Two candidates, two military records, two standards The gist is that the "Deserter" attacks on Bush were widely criticized by the media, while the "Swift Boat" attacks on Kerry are given a free pass. Media Matters breaks it down and does a fantastic job of backing up their arguments with facts and citations.

Anything to please the big-budget pocketbook? I just read that and the salon.com article that it linked to. I don't really read much news so I had no idea how bad the situation is. Wow. Wow.

depends on your source

and what this graph means to me is? hello spunky. good to see you.

Well, the source is LexisNexis. And that site rates Fox as perfectly balanced in reporting on Bush? Who funds this site?

Actually, I think in some ways spunky is right. However, I think most of the 'pro-Kerry' coverage is actually just that theres too much stuff working against Bush. Abu Ghraib, Iraq, ongoing Halliburton stuff, etc. - the media IS repeating a lot of the "kerry is a flipflopper" stuff while ignoring Bushs major and obvious flipflops of his own, and at the same time saying Kerry is the most liberal member of the senate. It doesnt really make much sense how someone can take both sides of an issue and be an 'out of the mainstream' liberal. And really, the Swiftvet stuff is getting way more coverage than the stuff against Bush. the viciousness of the Swiftvet stuff isnt coming from the media but they aint helping by playing it over and over again. if Kerry loses because of this one thing it'll be a huge shame. Disagreeing on issues is one thing, but this attack on his record, the case by the Swiftvets just hasnt been made. And meanwhile Bush still wont answer why he didnt show up to his medical exam. They spent millions of dollars training him and he cant show up?

Tiggy you have to go in the site further: New York, August 25, 2004 - While media criticism of John Kerry‘s military service far outweighed his positive coverage, ABC, CBS and NBC and the Fox News Channel differed in how they voiced their criticism. On Fox's Special Report with Brit Hume, journalists were openly critical of John Kerry, the network reporters went for critical quotes from third parties in their account of the controversy. On Fox, the largest share of criticism of Kerry came from the show‘s journalists, who were responsible for 63% of the negative statements on Kerry’s military service. Interviews with voters and experts only served as a secondary source of criticism on the show. In the network's evening news broadcasts, the most frequent source of criticism of Kerry were interviews with individual voters, which accounted for 65% of the negative statements on Kerry’s military service. Journalists here were more reserved in tone, contributing only 27% of the total of negative statements. Making frequent use of the "man on the street" as a source may well have a greater impact on the audience, since such quotes may appear more genuinely representative of the electorate. Similarly, a comment by an ordinary individual may also be perceived as more credible than open criticism from a reporter. More information: Ms. Isadora Badi Media Tenor Institute aka opinion masquerading as news.

anti-Kerry vet sticks up for Kerrys record regardless Swiftboat Crewman: Kerry Boat Took Fire 2 hours, 59 minutes ago By JOSEPH B. FRAZIER, Associated Press Writer PORTLAND, Ore. - A swiftboat crewman decorated in the 1969 Vietnam incident where John Kerry (news - web sites) won a Bronze Star says not only did they come under enemy fire but also that his own boat commander, who has challenged the official account, was too distracted to notice the gunfire. Retired Chief Petty Officer Robert E. Lambert, of Eagle Point, Ore., got a Bronze Star for pulling his boat commander — Lt. Larry Thurlow — out of the Bay Hap River on March 13, 1969. Thurlow had jumped onto another swiftboat to aid sailors wounded by a mine explosion but fell off when the out-of-control boat ran aground. Thurlow, who has been prominent among a group of veterans challenging the Democratic presidential candidate's record, has said there was no enemy fire during the incident. Lambert, however, supports the Navy account that says all five swiftboats in the task force "came under small arms and automatic weapon fire from the river banks" when the mine detonated. "I thought we were under fire, I believed we were under fire," Lambert said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "Thurlow was far too distracted with rescue efforts to even realize he was under fire. He was concentrating on trying to save lives." The anti-Kerry group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, has been running television ads challenging the Navy account of the boats being under fire. Kerry has condemned the ads as a Republican smear campaign. A career military man, Lambert is no fan of Kerry's either. He doesn't like Kerry's post-Vietnam anti-war activity and doesn't plan to vote for him. "I don't like the man himself," Lambert said, "but I think what happened happened, and he was there." A March 1969 Navy report located by The Associated Press this week supports Lambert's version. The report twice mentions the incident and both times calls it "an enemy initiated firefight" that included automatic weapons fire and underwater mines used against a group of five boats that included Kerry's. Kerry's Bronze Star was awarded for his pulling Special Forces Lt. Jim Rassmann, who had been blown off the boat, out of the river. Rassmann, who is retired and lives in Florence, Ore., has said repeatedly that the boats were under fire, as have other witnesses. Lambert didn't see that rescue because Kerry was farther down the river and "I was busy pulling my own boat officer (Thurlow) out of the water." Thurlow could not be reached for comment about Lambert's recollections. But speaking for the Swift Boat Veterans group, Van Odell, who was in the task force that day, remembers it differently from Lambert. "When they're firing, you can hear the rounds hit the boat or buzz by your head. There was none of that," he said in a telephone interview from Katy, Texas, where he lives. On Thursday, the group released a 30-second Internet ad disputing Kerry's contention that his swiftboat crossed into Cambodia. Kerry's campaign has acknowledged that he may not have been in Cambodia on Christmas Eve of 1968, as he has previously stated, but that he does recall being on patrol along the Cambodia-Vietnam border on that date. Lambert said the swiftboats were on their way out of the river when a mine exploded under one, PCF-3. "When they blew the 3-boat, everyone opened up on the banks with everything they had," he said. "That was the normal procedure. When they came after you, they came after you. Somebody on shore blew that mine." "There was always a firefight" after a mine detonation, he said. "Kerry was out in front of us, on down the river. He had to come back up the river to get to us." Lambert retired in 1978 as a chief petty officer with 22 years of service and three tours in Vietnam. He does not remember ever meeting Kerry.

"LexisNexis" ann coulter's favorite statistical obfuscation tool!

http://www.electoral-vote.com/ kerry's lead is slipping away. in electoral votes just a few weeks back he was leading by over 100. now its only 12. the smear campaign is working

I thought Southerners were supposed to vote Democrat?

"Baseless allegations that Kerry has lied about his military record have gotten heavy media coverage in recent months -- but lies we know that Bush has told about his own military record have gone virtually unreported by the media." From the link in the original post. Not very unbiased, if you ask me.

Col. George E. "Bud" Day is the most decorated officer since Gen. Douglas MacArthur, and was Senator John McCain's cellmate in the Hanoi Hilton. In John McCain's book, "Faith of My Fathers," McCain credits Day with saving his life (pg. 200). Col. Day is also one of The University of South Dakota School of Law's most prominent alumni, and gave the keynote address to the law school's class of 2004. The tale behind his Medal of Honor decoration is awe-inspiring. Today, Col. Day weighed in on the controversy surrounding John Kerry and the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth, firmly on the side of the latter "The major issue in the Swiftboat stories is, and always has been, what John Kerry did in 1971 after he returned from Vietnam. Kerry cast a long dark shadow over all Vietnam Veterans with his outright perjury before the Senate concerning atrocities in Vietnam. His stories to the Senate committee were absolute lies.. fabrications.. perjury.. fantasies, with NO substance. That dark shadow has defamed the entire Vietnam War veteran population, and gave "Aid and Comfort" to our enemies..the Vietnamese Communists. Kerry's stories were outright fabrications, and were intended for political gain with the radical left..McGovern, Teddy and Bobby Kennedy followers, Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden, and the radical left who fantasized that George McGovern was going to be elected in 1972. Little wonder that returning soldiers from Vietnam were spit upon and castigated as "baby killers". A returned "war hero" said so

wait a minute, so they're saying that there were no war atrocities committed in vietnam? that quite a bit of revisionism they're trying to pull off there. it's not fair that soldiers were reviled when they returned from 'nam but it's not kerry's fault. it was the people against what he was doing, i.e. john o'neill, who turned what kerry was saying -- that the leaders in government were responsible for the policies that allowed the war atrocities to occur -- into john kerry is trying to say that all soldiers are rapists and baby killers. in trying to smear kerry, they actually smeared all vets. they did it to themselves. kerry was trying to make the leaders in government responsible for it, not the vets themselves. the government actually vilified the vets by denying any wrongdoing. much like the abu gahreff uhhh. . . . ss . . . situation, the government is doing everything it can to pin it on the guards. shame on the government.

Kerry "cast a long dark shadow over all Vietnam Veterans"? He was quoting from the Winter Soldier investigation. And don't try to post all sorts of freeper links about winter soldier. Try looking up the history yourself. And, talk about a smear on vets. The swift boat yahoos are calling into doubt every medal won by every vet. If Kerry can fake the records of his own medals, even the after action reports and the like, couldn't that be said of any soldier's medals?

LexisNexis can be a tool for good and evil, Nate.

"Kerry cast a long dark shadow over all Vietnam Veterans with his outright perjury before the Senate concerning atrocities in Vietnam. His stories to the Senate committee were absolute lies.. fabrications.. perjury.. fantasies, with NO substance." the quote the Swifties use in their add wasnt Kerry talking about what he saw personally. it was him speaking as a representative of others, reading testimony from others. No perjury whatsoever. One of the Swifties was on Hannity the other night and said frankly that there were atrocities there and he knew people firsthand who committed "unspeakable atrocities". Then when asked why then they're attacking kerry, he said basically "duh he made us look bad" thats not a very good case. So whats gonna happen in 20 years? An Iraq War whistleblower vet runs for office and "Abu Ghraib Prison Guards for Truth" yells and screams that his testimony demoralized the troops? Thats not much of an argument. The buck stops at the leadership. Kerrys testimony in the 70s put it on the leaders, NOT on the troops, just as today he's not blaming the US troops for Ghraib, he blames the leaders and calls for Rumsfeld to resign. completely consistent.

