I love watching right wingers drool all over themselves.
I think I will forward this to all the undecided voters
I know so they can see the naked face of Right Wing hate. |
| 2004/7/30 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32587 Activity:high |
7/30 Kerry Wins Endorsement from Sandinista Thug
http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/30/90014.shtml
\_ Do you really want to bring the Contra scandal into this?
The man's body is hardly cold.
\_ And in other news, KKK leaders endorse Bush.
\_ Well, no, but they did endorse Reagan.
\_ URL? There is none since this is not true. It always makes me
laugh when you respond to factual URLs with complete fabrication,
as if your false assertions are the same as the truth. Even if
what you said was true, it still doesn't make the posted URL
false or make Kerry look better. Rhetoric 1A.
\_ Kerry's support of the Sandinistas is all very
well documented. It is the quintessential Kerry.
\_ Heh. Some credible URLs perhaps?
\_ Newsmax? Credible? I guess I can just start my own news
\_ Kerry negotiates with Ortega. The next
day Ortega goes to Moscow. Kerry is
gullible like Carter:
http://csua.org/u/8e5
\_ Why are you so filled with hate?
\_ Because he knows he's going to lose.
\_ I love that the page has a poll that
compares Kerry's speech to "A speech on
sexual abstinence by Richard Burton. It
was impressive but you know it's time
to hide the nanny goat." What the hell
is that supposed to mean? Do you see any
problem with trustting a source like this?
\_ Its really easy: type Kerry
Sandinista is google. Are you too
stupid to research this yourself?
\_ And you turn up freerepublic,
newsmax, nationalreview, and
insightmag. Branch out.
\_ I googled it, thats what came
up. I know the history this
seemed consistent. I have
no other experience with the
site.
\_ You don't know the history
if you don't follow the line
through to Kerry's examination
of the Iran-Contra dealings.
\_ Vast Right Wing Conspiracy?
No such thing!
\_ Uhm, yeah there is. It's
called the RNC.
site and call it a "credible source for news", make it
look like a tabloid, and people will come visit my site
in and reference it as "facts". It's an amazing world
we live in when thousands of idiots can post their
worthless ideas as "facts". By the way, I'm sure there
are Sandinista thugs who support Kerry. I'm also sure
there are KKK members who support Bush.
\_ Wow, some conservative doesn't like me linking Bush to
that icon of racial tolerance, Bob Jones "University"..
\_ Homer: See Lisa, instead of one big-shot controlling
all the media, now there's a thousand freaks xeroxing
their worthless opinions.
Lisa: I couldn't be prouder.
\_ Nice sentiments, but you're squishing other people's
changes.
\_ Newsmax "factual?" I guess by the Michael Moore standard of
facts...
\_ http://www.iht.com/articles/510898.html
\_ Bush doesn't have a record of supporting terrorists,
Kerry does have a record of vociferously supporting
the Sandinistas.
\_ I guess you missed the speech last night, huh? You guys are
toast.
\_ While I certainly share your sentiment, I think it's much
too soon to say that with any certainty.
\_ The boring, safe, content-free speech? I saw it. What
about it? Only the DNC base was impressed by it. That's
not true. I was impressed that he didn't speechify like
he usually does. Instead he whizzed through the last half
in 15 minutes like some sort of coke head. That was
funny.
\_ Woo hoo, you got the talking points! Good boy.
Anyway, the speech kicked ass.
\_ I disagree. I think most of them sucked when
compared to Clinton's. What little of Wes Clark
I heard was pretty good. I guess we'll just have
to wait for the Republican National Conv. where
Bush's speech will take oratory to a new low.
\_ Didn't Bush give millions to the Taliban before 9/11?
How does that not count as "supporting terrorists?"
\_ "Scary Dude: Michael Moore" message on that page. No wonder. |
| 12/24 |