|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
 Posted - 08/21/2004 : 22:20:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by SciFi Chick quote:
Bush could denounce it, as Kerry did over a certain ad that lied about Bush.
Originally posted by Robbquote:
He Has. http://www.cnn.tv/TRANSCRIPTS/0408/12/lkl.00.html
quote:
KING: Oh, so it is. But, I mean, Senator McCain has asked to be condemned, the attack on his service. What do you say to that?
G. BUSH: Well, I say they ought to get rid of all those 527s, independent expenditures that have flooded the airwaves.
There have been millions of dollars spent up until this point in time. I signed a law that I thought would get rid of those, and I called on the senator to -- let's just get anybody who feels like they got to run to not do so.
KING: Do you condemn the statements made about his...
G. BUSH: Well, I haven't seen the ad, but what I do condemn is these unregulated, soft-money expenditures by very wealthy people, and they've said some bad things about me. I guess they're saying bad things about him. And what I think we ought to do is not have them on the air. I think there ought to be full disclosure. The campaign funding law I signed I thought was going to get rid of that. But evidently the Federal Election Commission had a different view.
This is not a condemnation of the ad. This is a jab at 527s which the Dems have more money in. The Reps have more money if you take away 527s. If you leave them, the finances of the campaigns are more even.
Moveon.org started in response to the attacks on Clinton. The idea was to lobby to quit spending millions of dollars on Ken Starr's pet project and 'move on'. The organization is not a direct product of the Kerry campaign, whereas the swift boat group was directly related to the Bush campaign.
Moveon has not put out false ads. You can agree or disagree, but the ads don't reach the level of outright lying. The guys in the swift boat ads claim they served with Kerry when that's not true. And if that one seems legit because you think the stretched truth is not quite a lie, there are also the claims they have made that a certain incident did not occur under fire. Yet their own past testimony was that the boats were under fire when Kerry pulled an overboard man back into the boat.
The Hitler ad only got on the moveon website, never on TV. Moveon apologized and admitted it should have been screened and not put up on the site. Kerry specifically said the ad was wrong.
The Republicans have specific talking points to change the subject when the request for specific condemnation comes up in any interview. The talking points say to change the subject to condemn all 527s. Why? Because they not only want the ad to stick in people's minds that Kerry's war record is a sham, but they also want to give the impression Kerry attack ads have been equally bad. Every Republican interviewed on every news station has had the same answer to the question, "Should Bush condemn the ad?"
And, now, they've added a rumor that Kerry's wounds might have been self inflicted. Despite the fact that there is absolutely no evidence on that one.
Here's a report on the Hardball interview with the claims now being made. They are so dishonest it's frightening.
Self-inflicted politics (Keith Olbermann)
quote:
My producer handed m |
 |
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2004 : 13:35:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
The ties are more than circumstantial, I'm afraid. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are funded by contributors to the Bush campaign. "Truth" my size 4 ass. 
Realy, people that contribute to Bush also support the ads against Kerry. Unbelievable! This is not surprising or illegal and it does not prove that Bush is directing the ad. Kerry has contributors that contribute both to his campaign and MoveOn ads. |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2004 : 14:35:54 [Permalink]
|
Robb. Bush could have condemned the ad. He didn't.
"Unfit for Command" is published by Regnery, a conservative publisher. Check out their website: www.regnery.com. Regnery also published a "controversial justification" of the Japanese internment during WWII, a book by David Horowitz linking "the left" to radical Islam (?!), and a character assasination book on, of all people, that radical, subversive Jimmy Carter.
Kenneth Cordier, one of the contributors to the book, was also on the steering committee of Veterans for Bush-Cheney '04.
How much more evidence do you need to be convinced that this is a right-wing smear campaign acting with at least the tacit approval of the Bushies? |
|
|
|
Wulfstan
New Member
USA
42 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 00:35:41 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
The ties are more than circumstantial, I'm afraid. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are funded by contributors to the Bush campaign. "Truth" my size 4 ass.
Realy, people that contribute to Bush also support the ads against Kerry. Unbelievable! This is not surprising or illegal and it does not prove that Bush is directing the ad. Kerry has contributors that contribute both to his campaign and MoveOn ads.
Well, Bush doesn't really do anything, Karl Rove takes care of this and all of this bs is true Rovian form. Rove started this kind of smear tactic even before he promoted Bush as Governor of Texas. Let's see, the major contributor to SWIFT is Bob Perry of Perry Homes here in Texas(FOB..."friend of Bush"; he's given $200K to them so far. Sure, there's nothing illegal about, though comparison to MoveOn's ads is not a good analogy. SciFi Chick pointed some of this out. Worse, this is McCain-redux. Of course Bush isn't "directing" the ad, the point is he's allowing the same thing to happen. Rove is a very powerful person--he could shut this down fast if he cared to. SWIFT has actively sought out veterans to smear Kerry's record simply because Bush can't compete. It's not as if all these years they've had this heartfelt concern to expose Kerry who has been active in government for some time--suddenly this is a reason for Kerry to not be fit for the presidency? As if Bush was? No matter how you slice it, these SWIFT guys are doing wrong and they're doing wrong by current soldiers and past soldiers who have spoken out against the wars they've been engaged in and right now.