Seriously, the swiftvets have no idea what a smear they've put on the Navy by doing this. And I think its hilarious that Thurlow basically found out through all this that if he's telling the truth that "there was no enemy fire", that means the medals he got, he diddnt deserve. think he'd give them up? One day one Swiftvet says Kerry shot a VC child in a loincloth, the next this other guy, Tom somethingorother, says that Kerry never shot the VC, it was him. No consistency whatsoever.

Oregon City - The Clackamas County Prosecutor who appeared in an ad against John Kerry has been suspended from his job, but not for speaking out. Al French has been the target of local protests after his appearance in a political ad questioning the the Democratic candidate's war record. On Thursday he was placed on leave by the Clackamas County District Attorney's office. It wasn't for his statements against Kerry, but for lying about an extra-marital affair. Reports say French misled his former boss ten years ago to avoid getting fired. French has faced a great deal of scrutiny since the ad first aired, with veterans calling for his resignation. He said in the spot that he had served with John Kerry, and that Kerry exaggerated his war record. He also signed an affidavit, swearing to tell the truth during the taping. French later admitted he had not served with Kerry, but relied on accounts from his friends. That irked local veterans, who complained to the Oregon Bar Association. They say French violated his duty as a state official by lying on the affidavit, and can no longer be trusted. I think some site needs to keep a 'body count' of the number of Swifties now discredited. So many hav either been completely discredited, mainly by their own words against them. Several others have 'quit' the group, not showing up to planned rallies saying O'Neill and others lied to them in putting the group together.

Thurlow basically threw his own bronze star away, saying it was invalid, so he could smear Kerry. Isn't that ironic given how much shit Kerry's gotten for symbolically throwing his own medals away?

actually Thurlow didnt. He didnt know it was 'invalid' till someone called him on it. He had no idea he got it for the same action as Kerry. He even said he never looked at his citation for it, having lost it decades ago. he really made a fool of himself.

Jeez. World Net Daily is even trashing the swift boat vets. Amazing.

http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/08/ale04035.html kerry's remarks before congress in '71 yeah, he really hates his fellow soldiers.

its in the Republicans interest to disavow themselve s of the Swiftvet ads. McCain is a huge hope for the RNC and rightly so for the future. Putting this stuff out there hurts McCain and could hurt him again in the future. It could help Bush get reelected, but i think the smarter Republicans are thinking further ahead.

http://swiftvets.eriposte.com/

http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/08/ale04040.html Former TX Lt. Gov - "I got Bush in the ANG' (video)

rowlfe, that was an editorial. WND's Homepage splashes this: Admiral comes forward to dispute Kerry medal Insists he was in boat with future senator, wound self-inflicted, not from enemy fire and this: "Speaking at a Martin Luther King Day celebration last year, presidential candidate John F. Kerry told a Virginia audience that he remembered hearing the tragic news of the assassination while serving in Vietnam – though he did not begin his four-month tour of duty for at least seven months after the shooting." As for the link you provided for Bill Press: Bill Press' latest book is now available from ShopNetDaily! Get your copy of "Bush Must Go: The Top Ten Reasons Why George Bush Doesn't Deserve a Second Term" before you vote. Bill Press is a political analyst for MSNBC, a syndicated columnist, and the author of "Spin This!"" Not that any of this really matters. The only thing, if anything, that will get Kerry into office is his one claim he can make that cannot be refuted. He's not Bush. Just one last thought on this: Kerry has chosen to make the battleground his time in Vietnam. As others have pointed out, he himself has chosen not to say one word about the time between Vietnam and now. Not one word about Winter Soldier. Not one word about his time as a prosecutor (what major cases?). Not one word as LT Governor (not that most LTGovs have that much to boast about). Not one word as Senator. To suggest that the other side is somehow supposed to give that chosen battleground a pass is odd, at best, and disingenuous at worst. Kerry should raise high his banners of prosecutor, of lieutenant governor. I suspect that the GOP would be forced to then contend with that, especially if he has a rock-solid record. One can hardly fault the opposition for taking up the cudgel on ground of your choosing.

" He's not Bush. " good enough. at the moment. first you clear the debris. you can worry about washing windows when you've replaced the glass. fuck all, i gave that bastard the benefit of the doubt for a long time. this shit is freaking me out. if not bush himself, the lack of elephant spine. where are the conservatives?

have ya noticed there are no terror warnings now that they've drawn kerry blood with this issue? wouldn't want to draw attention away from that, would we? i mean, c'mon. we got a convention and demonstrations to look forward to next week. perfect time to play the threat card and go martial law on manhattan. except that it would also take away from the swift vet thing. i bet 5 bucks the minute kerry gets his act together and strikes back (what the fuck are they waiting for?) we get another very credible, non-specific threat warning.

"rowlfe, that was an editorial...etc...etc" I didnt post the link. "The only thing, if anything, that will get Kerry into office is his one claim he can make that cannot be refuted. He's not Bush." I dont agree with Kerry on a lot of things, but theres some things that are very respectable about him. He's knowledgable and articulate. he answers questions. In this respects he is like Clinton, who was at least better than Bush. "Kerry has chosen to make the battleground his time in Vietnam. As others have pointed out, he himself has chosen not to say one word about the time between Vietnam and now." You're confusing, are you saying he never talked about vietnam between 70-today, or are you saying he hasnt said the following: "Not one word about Winter Soldier. Not one word about his time as a prosecutor (what major cases?). Not one word as LT Governor (not that most LTGovs have that much to boast about). Not one word as Senator." Well you know thats not true and just hyperbole, this 'not one word' crap. Its not at the forefront in the media, but its been out there. ANd I doubt you read his website. In his convention speech he didnt, you'r eright. the spin on that was the election was about 'the future'. I can see past that but if you're gonna be like Hannity and count the number of words about his past in his speech, you have to know that Bush spoke even HALF AS MUCH about his than that in his 2000 convention speech. And I dont think he's got a lot of record to crow about at this next one. Be sure most of it will also be about the future with buzzwords and "moving forward" and blah. "To suggest that the other side is somehow supposed to give that chosen battleground a pass is odd, at best, and disingenuous at worst." Bob Dole's record was not attacked in 96. The book 'fortunate son' in 2000 about Bush was tackled by the media and never received any SWBFT type notoriety. Bush 41 spoke a lot about his war record and wasnt attacked. The way you worded this sentence seems like someone else wrote it. Its not 'you'. "Kerry should raise high his banners of prosecutor, of lieutenant governor. I suspect that the GOP would be forced to then contend with that, especially if he has a rock-solid record." I guess you're not really listening. I dont put my ear out that often to hear what Kerry himself has to say, but I still found out all about the selfless lawyer stuff, the bipartisan workings on POW and all that stuff. "One can hardly fault the opposition for taking up the cudgel on ground of your choosing." Cudgel? That aint a spunky word or a spunky phrase. I cry foul here. AND I'M RIGHT! You copied this opinion from "Dean Esmay" from the link below as well as from the Swiftvets message baord ---- unless thats your email there spunk - sunzisomethingorother@yahoo.com? I doubt it. I suppose if I want I could email him and find out? http://www.dailypundit.com/archives/014683.php next on the Swiftvets discussion thread! Corsi-isms! Corsi on Islam: "a worthless, dangerous Satanic religion" • Corsi on Catholicism: "Boy buggering in both Islam and Catholicism is okay with the Pope as long as it isn't reported by the liberal press" • Corsi on Muslims: "RAGHEADS are Boy-Bumpers as clearly as they are Women-Haters -- it all goes together" • Corsi on "John F*ing Commie Kerry": "After he married TerRAHsa, didn't John Kerry begin practicing Judiasm? He also has paternal grandparents that were Jewish. What religion is John Kerry?" • Corsi on Senator "FAT HOG" Clinton: "Anybody ask why HELLary couldn't keep BJ Bill satisfied? Not lesbo or anything, is she?"

"...he himself has chosen not to say one word about the time between Vietnam and now." Right, kind of like Bush hasn't talked much about his activities in that same time. Lessee...he was...choosing to not go to Vietnam...no word about the physical exams for the air national guard he missed...no word about the failed businesses he "ran"...no word about the drunk driving arrest...no word about Harkin energy... So, at the same time Bush was doing... what? ...Kerry was getting a law degree, being a prosecutor, being a Lt Govenor, and being a Senator. I think that speaks for itself.

Ah, Rowlfe, I can always count on you to hit Google. :) Oh, and about the Kerry/MLK thing: Kerry WAS in Vietnam then. I can cut 'n' paste too: from MediaMatters "A timeline of Kerry's Vietnam service on his website shows that Kerry began serving on the U.S.S. Gridley in June 1967, and the ship departed for the western Pacific on February 9, 1968, 'to engage in operations in support of the Vietnam War. According to the timeline, 'the ship spen[t] time in the Gulf of Tonkin off North Vietnam, at Subic Bay in the Philippines and in Wellington, New Zealand.' Kerry remained on the ship until June 20, 1968, when Kerry left to begin 'specialized training' in preparation for his service as a swift boat commander on the rivers of mainland Vietnam, which he began on November 17." Spunk, you won't question anything as long as it backs up your beliefs. That's pathetic.

