Politics Domestic Election - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:Election:
Results 301 - 450 of 1431   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2017/11/17 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
11/17   

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.
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?
2017/11/17 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
11/17   

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/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] 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/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] 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/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] 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/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] 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/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] 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/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] 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/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] 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 [Computer/SW/OS/OsX, Politics/Domestic/Election] 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.
2017/11/17 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
11/17   
Results 301 - 450 of 1431   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:Election:
.