And this is just obscuring the issues, which Bush doesn't have a whole lot going for him. I hope it backfires in the way Bush Sr's last campaign did--my grandmother wouldn't vote for Bush Sr because he got so nasty.
New article:
quote:
EAST HAMPTON, N.Y. -- Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry on Saturday night urged President Bush to "stand up and stop" what he called personal attacks on him over his combat record in Vietnam.
At a fundraiser, attended by about 750 people, Kerry said the attacks by a group of Vietnam veterans and former Swift Boat commanders have intensified "because in the last months they have seen me climbing in America's understanding that I know how to fight a smarter and more effective war" against terrorists.
"That's why they're attacking my credibility. That's why they've personally gone after me. The president needs to stand up and stop that. The president needs to have the courage to talk about it."
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group funded in part by a top GOP donor in Texas, has been running ads featuring veterans who served in Vietnam at the same time as Kerry and question his wartime record.
The White House and the Bush campaign have denied any direct connection with the Swift Boat group. "The president has made it repeatedly clear that he wants to see an end to all" advertising from outside groups, said Brian Jones, a Bush campaign spokesman.
But on Saturday, a former POW, retired Col. Ken Cordier, resigned as a volunteer from the Bush campaign's veterans' steering committee after it was learned that he participated in an anti-Kerry ad sponsored by the Swift Boat group. The ad criticizes Kerry's congressional anti-war testimony in the 1970s alleging U.S. troops engaged in atrocities in Vietnam.
SNIP
Earlier on Saturday, Kerry's campaign released a video comparing the controversy over Kerry's Vietnam service to attacks on John McCain during the 2000 Republican primaries.
The video, sent via e-mail to supporters, says, "George Bush is up to his old tricks" and shows then-Texas Gov. Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain at a debate in February 2000.
McCain, sitting next to Bush, says that when "fringe veterans groups" attacked him at a Bush campaign function, Bush stood by and didn't say a word. McCain says a group of senators wrote Bush a letter that said: "Apologize. You should be ashamed."
McCain, also a Vietnam veteran, says Bush "really went over the line."
Full article:http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/2753262
|
|
|
|
Wulfstan
New Member
USA
42 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 00:46:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Kil said: When Kerry said he would have voted to send troops to Iraq even if the WMD evidence wasn't there, I could only hang my head and think about how Gore snatched defeat from the jaws of victory by running a stupid campaign. If Kerry thinks he will win by showing that he would make exactly the same wrong headed decision's as Bush, we are lost...
Yep, which is why I didn't vote for Kerry in the Primary. However that bothers me, it's not just the President we vote for, but his Cabinet and his appointees. For this reason, I want to clean house, nevertheless. It would make me happy to see Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Ashcroft, et al gone. I don't know who we'd get in place, but if you know how people operate and they've done a poor job, you try someone new.
I remember my father, who has always voted Republican, saying in response to my comments about Bush's bumbling, idiotic ways, "It's not the president, it's who he surrounds himself with." That's what I have a problem with. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 06:37:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
And to follow up, Ms Malkin then appeared on the Rush Limbaugh show with the pretense she was horribly treated by Chris Matthews.
Well, I hope the Republicans hang themselves with this one. They might be reinforcing their base but I can't see how this kind of smear campaign is going to get swing voters. It most certainly will be reinforcing Kerry's base. The more dishonest the Bush admin seems, the more motivated Dems will be to vote him out.
I was watching (and laughing hysterically) the savaging of Ms. Malkin(who rolled her eyes like a teenager when they say "whatever".) and the interrogation of Thurlow. It was truely inspiring. Malkin made herself out to be a fool. (Olbermann referred to her as that, not calling her an idiot as she whined to Limbaugh.)
Thurlow's claims were completely unsupported. Claiming that Kerry piloted his craft into harms way (nice of the Vietnamese to oblige him) and self inflicted wounds to ensure a war record. He claimed that there was no shooting going on when Kerry won his Bronze Star, yet Thurlow's own Bronze Star for the same action also prominently mentions gunfire. Rassmussen, a special forces member at that time, mentions being shot at in the water from both shores. The action report appears to be written from multiple points of view. When in command of your own boat and dealing with an emergency (such as rescue and recovery of a mined boat) one rarely has time to watch the actions of another boat.