Fuck me...

rowlf, you da dawg. spunky, use your words. paraphrase or whatever but, dude, that's fucking weak. i kinda understand as i'm a lousy communicator too, and every day i find examples of people who express my feelings better than i could express them. but at least say something like, "this guy expresses my feelings better than i can when he says . . .". then it isn't plagarism. sheesh.

the whole matter of Kerry's service is rather stupid. and thats the point. the bush camp has nothing to tout otherwise. anybody but Bush. as nate says. we'll sort it out later. first order of business is get that dangerous motherfucker out.

did anyone see Bush and his "War on terrorism is not winnable" quote? Now I actually agree with him on this, but talk about your ULTIMATE flip-flop

my farts are so smelly. i made a batch of texas style chili this weekend it was DELICIOUS! but it also fucked me up. apparently, i've become too feeble to handle large amounts of cumin and chili powder. first time i've ever had to eat tums. so now, i debate either giving it up or stocking up on antacids. the latter seems less pussy. i am not a pussy (nate).

My farts have also been similarly smelly lately. Not sure why. Might be all the blueberry pie. (Been making it from scratch.)

do you think it's the blueberries or the pectin? for me, it feels like stomach acid up into my throat. the chili was really good. i followed a recipe that won a championship except that it called for a tbsp of msg and 2 cups of water. i split the difference and added an extra can of crushed tomatos in lieu of msg. i love how all of the champion recipes owe so little to gourmet and so much to white trash.

http://www.chilicookoff.com/Recipe/Recipe_Categories_Search.asp?Cat=1 i used the second recipe with the 4 drops. anyway, we can uncover all the dirt, all the hypocrisy. it won't matter unless the professionals get it into play like the swift vets did. rest assured, the moment they do, we go nationwide red alert. these bastards will not fail to exploit the power of incumbency and squander tax revenues to preserve their hegemony. george bush would personally fuck pre-adolescent children if he thought it would assure his re-election.

http://www.pleasurecaptains.com/ Pleasure Boat Captains for Truth

wtf is up with bush saying we can't win the war on terror one day, and then saying we will win the war on terror the next day. i just don't understand how half the country is caught up in this guy. i see guiliani and mccain standing up for him and i can't figure out why. what am i missing?

what choice do they have? they didn't even have primaries this time around. they're betting the farm on dubya.

Check out the media bias on the Bush flip-flop. How much you wanna bet there'll be little fuss over it, but they'll keep repeating the "Kerry is a flip-flopper" line.

the republicans didnt have any choice but to have bush get a redo on that one. its so absurd because they do otherwise. they could have left it alone and let the dems flap about it but it would be quite damaging or they can do an obvious flip about it, look stupid for a while and at the same saying "no no, he was wrong, see? he said the right thing the next day." i still maintain the biggest concern this country has is its education system. it doesnt get any more obvious.

I was watching a townhall thing on CNN, and the crowd had been going for the RNC representative for most of the show, but then they talked about education, the RNC shill says Bush has a great education record, and the whole place, the WHOLE place, BOOED the living hell out of him. Never seen anything like it. I havent been watching the Repub Convention. But I'm looking to see this Bush daughter speech. Heard it was a train wreck.

http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow/demnow/demand/2004/aug/video/dnB20040831a.rm&proto=rtsp&start=35:16.287 watch around 2 - 3 minutes in and onward to get a little insight into the geniuses that supports Bush

While the Reps are pretending to be 'compassionate conservatives' in NYC, this is happening. and its just sick: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=544&ncid=703&e=6&u=/ap/20040831/ap_on_go_pr_wh/weapons_workers

reading transcripts bizarre little thing I noticed. Arnold said in his speech he became a Republican after seeing Humphrey debate Nixon. Nixon and Humphrey never debated. WTF?

It's a clear choice Spunky. Just on the environmental records alone. Kerry has a 92% lifetime voting record from the League of Conservation voters, who are fairly non-partisan (They endorse politicians based solely on their voting records, so I've actually seen a decent number of environmentally friendly republicans get a nod from them). Bush's environmental record, well, it would take a long time to list all the really awful things, so how about this one especially for you, Spunky: Instead of simply enforcing the Clean Air Act, Bush's EPA wants to allow three times more mercury in the air than is currently allowed under the act. This is despite EPA findings that discovered the health threat of mercury to Americans is much higher than was thought. One in six women have blood mercury levels high enough to adversely effect fetal development. Now, to bring that to a personal level, that means there is a one in six chance that Eri is one of those women. The same odds for your daughters. Bush thinks that's ok. Do you think that's ok?

Check this out: Bush wearing a military ribbon he wasn't awarded.

I just figured out who the Bush daughters remind me of click here http://www.thefirsttwins.com/images/official-email.jpg then here http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000003MSH.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

did you hear at the convention, they are handing out little band aides that poke fun at Kerry's war wounds? wtf?

stave it off 1 2 3 and now you can count to 3

i read buzzflash every day, i listen to air america. why? i'm not the one who needs any more convincing. what am i getting out of all this? it's fucking ridiculous.

Re; Kerry's anti-Vietnam Congressional testimony "It was a period of intense feeling on both sides for and against the war, but I think that was painting with far too broad a brush to tarnish the records and service of people who were defending our country and fighting communism and doing what they thought was right," Karl Rove hey asshole, incase you forget many soldiers who to Vietnam were forced to go by a thing called the draft, remember? Many sodliers did what was "right" because they had little choice you fuck.

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040901/i/r3037595475.jpg anyone else notice the Cross motif in that podium? Intentional? Unintentional? Subliminal?

Totally intentional.

Completely. If I didn't know it was at the convention I'd say it was an altar.

Even that asshole Andrew Sullivan has had enough now: THE MILLER MOMENT: Zell Miller's address will, I think, go down as a critical moment in this campaign, and maybe in the history of the Republican party. I kept thinking of the contrast with the Democrats' keynote speaker, Barack Obama, a post-racial, smiling, expansive young American, speaking about national unity and uplift. Then you see Zell Miller, his face rigid with anger, his eyes blazing with years of frustration as his Dixiecrat vision became slowly eclipsed among the Democrats. Remember who this man is: once a proud supporter of racial segregation, a man who lambasted LBJ for selling his soul to the negroes. His speech tonight was in this vein, a classic Dixiecrat speech, jammed with bald lies, straw men, and hateful rhetoric. As an immigrant to this country and as someone who has been to many Southern states and enjoyed astonishing hospitality and warmth and sophistication, I long dismissed some of the Northern stereotypes about the South. But Miller did his best to revive them. The man's speech was not merely crude; it added whole universes to the word crude. THE "OCCUPATION" CANARD: Miller first framed his support for Bush as a defense of his own family. The notion that individuals deserve respect regardless of their family is not Miller's core value. And the implication was that if the Democrats win in November, his own family would not be physically safe. How's that for subtlety? Miller's subsequent assertion was that any dissent from aspects of the war on terror is equivalent to treason. He accused all war critics of essentially attacking the very troops of the United States. He conflated the ranting of Michael Moore with the leaders of the Democrats. He said the following: Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today's Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator. And nothing makes this Marine madder than someone calling American troops occupiers rather than liberators. That macho invocation of the Marines was a classic: the kind of militarist swagger that this convention endorses and uses as a bludgeon against its opponents. But the term "occupation," of course, need not mean the opposite of liberation. I have used the term myself and I deeply believe that coalition troops have indeed liberated Afghanistan and Iraq. By claiming that the Democrats were the enemies of the troops, traitors, quislings and wimps, Miller did exactly what he had the audacity to claim the Democrats were doing: making national security a partisan matter. I'm not easy to offend, but this speech was gob-smackingly vile.

The Miller speech is a prime example of the core Republican strategy: accuse your opponent of doing something while doing it yourself. Accuse your opponent of doing the nasty shit that you've been doing yourself. That way, the response sounds a lot like, "I know what you are, but what am I?" I dunno. I know this is cliche, but if Bush wins again I may have to move out of the US. At the very least I'll have to move out of Texas. Sweden looks nice. (It's my ancestral home, and you can get 10Mbit broadband to your home for cheap...)

the liberals still aren't learning. if anyone delivered a speech like that against bush, they'd be instantly cast by every right-winger with a mic, a camera or a blog as wild-eyed, unhinged, shrill, shrieking, etc. i have not heard, seen or read any such coordinated response from the kerry campaign or the dnc. i've read a lot of criticism but nothing coordinated. hey, guys. coordination works. give it a try sometime. a couple days ago, bush handed us a perfect flip-flop. last night, we got a dose of classic, right-wing fear and hate mongering, lies and intolerance. it's time to wake the fuck up.

maybe so, but im seeing the stories and images from the brothers and sisters in NYC protests. it looks to be some of the most organized, flamboyant and surreal protests in recent years. i just wish i was there.

i don't mean that kind of organized. where the fuck is james carville? goddamit, the republicans should be begging for mercy by now. they should be laying on the ground in a fetal position with a wedgie and a swirlie, crying for their momma to take the pain away. fuck the protestors.

"a couple days ago, bush handed us a perfect flip-flop." Yeah, I mean I just read on Salon someone commenting that there was more media coverage of the "shove it" from Kerry's wife than the president of the united states saying we can't win the war on terror.

http://hosted.ap.org/photos/R/RNC18809020300-big.jpg the face of death.

i know you didnt dave. before i even read your comments i was intent on posting about the protestors. personally id rather see cute hippy-like chicks and choppy bull dykes on the street in face paint beating pots and pans that assholes like James Carvel spitting on the camera lens, but thats just me. Did anyone see that bit on John Stewart last night about "Words Speak Louder Than Actions" ?

I cant believe this shit. It can actually be said that the RNC convention has been nothing more than "kerry sucks kerry sucks 9/11 9/11 terror terror" Where are the policies? Is there any plan at all... for ANYTHING? People are gonna give Bush a blank check?

I scanned over the RNC platform. Basically, it's a bunch of utter bullshit (no surprise). Lots of lies and euphemisms. One thing I found ironic was a statement early on about their commitment to women's health and all they've done for women's health, while later on they state they want a constitutional amendment banning abortion. jesus. Anyone seen that Salon article about what Bush was really doing in 1972? He wasn't at the Guard. AWOL, anyone?

i'd rather see the republicans getting the political shit kicked out of them. it pisses me off that the liberal activists choose to expend their efforts by dancing in the streets. it's pure, self-absorbed fantasy to think that doing the hippy dance and waving signs and shit in nyc is going to sway undecideds in ohio.

I think the problem with protesting is that theres not a whole lot you can do. Walking, slogans, signs, dancing... uh... stuff... not much. The only real purpose of a protest as far as changing anyones mind is to just ASSEMBLE in numbers. whether or not you move, a nice aerial shot of hundreds of thousands of people might make a difference. In that sense the protest is a success.

"Where are the policies? Is there any plan at all..." Apparently Bush is going to highlight many domestic programs in his speech tonight. Like the Swift Boats shit, he's letting people around him do the attacking while he talks like a moderate.

"it added whole universes to the word crude." great line. And that "Words" thing on the daily show was magic. In a just world, I should bee seeing that montage on every news channel on earth right now. *sigh*

sister Doro ?

Well, whaddya know...

HA! i just now saw that bush twins/aphex twin comparison. i love the windowlicker video.

chris who?

I'm watching Kerry speak in Springfield, OH. Un-fucking-believable. He is tearing Bush a new asshole. Check out this excerpt: "We all saw the anger and distortion of the Republican Convention. For the past week, they attacked my patriotism and my fitness to serve as commander in chief. Well, here's my answer. I'm not going to have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq. "The vice president even called me unfit for office last night. I guess I'll leave it up to the voters whether five deferments makes someone more qualified to defend this nation than two tours of duty. "Let me tell you what I think makes someone unfit for duty. Misleading our nation into war in Iraq makes you unfit to lead this nation. Doing nothing while this nation loses millions of jobs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting 45 million Americans go without health care makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting the Saudi royal family control our energy costs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Handing out billions of government contracts to Halliburton while you're still on their payroll makes you unfit. That's the record of George Bush and Dick Cheney. And it's not going to change. I believe it's time to move America in a new direction; I believe it's time to set a new course for America."

fuck. i missed it. maybe they'll replay it this weekend.

Wow. Kerry certainly stole Bush's thunder. It was better than his convention speech. in fact it was the best speech I've seen him do to date. Say what you want about Kerry, contrast his detail and articulation to Bush's vagueness and repetition, and theres just no contest. Now can he keep it up?

Protesting does more than talking about politics on a website.

"protest" is just another name for "theme party downtown: bring props".

OH SNAP!

(to agatha)

http://martinirepublic.com/item/zell-miller-s-speech-based-on-email-hoax wowow

Clinton is undergoing bypass surgery tomorrow. Already the Freepers are saying he did it on purpose to distract from the Bu$h campaign trying to capitalize on a post-convention bounce.

I wouldn't put it past him. I mean, the symptoms leading to quadruple bypass don't just start up instantly. Of course, the flip side is this: isn't it odd that a major Democratic politician has gotten seriously ill or died just before the last three elections?

That's not quite true. Lots of folks go in for check ups on their hearts and end up with bypass surgery. That's what happened to Letterman. The three politicians are Wellstone, Carnahan, but who's the third? Did you know Ted Kennedy was supposed to be on the Wellstone plane?

Clinton would be the third. Maybe the South Beach Diet did it to him. :)

Yet another connection between Bush and the Swiftvets Presidential Elections - AP Two Anti-Kerry Vets Tapped for VA Panel 30 minutes ago By MATT KELLEY, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - Two former Vietnam prisoners of war who appear in ads attacking Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites) were appointed by the Bush administration to a panel advising the Department of Veterans Affairs (news - web sites). The former POWs in the ad, Kenneth Cordier and Paul Galanti, serve on the VA's 12-member Former POW Advisory Committee. VA Secretary Anthony Principi appointed Cordier in 2002 and Galanti in 2003. Cordier said the VA panel has nothing to do with the Bush campaign or the anti-Kerry group. "It's totally apolitical, and we meet twice a year to bring to the secretary's attention problems from around the country in VA hospitals," he said. Cordier and Galanti appear in an anti-Kerry ad saying their Vietnamese captors used news of anti-war protests, such as ones Kerry organized, to taunt the prisoners. Cordier also was a member of a Bush campaign veterans' committee but quit earlier this month after that role was revealed. VA spokesman Phil Budahn said Principi did not know about or encourage the veterans' appearance in the anti-Kerry ad. Budahn said federal regulations bar advisory committee members from engaging in political activity while performing their committee duties, but there are no other restrictions on their activities when not working on committee business. Kerry has labeled the group running the ads, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a front for the Bush campaign. Kerry's campaign complained to the Federal Election Commission (news - web sites) that the veterans' group was illegally coordinating its attacks with the Bush campaign. More than $100,000 of the group's initial funding came from Houston-area homebuilder Bob J. Perry, a longtime donor to Bush and other Texas Republicans. A Bush campaign lawyer also advised the Swift boat group and was dropped from the campaign staff after his role became public. Bush and his campaign have denied any coordination with Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Cordier said he got involved with the group because of his continuing outrage over anti-Vietnam war activists like Kerry. He said he got in touch with one of its leaders, John O'Neill, who later commanded the same Swift boat Kerry had overseen. Cordier said he doesn't remember his Vietnamese captors specifically mentioning Kerry but he does remember them playing a tape of an address by anti-war activist Jane Fonda. Cordier and Galanti are longtime friends and prominent former Vietnam POWs with long-standing Republican ties. Cordier said he suggested Galanti contact O'Neill. Galanti coordinated Arizona Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record)'s presidential campaign in Virginia four years ago and was a member of the same VA advisory panel when Bush's father was president. Cordier gave $2,000 to Texas Republicans in 2000 and 2001. The anti-Kerry group's ads have accused Kerry of lying to get some of the five medals he won as a Swift boat commander in Vietnam. Navy documents and other servicemen who witnessed the incidents contradict the group's claims, and the group has not offered any documentary proof of its claims that Kerry lied about his medals. Kerry himself has given differing accounts of some incidents, however, and his past claim to have been in Cambodia on Christmas 1968 is not substantiated by any documents so far. Navy records also show most of the anti-Kerry group's members were not in Vietnam at the same time as Kerry. The group has not released a membership list but did criticize Kerry in a May letter signed by 238 members. Only 101 names on the letter match names of officers or enlisted men on the rolls of Kerry's units in Vietnam when he was there, from November 1968 through March 1969. Van Odell, an enlisted man in Kerry's unit and a member of the group, said Swift Boat Veterans for Truth never claimed to be exclusively made up of veterans who served with Kerry. Finding such vets is difficult because Kerry was only in Vietnam for about four months, Odell said. "It's hard to be there when he was," Odell said. "He was in and out so fast." Before volunteering for Swift boat duty on Vietnam's rivers, Kerry served about a year on a Navy frigate offshore in the Gulf of Tonkin. At least 30 men on the list, including one who appears in an anti-Kerry ad, served in Kerry's former Swift boat unit a year after Kerry left Vietnam, the records show. Shelton White appears in the group's first ad, which claims it is quoting those who served with Kerry. In the ad, White says "John Kerry betrayed the men and women he served with in Vietnam." Navy records show White served in Kerry's former unit, Coastal Division 11, from November 1969 to March 1970 — a full year after Kerry left. Odell said White was referring to Kerry's anti-war activities after Kerry returned to the United States. ___ http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=696&e=2&u=/ap/20040903/ap_on_el_pr/anti_kerry_veterans _________________

Snap back atcha, Wisper! There is bunny pee on my floor, and ain't nobody gonna clean it but me. Life gets tired.

http://cbsnewyork.com/nynews/NY--Bush-Clinton-on/resources_news_html Audience boos Bush's prayer for Clinton

since posting that I found new reports that the boos where actually just 'Ohs' and noises of people in shock.

i heard the audio and didn't hear any boos. that was odd.

I heard it too. Nothing. Maybe the reporter was in part of the crowd where a few people were booing or some stupid shit like that. who knows.

this article suggests that perhaps there is a concerted effort to make sure dissenting noises get drowned out at the RNC.

not just the RNC, everywhere. To get into any Bush event you have to sign 'loyalty pledge' endorsing the president.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040905/pl_afp/us_vote_bush_miller "Bush campaign manager Ken Mehlman said the president endorsed everything Miller said in his speech" In this case I'm flipflopping from my 'Bush is just lazy' position back to my 'Bush is an idiot and a liar' position.

Kerry is a blatant liar. He is an oppertunist. I know how you all feel about Bush, and I know it is a waste of time to explain anything to you, that you have hated him since before the 2000 elections, and you are blinded by your hate for capitalism, and your misguided notions that the US is the root of all evil on earth, but I think you guys are betraying your beleifs to back that twit. This guy is a chamilion. That is all he is. I said I was not going to weigh in on the political threads. And this is exactly why. You guys are worse then the democratic underground. And anyone who accused Clinton of waiting to take away from the RNC is a complete idiot. You know how I feel about the man, but I have nothing buy sympathy for him right now. Look, Bush is not a conservative. His spending alone proves that. But one thing is clear. His attmept at a consitutional amendment banning gay marriage further proves that. However, he has done more to defend this country then Carter and Clinton combined. I am going back on hiatus. You have chased the rabbit back into his hole. And there is no reasoning with you guys.