Malkin's claims, based on the book, surround Kerry discharging a grende launcher close aboard against the water or a rock to get shrapnel. Besides being absolutely stupid, as the shrapnel could easily blow back and kill you, it is not something that the entire crew would miss. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 07:03:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
Seems to me that Kerry running on his war accomplishments is a mistake. Running as a Republican is a mistake. While Kerry may have used that in the beginning to show that he actually did something that Bush, our "War President" didn't do, too much attention has been made on what now looks like a pissing match to see who is the most macho. 'Cept Bush isn't running on his war record.
Bush may not be running on his war record from the 60's, but he is trying to make himself out to be a "wartime" President. (A fact no doubt helped by the nebulous "war on terror" which, as near as I can tell, is a fight against a stateless enemy and no definable criteria for victory.)
Indeed, the present campaign strategy for Bush seems to have two parts: A) stress how we're "fighting" terror, and B) Kerry sucks.
By pushing these-- especially B-- they've managed to brush off the table any serious discussion of actual policy, domestic or otherwise.
Of course, now I read that Bush plans to unveil more plans during the convention. Brilliant! Stall the debate regarding actual policy until you and your hacks can come up with catchy names and positive-sounding spin-points for destructive programs and then announce them when you want to. It will put Kerry on the defensive, and doubtless that our hapless press corps with be thrilled to buy into all Bush's crap without engaging in any sort of critical analysis.
Sounds like 2000 all over again! |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 12:39:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Sounds like 2000 all over again!
Yep... and as somebody else said, somehow Bush and his crew have made the media think that criticizing Bush = Anti-American. Since 9/11 our "free press" (even the ones that are not owned by a big corporation) have had their heads up their asses. They have failed to question any of the dubious claims made by this administration.
Even Bob Woodward.... he gets a 3 1/2 hour private interview with W, and never asks him a hard question.
All the while FOX news sits back and parrots the republican talking points endlessly, and after enough repetition people start to believe. (it works, no other way to explain why so many people still think Iraq HAS(not HAD) WMD and that Saddam helped in the 9/11 plot)
Soros should start his own 24 hour cable news..... |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2004 : 00:43:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Even Bob Woodward.... he gets a 3 1/2 hour private interview with W, and never asks him a hard question.
Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were on Larry King discussing Nixon. It was fascinating that Woodward was clearly Republican and Bernstein was a Democrat. They had some very diverse opinions on some things.
I read both of Woodward's books and was a bit bored by them. But even with Woodward being pro-Bush, there was a lot of bad decision making 'on the record'.
That was Bernstein's complaint, Bush wasn't making good decisions at all. Both reporters said Nixon had serious personality flaws that left him unsuited for being president. Nixon was very bigoted and paranoid. Bernstein compared Nixon's lies to Bush's misleading the country and said the two situations were completely different.
I found Bernstein to be incredibly insightful. |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2004 : 05:18:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Robb posted;
The ad was not put out by the Republicans and Bush cannot stop this ad unless he wants to supress free speech. There was not this much uproar over some of the MoveOn.org ads that also had falsehoods in them.
Beskeptigal addressed this issue fairly well. The thing to remeber is that Kerry did specifically separate himself and his campaign from the MoveOn ad. Bush played word games.
To be honest, I think Kerry gave in too easily. There is a huge difference between the MoveOn ad and the SWIFT ad. The MoveOn ad can be supported by military records. The SWIFT ad is contradictory to the military records.
This is a First Amendment issue, and the First Ammendment gives us the right to say what we feel, but not to lie in an effort to harm others.
By the way Robb, CNN and FOX covered the MoveOn ad closely until Kerry condemned it. Besides, the Bush administration does not want the news covering the MoveOn ad to get a lot of air time. This would keep his military records in the media. That includes the his low pilot's test scores and leaping past more qualified people to get into the ARN. It includes his missing time. It includes his early release. And, it includes failure to show up for a physical and drug test.
The administration does not want to draw attention to Bush's past, but it must keep up the attack on Kerry's past. If they don't keep the Kerry campaign on the defense, they might have to discuss issues, rather than complaining that the other side isn't.
Damn, I love politics!
And, for those that insist that Kerry should not run on his war record should consider that his campaign began this tactic in response to the radio right wingnuts, Republican and Democratic primary attacks on his post service anti-war antics. Plus, this issue doesn't resonate with those that have already chosen sides. These folks might get upset, but they're unlikely to change their minds. However, the mysterious undecided voter is supposed to be intensely interested in the so called "War on Terrorism," and the war in Iraq, as well as the economy. They're supposed to consider military leadership a key factor in the qualifications of the next president.
edited because I ain't too bright and can't write |
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
| Edited by - Tim on 08/26/2004 05:40:56 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