Spunky - So you're completely fine with Eri and your daughters having a 1 in 6 chance of having mercury blood levels high enough to cause fetal damage, I take it. That's sad. That's unspeakably sad that you would put your fears and prejudices above the health of your family. Perhaps you should go back into your hole and quiver some more, rabbit.

Did you write this one yourself this time? "However, he has done more to defend this country then Carter and Clinton combined. " He's CREATED more terrorism spunk by going into Iraq. not ONE PERSON at the convention even MENTIONED Osama bin Laden by name. And by atacking Iraq, which has nothing to do with 9/11, if theres a real threat like Iran looks like its going to be, guess what? THERES NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT NOW. And the public probably wouldnt support it either! You know how stretched thin you are when Bush is taking troops OUT OF KOREA? Cant you see now that move was absolutely retarded? If you attack any more countries now you'll only completely bankrupt the country USSR style. So all this "duh Kerry wont go to war duh" stuff makes no sense because Bush's and Kerry's hands are both tied with the amount of actual 'responses' they could make to terrorism. They can only do what Clinton did which is actually FIND THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE and CAPTURE THEM. Bush never committed to Afghanistan, and now bin Laden is still supposedly out there. There were more police in NYC at the RNC then there are in Afghanistan. The Taliban are still kicking around in there and right after the US abandons it (which is will if OBL is captured because then nooone will care) then it will fall back into terrorism again, since the LAST conservative who was in there did the same thing, which is one of the many non-catchphrase reasons 9/11 happened now innit? Yes, yes it is. And then theres the Saudis where the hijackers came from, who still channel funds to Al Qaeda, who refuse to freeze the acounts of terrorists. Bush is betraying his country by not doing anything about them. Bush doctrine not applicable there apparently. Look, I think the war on terror is somewhat retarded and you know that. But if you're gonna fight one, you need someone who knows what the fuck he's doing and actually maybe you know, has a sense of geography and of history and to repeat Kerry, well, yes, actually FOUGHT in war who knows what its like to commit troops unlike all these chickenhawks. Bottom line: He fucked up on Iraq and has not taken any responsibility, which is one huge flipflop from the "uniter" "culpable" promising candidate of 2000. He has massively fucked up and that alone means he no longer gets to lead. So Kerry's a weathervane huh? I can accept that but no more than Bush. Fought 9/11 commish now taking their orders. Fought against the creation of the Dept of Homeland Security then did it. Said gay rights were a states issue then look at whats going on now. Flipflopped on Condi Rice before the 9/11 commish. No nation building and now look at whats going on. Carbon dioxide position. Recount laws. Created No child left behind but didnt fund it. Said he's a war president then a peace preisdent back to war president. Couldnt win the war on terror, next day its a nuanced "yes, but I meant". Oh wait Bush and conservatives are allowed to be nuanced but not Kerry. I forgot. Oops. Bush is the ultimate opportunist, look at his whole life. He never earned a damn thing, everything was a silver spoon thing, getting money from other people. But Kerry is the fancypants elitist? the one who went to war, earned his right to speak out against it afterwards, went to law school, served in the senate for all this time. You know, things that are actually hard to do, not things daddy pulled strings for. NO handed down businesses and bailouts from daddy. No extended haze of alcoholism and drug use. just WORK. I will stand up absolutely for how articulate kerry is, how he can discuss any issue (I'm sure he could say something about tribal sovereignty without babbling, natch) on a dime. On this quality alone he is way more qualified to lead than Bush, who is a lazy absent mess of a president. If he actually gets elected this time I dont even think I'm gonna even bother talking about it anymore because this time you'll deserve the damage he does to your nations families, troops and reputation. "Look, Bush is not a conservative. His spending alone proves that. " In that case I guess Reagan isnt a conservative. The cons say the Democrats are tax and spend but Clinton was way more fiscally responsible than both Bush 41, 43 and Reagan. These last conservatives are borrow and spend and thats much worse. Hey spunk, that 87 billion everyones crowing about? How come Kerrys responsible for body armor when Bush never gave it to them before the war in the first place? And do you know how much has actually been spent since that passed? Just a few billion. Who, is the rest of it going to? "nd you are blinded by your hate for capitalism, and your misguided notions that the US is the root of all evil on earth," blah blah blah blah I'm a freeper now blah blah blah I'm all for capitalism, I just want it to actually fall into place with democracy. The courts have given corporations the basic Constitutional rights of persons, but workers lose those rights on entering the workplace. It doesnt make sense that we want to spread democracy all over the world but we spend 1/3 of our day or more in the opposite. Go back to your swiftvet forum. Its not cool to just drop a shitbomb and then tell us there'll be no discussion on it. If theres one reason Kerry is falling behind, its becuase he's not enough of a liar. Isnt that hilarious? the big hits from the RNC are coming from Zell Miller, who accuses Kerry of cutting things Cheney cut himself (AND MORE!), and from the Swiftvets who have been completely discredited, and Bush saying 527s are the root of all campaign evil when he was against McCain-Feingold's campaign finance reform bill.

"This guy is a chamilion." So? I guess you'd say that Bush is resolute, or something like that. That he doesn't change his mind or change the opinions he expresses on a whim to please people, or for political reasons. That'd be funny. Oh yeah. www.m-w.com Please.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20040905/ap_on_el_pr/bush_national_guard Bush Definitely Missing Files: including: _A report from the Texas Air National Guard to Bush's local draft board certifying that Bush remained in good standing. The government has released copies of those DD Form 44 documents for Bush for 1971 and earlier years but not for 1972 or 1973. Records from Bush's draft board in Houston do not show his draft status changed after he joined the guard in 1968. The AP obtained the draft board records Aug. 27 under the Freedom of Information Act. _Records of a required investigation into why Bush lost flight status. When Bush skipped his 1972 physical, regulations required his Texas commanders to "direct an investigation as to why the individual failed to accomplish the medical examination," according to the Air Force manual at the time. An investigative report was supposed to be forwarded "with the command recommendation" to Air Force officials "for final determination." Bush's spokesmen have said he skipped the exam because he knew he would be doing desk duty in Alabama. But Bush was required to take the physical by the end of July 1972, more than a month before he won final approval to train in Alabama. _A written acknowledgment from Bush that he had received the orders grounding him. His Texas commanders were ordered to have Bush sign such a document; but none has been released. _Reports of formal counseling sessions Bush was required to have after missing more than three training sessions. Bush missed at least five months' worth of National Guard training in 1972. No documents have surfaced indicating Bush was counseled or had written authorization to skip that training or make it up later. Commanders did have broad discretion to allow guardsmen to make up for missed training sessions, said Weaver and Lawrence Korb, Pentagon (news - web sites) personnel chief during the Reagan administration from 1981 to 1985. "If you missed it, you could make it up," said Korb, who now works for the Center for American Progress, which supports Kerry. _A signed statement from Bush acknowledging he could be called to active duty if he did not promptly transfer to another guard unit after leaving Texas. The statement was required as part of a Vietnam-era crackdown on no-show guardsmen. Bush was approved in September 1972 to train with the Alabama unit, more than four months after he left Texas.

"I guess you'd say that Bush is resolute, or something like that. That he doesn't change his mind or change the opinions he expresses on a whim to please people, or for political reasons. That'd be funny. " He's very stubborn so people get the impression that he's 'resolute' or wont change positions when the chips are against him

Ugh.

Just watched Mahr's "Real Time" on HBO. Pat Buchanan was on. Do you know what that ultraconservative motherfucker was saying about the war in Iraq? He said stuff like "terrorism is what empires get when they try to rule countries." Then I did a bit of searching and found this. Fuck all. If a liberal said this they'd be hung. Buchanan is just ignored, of course.

You know the world's totally upside down when Pat Buchanan can write a column that a die hard liberal like me can agree with EVERY SINGLE POINT made in it.

there's hope. today i read that the kerry campaigned hired on some new staff = clinton's former press secretary i believe, and key folks from clinton's campaign. also, spunk: kerry isn't a chamelion, he doesn't change his colors so he can hide. he just doesn't see the world in black and white. don't mistake lack of conviction for what is really an understanding and appreciation for the complexity of the issues we face. i'd rather have a leader who can analyze all sides and come to a reasonable decision, rather than make decisions based solely on principals.

Kerry doesn't need new staff. Kerry needs to take the gloves off & come out swinging! Bush's record stinks to high heaven ON IT'S OWN. Kerry doesn't need to attack it -- just point out the facts! Beginning with the fact that Bush didn't shut down the swiftboat veterans the minute they began running that ad -- which speaks volumes about *his* character. You don't sit on your hands & let someone else sling mud on your behalf if you are above mudslinging. Dubya pulled the same shit at the RNC -- rather than having the balls to attack Kerry himself, he sent Zel MIller up there to do his talking for him (who si retiring, so who gives a rat's ass if he decided to switch parties now?). Which is precisely what those swiftboat vets are doing. And they're being discredited left & right: http://www.misleader.org/daily_mislead/read.asp?fn=df08312004.html The press isn't going to get on Bush's case the way it should, so Kerry's gotta lead them where he wants them to go. Start HAMMERING on those missing 18 mos. of Air National Gaurd service -- why there isn't A SINGLE PERSON coming forward to say "Hey, I was there & I saw Dubya there too." Every time there's a microphone in front of him, Kerry should be stating that HE served his conunty honorably in Vietnam while Dubya's daddy used his influence to get the Lt. Governor keep Dubya at home in the Texas Air National Guard -- something the former Lt. Governor admits & regrets doing & something he later used for his personal financial gain: http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=365&row=0 The mantra of the RNC the whoel week was that "Since 9/11, America is safer under Dubya". Kerry needs to remind people that 9/11 Happened On Bush's Watch In The First Damn Place!!!! Remind folks of the all those PDBs Dubya admits he never reads, the intel advising him him that no, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 -- & that American authorities received SPECIFIC WARNINGS in the weeks before 9/11 that attacks would be launched against NYC. (The links to these articles no longer work so I am pasting the 1st page of the info I gathered here. Anyone who wants the entire 22 pgs. can email me.) -------------------------------------------------- Info on the “Iranian National“ story I saw as one of the Fox News crawls on 9/13/01 The first documentation I found about this story appeared at: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/AAexactday.html (Title of piece: Suggestions of Advance Knowledge an Attack Would Take Place on or Around 9/11). Foudn on 5/17/03.) The “Advance Knowledge” piece contained the following info relating to this specific story: ***Early September 2001 (D): An Iranian man known as Ali S. in a German jail waiting deportation repeatedly phones US law enforcement to warn of an imminent attack on the WTC in the week of September 9-15. He calls it "an attack that will change the world." After a month of badgering his prison guards, he is finally able to call the White House 14 times in the days before the attack. He then tries to send a fax to Bush, but is denied permission hours before the 9/11 attacks. German police later confirm the calls. Prosecutors later say Ali had no foreknowledge and his forebodings were just a strange coincidence.*** They say he is mentally unstable. Similar warnings also come from a Moroccan man being held in a Brazilian jail. [Deutsche Presse-Agentur, 9/13/01, Ottawa Citizen, 9/17/01, Ananova, 9/14/01, Sunday Herald, 9/16/01] FTW The Deutsche Presse-Agentur link contained the following story: Iranian in Germany "Tried to Warn" U.S. of Impending Attacks Deutsche Presse-Agentur September 13, 2001 An Iranian man awaiting deportation in Germany tried to warn the United States that the terrorist attacks which shook the nation on Tuesday were about to be carried out, according to press reports. The Hanover daily "Neue Presse", in a report published in its Friday edition, said the man, being held in detention near this northern German city, had told U.S. intelligence officials by telephone that attacks would take place this week. However, they had hung up the phone when the 29-year-old man said he was being detained. Just hours before the kamikaze airplane attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, he had asked in vain to be allowed to send a fax to U.S. President George W. Bush. The man had for the past month insisted that he had important information for the United States and must urgently pass it on by telephone. The German authorities had eventually allowed him to make the call, the paper wrote. The report said that the man had been interrogated on Thursday by German and U.S. justice and intelligence officials. There was no immediate confirmation available from the German prosecutor-general's office. © Copyright 2001 source: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/deutschepresseagentur091301.html ------------------------------------------------- I dont know what the hell Kerry's waiting for -- but the clock is ticking. You don't fight by the Marquess of Queensbury rules when your opponent is coming at you with rusty switchblade -- you go for the kill if you want to win. - RC

well, he's got Carville and Begala now. Carville can bring it. Mary Beth Cahill is in the doghouse, where she belongs for believing the Swiftvet thing would just blow over. They need to get out there and start swinging, I agree. Not just on the war and the economy, but on the environment too. That's a big issue that gets short shift. Although the latest National Geographic may help put it back in folks' minds - probably the best roundup of evidence for climate change I've seen.

for a long while it did just 'blow over', then all of a sudden POOF it was an issue. I think the Kerry campaign didnt want to make it the issue themselves, but well... looksee what happened. At the same time the Bush campaign pretends his National Guard stuff isnt happening and it never gets really covered in the media. Go figure. Anyone see the Pentagon now wants to investigate Kerrys medals?

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/Nomad667/obgyn.wmv latest Bushism. Is this still cute to anyone?

A new "we're not associated with the bush campaign - honest" 527 group, with the creative name of moveonforamerica.org, is planning to run what they call "Willie Horton" type ads, I just saw. Fucking slimebags. If the pentagon wants to investigate Kerry's medals, let them. I saw what it is about, and it's a clerical error on the part of the Navy. But shame on Rumsfeld for pushing it. Why not investigate why W. was wearing medals he couldn't possibly have been given in the photo in the GHWB presidential library?

another good rude pundit today. effin' kerry ought to hire him, too.

yeah, he should.

:"also, spunk: kerry isn't a chamelion, he doesn't change his colors so he can hide. he just doesn't see the world in black and white. don't mistake lack of conviction for what is really an understanding and appreciation for the complexity of the issues we face. i'd rather have a leader who can analyze all sides and come to a reasonable decision, rather than make decisions based solely on principals" Sarah. I know you are smarter then that. Sem, Dave, and Rowlf, I expected nothing else from you. Shit bomb? Why would an opinion from me that Kerry is a chamilion be a shit bomb? Of course he is. And sorry, maybe you Rowlfe do not dislike free enterprise and capitalism, but you are not the only person on this site, and maybe you should consider that comments are not aimed soley at you.

"This guy is a chamilion. That is all he is." i know that what follows is way too long for you read, spunky. maybe eri can read it to you. and then you can go cheney yourself. From the beginning, George W. Bush has made his own credibility a central issue. On 10/11/00, then-Gov. Bush said: "I think credibility is important.It is going to be important for the president to be credible with Congress, important for the president to be credible with foreign nations." But President Bush's serial flip-flopping raises serious questions about whether Congress and foreign leaders can rely on what he says. 1. Social Security Surplus BUSH PLEDGES NOT TO TOUCH SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS... "We're going to keep the promise of Social Security and keep the government from raiding the Social Security surplus." [President Bush, 3/3/01] ...BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS The New York Times reported that "the president's new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes." [The New York Times, 2/6/02] 2. Patient's Right to Sue GOVERNOR BUSH VETOES PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... "Despite his campaign rhetoric in favor of a patients' bill of rights, Bush fought such a bill tooth and nail as Texas governor, vetoing a bill coauthored by Republican state Rep. John Smithee in 1995. He... constantly opposed a patient's right to sue an HMO over coverage denied that resulted in adverse health effects." [Salon, 2/7/01] ...CANDIDATE BUSH PRAISES TEXAS PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... "We're one of the first states that said you can sue an HMO for denying you proper coverage... It's time for our nation to come together and do what's right for the people. And I think this is right for the people. You know, I support a national patients' bill of rights, Mr. Vice President. And I want all people covered. I don't want the law to supersede good law like we've got in Texas." [Governor Bush, 10/17/00] ...PRESIDENT BUSH'S ADMINISTRATION ARGUES AGAINST RIGHT TO SUE "To let two Texas consumers, Juan Davila and Ruby R. Calad, sue their managed-care companies for wrongful denials of medical benefits ‘would be to completely undermine' federal law regulating employee benefits, Assistant Solicitor General James A. Feldman said at oral argument March 23. Moreover, the administration's brief attacked the policy rationale for Texas's law, which is similar to statutes on the books in nine other states." [Washington Post, 4/5/04] 3. Tobacco Buyout BUSH SUPPORTS CURRENT TOBACCO FARMERS' QUOTA SYSTEM... "They've got the quota system in place -- the allotment system -- and I don't think that needs to be changed." [President Bush, 5/04] ...BUSH ADMINISTRATION WILL SUPPORT FEDERAL BUYOUT OF TOBACCO QUOTAS "The administration is open to a buyout." [White House spokeswoman Jeanie Mamo, 6/18/04] 4. North Korea BUSH WILL NOT OFFER NUCLEAR NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM... "We developed a bold approach under which, if the North addressed our long-standing concerns, the United States was prepared to take important steps that would have significantly improved the lives of the North Korean people. Now that North Korea's covert nuclear weapons program has come to light, we are unable to pursue this approach." [President's Statement, 11/15/02] ...BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFERS NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM"Well, we will work to take steps to ease their political and economic isolation. So there would be -- what you would see would be some provisional or temporary proposals that would only lead to lasting benefit after North Korea dismantles its nuclear programs. So there would be some provisional or temporary efforts of that nature." [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 6/23/04] 5. Abortion BUSH SUPPORTS A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE... "Bush said he...favors leaving up to a woman and her doctor the abortion question." [The Nation, 6/15/00, quoting the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, 5/78] ...BUSH OPPOSES A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE "I am pro-life." [Governor Bush, 10/3/00] 6. OPEC BUSH PROMISES TO FORCE OPEC TO LOWER PRICES... "What I think the president ought to do [when gas prices spike] is he ought to get on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say we expect you to open your spigots...And the president of the United States must jawbone OPEC members to lower the price." [President Bush, 1/26/00] ...BUSH REFUSES TO LOBBY OPEC LEADERS With gas prices soaring in the United States at the beginning of 2004, the Miami Herald reported the president refused to "personally lobby oil cartel leaders to change their minds." [Miami Herald, 4/1/04] 7. Iraq Funding BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004... "We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04" [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton, 2/2/04] ...BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 "I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops." [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04] 8. Condoleeza Rice Testimony BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'... "Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference." [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04] ...BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: "Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony." [President Bush, 3/30/04] 9. Science BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE..."I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good." [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00] ...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE "60 leading scientists—including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents—issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04] 10. Ahmed Chalabi BUSH INVITES CHALABI TO STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS...President Bush also met with Chalabi during his brief trip to Iraq last Thanksgiving [White House Documents 1/20/04, 11/27/03] ...BUSH MILITARY ASSISTS IN RAID OF CHALABI'S HOUSE "U.S. soldiers raided the home of America's one-time ally Ahmad Chalabi on Thursday and seized documents and computers." [Washington Post, 5/20/04] 11. Department of Homeland Security BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02] ...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02] 12. Weapons of Mass Destruction BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories...for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03] ...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons.And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04] 13. Free Trade BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02] ...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03] 14. Osama Bin Laden BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01] ...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA "I don't know where he is.You know, I just don't spend that much time on him... I truly am not that concerned about him."[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02] 15. The Environment BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to...establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00] ...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03] 16. WMD Commission BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04] ...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE "Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04] 17. Creation of the 9/11 Commission BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02] ...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02] 18. Time Extension for 9/11 Commission BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04] ...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04] 19. One Hour Limit for 9/11 Commission Testimony BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday." [NY Times, 2/26/04] ...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04] 20. Gay Marriage BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00] ...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04] 21. Nation Building BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00] ...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03] 22. Saddam/al Qaeda Link BUSH SAYS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEEN AL QAEDA AND SADDAM... "You can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." [President Bush, 9/25/02] ...BUSH SAYS SADDAM HAD NO ROLE IN AL QAEDA PLOT "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in Sept. 11." [President Bush, 9/17/03] 23. U.N. Resolution BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03] ...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03] 24. Involvement in the Palestinian Conflict BUSH OPPOSES SUMMITS... "Well, we've tried summits in the past, as you may remember. It wasn't all that long ago where a summit was called and nothing happened, and as a result we had significant intifada in the area." [President Bush, 04/05/02] ...BUSH SUPPORTS SUMMITS "If a meeting advances progress toward two states living side by side in peace, I will strongly consider such a meeting. I'm committed to working toward peace in the Middle East." [President Bush, 5/23/03] 25. Campaign Finance BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000] ...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02] 26. 527s Bush opposes restrictions on 527s: "I also have reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising [in McCain Feingold], which restrains the speech of a wide variety of groups on issues of public import." [President Bush, 3/27/02] …Bush says 527s bad for system: "I don't think we ought to have 527s. I can't be more plain about it…I think they're bad for the system. That's why I signed the bill, McCain-Feingold." [President Bush, 8/23/04] 27. Medical Records Bush says medical records must remain private: "I believe that we must protect…the right of every American to have confidence that his or her personal medical records will remain private." [President Bush, 4/12/01] …Bush says patients' histories are not confidntial: The Justice Department…asserts that patients "no longer possess a reasonable expectation that their histories will remain completely confidential." [BusinessWeek, 4/30/04] 28. Timelines For Dictators Bush sets timeline for Saddam: "If Iraq does not accept the terms within a week of passage or fails to disclose required information within 30 days, the resolution authorizes 'all necessary means' to force compliance--in other words, a military attack." [LA Times, 10/3/02] …Bush says he's against timelines: "I don't think you give timelines to dictators." [President Bush, 8/27/04] 29. The Great Lakes Bush wants to divert great lakes: "Even though experts say 'diverting any water from the Great Lakes region sets a bad precedent' Bush 'said he wants to talk to Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien about piping water to parched states in the west and southwest.'– [AP, 7/19/01] Bush says he'll never divert Great Lakes: "We've got to use our resources wisely, like water. It starts with keeping the Great Lakes water in the Great Lakes Basin...My position is clear: We're never going to allow diversion of Great Lakes water." [President Bush, 8/16/04] 30. Winning The War On Terror Bush claims he can win the war on terror: "One of the interesting things people ask me, now that we're asking questions, is, can you ever win the war on terror? Of course, you can." [President Bush, 4/13/04] …Bush says war on terror is unwinnable: "I don't think you can win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/30/04] …Bush says he will win the war on terror: "Make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/31/04]

"Shit bomb? Why would an opinion from me that Kerry is a chamilion be a shit bomb?" I didnt call that specific point a shitbomb. Its the whole post, how you decided you were going to post and then 'go back on hiatus' makes your whole post a complete shitbomb, since you pre-emptively stated you're not willing to stick it out and make your case. and you saw how many points we've made in response, and all you can come back with now is this "you're wrong because you hate capitalism" thing... lets pretend this is true of everyone who is against you. Does that somehow erase from existence all of Bush's own "chameleon"-like flipflops? Aren't you smart enough to admit that most 'flipflops' are either because of a legitimate and explainable changing of minds or a misconception based on nuance? If not, maybe you should ****insert glass house/stones metaphor****

Whack a Mole!!!

Hey spunky. nine hundred and ninety-nine. chew on that for a while.

make that an even 1,000. and for what?

I am not talking about Bush. I am talking about Kerry. Focus, man focus! Tell me what makes Kerry a good canidate for the President of the United States. He's not Bush and He;s the lessor of two evils not acceptable. I want a good reason, based on his history and record in the Senate, or a statement he has made that he has not contridicted himself on. Try not to change the subject to Bush Bashing (you have had 4+ years to do that, and you are still wrong).

I was just watching Rumsfeld talking about terrorism in Russia... I'm waiting to hear that the terrorists hate Russia's freedom. HAR

"He's not Bush and He;s the lessor of two evils not acceptable." the hell it isn't. "Try not to change the subject to Bush Bashing" don't fucking tell me what it's about. john kerry never went on the air to mock a woman who was due to be executed. in general, john kerry isn't a vulgar, snickering, hateful little fucker who needs his ass kicked all the way back to connecticut, where he's really from.

ARE YOU SERIOUS?

See, dave. You are only telling me why you wont vote for Bush. That was not my question. I don't give a shit about that. Why do you support Kerry?

and that's just one example and not the most despicable by a long shot. i'm not going to list any more because the effort would be wasted on you, trace. george bush and the republican party are using YOU. i know they hate my people so it ain't no big thing to me but you actually think they care about you, that they respect you. they're laughing at you. wake the fuck up. or don't. shit, why am i even bothering?

it's really as simple as that, trace. the republicans need to be derailed. i'd prefer dean just because he's interesting but i'm stuck with kerry. i'm ok with kerry. i trust kerry not to fuck things up. i despise bush and his administration and his party and 99.9 percent of his supporters. they're all wrong in the head. y'know, under a democrat, you folks can still run around and be unsympathetic hardasses and backwards idealogues all you fucking want. feel free, please. don't take the handouts, don't enjoy the infrastructure, walk your fucking 10 miles to school in the snow barefoot and like it. as long as you keep your bigoted, intolerant, hateful, grubby paws off me and mine, you just have at. under republicans, we'd all have to live like you guys. well, fuck you. i don't like your crappy world. that's why.

here's some reasons for you: Kerry's record in the senate is pretty damn good. He has a 92% lifetime voting score from League of Conservation Voters. He's worked to improve health care for low-income children, strenghten access to education. He was chairman of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs. He's the ranking Democrat on the East Asian and Pacific Affairs Subcommittee (north korea, anyone?). His running mate, Edwards, was a co-author of the Patient's Bill of Rights, and is a member of the Select Committee on Intelligence. Why I'm voting for Kerry, and not just against Bush: Kerry will reverse a lot of the damage BushCo has done to our environmental protection laws. Kerry actually believes Americans have the fundamental right to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and have unspoiled wild placed. He also believes we have a responsibility to take care of our land so we leave a better and clearer America for future generations. Kerry supports Superfund, which Bush has abandoned. Kerry is an advocate of environmental justice, which Bush blocks at every turn. He has plans for a conservation covenant with America, to preserve our national parks and protect our last wild lands from overzealous development. On national security, Kerry understands that diplomacy requires nuance. He'll mend the bridges that Bush broke. He's pledged to complete the Global Cleanout of bomb material and help secure Russian nuclear weapons before any more can disappear. Kerry wants to double the capacity of the Special Forces to go after terrorists. on the economy, Kerry will restore fiscal discipline and attack the deficit without bankrupting medicare and social security. He's aid he'll eliminate tax incentives to businesses that outsource labor. He'll raise the minimum wage. How about cutting $1000 from your health insurance premiums for your family? How about making sure every child has access to quality health care? Then there's energy. How's a tax incentive to develop more fuel efficient vehicles sound to you? Bush sure doesn't like it. In education, Kerry wants to establish a National Education Trust Fund, so that no school has to be short on the funds it needs to operate. Spunky, if you've read this far, how does a $4,000 a year college tuition tax credit sound to you for your kids? Here's a good one: mandatory funding for veteran's health care. I can think of at least 3500 people that might appeal to, maybe even 130,000 people that could appeal to...

sounds like a happier place to me. thanks, sem. i get too pissed off to be so reasonable and expansive. i just wanna start knocking heads together.

I'm voting for Kerry just to piss spunky off. (And to cancel out his vote in Texas...) Oh yeah. It turns out the Bush bounce wasn't all that great: Gallup. Is the media reporting this? Of course not! A direct quote: "Bush's bounce is the smallest an incumbent president has received."

And hey! Check out this double whammy!

Well, I am certainly not betraying my anti-capitalist, anti- american, marijuana and alcohol loving values with a Kerry vote. VOTE FOR J

The kid gloves are officially off.

anyboyd but bush and im not afraid to admit. get that motherfucker out of there. the polls are garbage. the media can suck it. enjoy the last few days of the Bush II era because he's gone. Thats right. Here and now, I proclaim, Bush is gone come November. He's done enough damage to tie Kerry's hands for at least 2 years trying to unravel the damage, then maybe...JUST MAYBE in 2 years a Democrat controlled congress will re-emerge and MAYBE some progress might be made. Otherwise the inefficacy of the American government will continue and we'll all still be a bunch of fucking morons. Vote J in 2006. kerry in 2004.

Way off...

If I see chameleon spelled wrong ONE MORE TIME on this thread, I swear I'll slit my wrists. PS- ABB, ya betcha. Carry on.

Bush calls for a more sensitive treatment of terrorist child murderers.

Thank you Sem. I am glad to see something productive here.

Spunk...you could have gotten all of that from johnkerry.com

You can go ahead and read it... You won't get cooties.

DAVE! A thousand thanks for that Bush Pro-choice quote! I always suspected he didn't give a rat's ass about black & brown girls having abortions, just the pure-d White ones who could be providing babies for infertile White couples to adopt. But I was NEVER aware that he'd EVER come out publicy in favor of the right to choose! Give that man a drink on me! That's what I missed the most about The Sorabji Asylum- - having conversation with folks who know more than I do. And Spunky - since you want a reason, here's why I'm voting for Kerry -- despite the fact that I am royally pissed that my only choices are a Skull & Bonesman & another Skull & Bonesman. Secret societies give me the creeps. And S&B has put far too many presidents in the Oval Office & judges on the Supreme court than the laws of coincidence will allow. The reason why you shouldn't vote for Bush is beacuse of what he's done to this nation over the last 4 years. When you're on a ship that the captain has run aground, you're leaking fuel & in danger of catching fire & you're facing attacks from foreign forces from land & sea -- seems to me any reasonable person would figure it's time to change captains. Bush is running this country into the ground with a a multi-billion dollar war that we can't afford & that benefits NO ONE except Halliburton & the other Bush cronies who are pocketing OUR TAX DOLLARS in the greatest instance of kleptocracy this planet has seen since slavery. Our involvement in Iraq is FUBAR! There WILL be a civil war there shortly -- & then what will Bush do? We ran roughshod over a people who have no use for the West, our values or our sham democracy. People there don't WANT a secular democracy -- which is their right! They WANT their religious leaders running things. Are their women oppressed -- of course -- but do you really think Bush cares about that? ANY fundamentalist religion is going to oppress women, gays & anyone who doesn't toe the line. But you don't change that by instigating a coup & holding sham elections -- you have to give The People within that culture the chance to CHANGE THEIR OWN MINDS about how they want to organize their society. But all Dubya cared about -- since way before we invaded Iraq -- was securing a virtually limitless oil supply in the Middle East & installing a gov't that would be favorable to the oil interests that made his family rich in the first place. BUSH LET 9-11 HAPPEN TO GIVE AMERICANS JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PLANS HE'D ALREADY MADE TO INVADE IRAQ. And that's NOT just my opinion -- there's a paper trail to back it up: http://www.sundayherald.com/27735 http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf Read the Neil Mackay article, Spunky. Then click on the 2nd link & actually READ THE PNAC DOCUMENT. It's 90 pps. but well worth the effort. Some of the comments in it will Curl Your Teeth! Where I came from, what Bush has done in Iraq is called creating a puppet gov't -- which granted, the US has been doing for centuries in black & brown countries to secure the economic interests of the ruling class. I am a patriot but not a jingoist. I don't buy into the Republican party line that anyone who doesn't embrace Western capitalism in the guise of 'democracy' is an 'evildoer' or an 'enemy of freedom.' The people in Iraq look too much like me & my family members for me to brush them off as 3rd World 'Others' who just don't 'get' that democracy is a good thing. Bush is responsible for taking this nation from a budget surplus into raging debt due to tax cuts for the wealthy & a horifically expensive war we will NOT win. We are NOT safer from terrorism -- cities like NY are STILL waiting for the federal funds they need to update their communications systems between the fire dept. & the police dept. Our troops in Iraq are STILL WAITING for the proper body armour & reinforced vehicles they need to have some modicum of safety as they fight Bush's war for oil. Unemployment is still rising every month, as the gov't stops counting the people whose unemployment checks have run out, even though they are still jobless. And Dubya's Council of Economic Advisors are still claiming that outsourcing American jobs to low-wage countries is 'good for the economy'. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04041/271362.stm That's not even Vodoo Economics -- it's Crackhead Economics! Bush is NOT performing well as President. This country is about to crash & burn -- or be blown to bits by terrorists -- because of his egotistical leadership & greed. Greed was the ONLY reason we didn't allow other nations to bid on the 'contracts to rebuild Iraq'. OF COURSE most of the rest of the world -- except for The Brits -- refused to run themselves into debt by sending their troops to support our war in Iraq when they weren't going to get to divvy up the spoils -- they are capitalist nations, just like us. The fundamental tenet of a free-market workplace is that WHEN SOMEONE CAN'T DO THE JOB, YOU FIRE THEM & GIVE THE JOB TO SOMEBODY ELSE. And that's all the reason any thinking person needs to vote for Kerry. - RC

question: Has a Republican president ever won a war? does anyone think its actually a tight race? Higher voter turnout historically works for Democrats, and we all know there'll be a high turnout this year. A lot of those swing states that appear to be 1 or 2% for Bush I think will actually fall for Kerry. If turnout is as high as expected and the race stays 'tight' in the 'likely voter' polls, kerry might actually win in a landslide. And again, I'm going to fall back on my main reason why any thinking person should vote for Kerry. He's fucking smart. And I'm not just talking mental capacity, he's constantly displaying it with numbers and statistics and facts and often its off the cuff and unprepared yet somehow DEAD ON. I know that makes him some sort of fancypants elitist, you know, actually having to read bills and books and weigh issues on a regular basis, but oh well. Like Kerry said, "what if there was a president who believes in science?" And I think even those who woulda preffered Clark or Dean should be voting thinking of all the people Kerry is going to surround himself with. He's got a good crop. Kerry would also be able to get rid of CIA director Porter Goss and put in someone who you know, doesnt admit on camera that he's unqualified for the job.

Bush-Cheney 04 - dont change horsemen mid-apocalypse!

question: Has a Republican president ever won a war? answer: Yes. Lincoln.

Bush-Cheney 04 - Winning the war on Terra!

http://www.texansfortruth.org/ oh dear

Bitch, I already posted that link. Don't wet yourself.

Here, wet yourself over this.

ARSE FECK DRINK GIRLS!!!!!!!!!!

support our oops! i dunno rowlf. do not misunderestimate these guys. if somebody walks out with osama in cuffs in the next month or so, the shit could all change. i also say they still have one or two good terror alerts left before election day to steal momentum from democratic races. this is not in the bag. don't thank me, r.c. thank google and the center for american progress. i just cut-n-paste marginally pertinent stuff in between episodes of cussing and name calling.

The Boston Globe has a decisive take on the new findings: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/08/bush_fell_short_on_duty_at_guard/ "Bush fell well short of meeting his military obligation, a Globe reexamination of the records shows: Twice during his Guard service -- first when he joined in May 1968, and again before he transferred out of his unit in mid-1973 to attend Harvard Business School -- Bush signed documents pledging to meet training commitments or face a punitive call-up to active duty. He didn't meet the commitments, or face the punishment, the records show. The 1973 document has been overlooked in news media accounts. The 1968 document has received scant notice." Bartlett, in a statement to the Globe last night, sidestepped questions about Bush's record. In the statement, Bartlett asserted again that Bush would not have been honorably discharged if he had not ''met all his requirements." In a follow-up e-mail, Bartlett declared: ''And if he hadn't met his requirements you point to, they would have called him up for active duty for up to two years." "That assertion by the White House spokesman infuriates retired Army Colonel Gerald A. Lechliter, one of a number of retired military officers who have studied Bush's records and old National Guard regulations, and reached different conclusions. ''He broke his contract with the United States government -- without any adverse consequences. And the Texas Air National Guard was complicit in allowing this to happen," Lechliter said in an interview yesterday. ''He was a pilot. It cost the government a million dollars to train him to fly. So he should have been held to an even higher standard." "Lawrence J. Korb, an assistant secretary of defense for manpower and reserve affairs in the Reagan administration, said after studying many of the documents that it is clear to him that Bush ''gamed the system." And he agreed with Lloyd that Bush was not alone in doing so. ''If I cheat on my income tax and don't get caught, I'm still cheating on my income tax," Korb said. " "Lechliter said the records push him to conclude that Bush had little interest in fulfilling his obligation, and his superiors preferred to look the other way. Others agree. ''It appears that no one wanted to hold him accountable," said retired Major General Paul A. Weaver Jr., who retired in 2002 as the Pentagon's director of the Air National Guard." but yet here we are arguing if John Kerry bled enough.

FEAR SCARE FEAR SCARE FEAR!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3586-2004Sep7.html Bush is a girlie man

I have decided what I am going to do on election day besides vote. Later that night, when I'm fretting over who is going to win I am going to bake cookies. I realized today that I have to teach the day after the election and, no matter what happens, I am not going to be able to focus. I will feed them, the students and then hope that we can all concentrate on "The Yellow Wallpaper." I'll mediate a discussion on the election of they want, but we will have cookies to help. Cookies are good. Chocolate chop and some kind of ginger snap. Cookies, you can use them to celebrate or to to console. Cookies. My cat does this thing where if she is resting on my chest (I am sort of lying down on the couch) and I stop petting her, she gets off my chest, walks around on the pillows above my shoulder and then sits back on my chest...as though that is what I needed her to do to remind me that she was on my chest in the first place. She also squeaks if I try to type.

how did that happen?

ok. so with Cheney's fear mongering, the only response is for Edwards to call the comment 'un-American' ? Take the gloves off Kerry. Fear-mongering. People WILL respond to it. Americans are NEVER comfortable with the idea they are being controlled with fear!

Good to see you back, Patrick, btw. So, the latest is that Bush is off the wagon. I half believe it. The white house is doing a pretty good job of covering it up, but damn if he has not looked totally hung over in a lot of recent photos. There's also the (of course) witness who does not wish to be identified who saw W drinking scotch neat at a private function earlier this year (finally, something I have in common with the pResident - our preference in hard liquor! Although I wouldn't necessary need to drink most of a decanter of it). On the flip side, it could just be complete exhaustion since this is the hardest he's had to work in his entire life. I'm willing to be fair once in a while :P

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1963&e=14&u=/ap/20040908/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_heckler_1 At least the Kerry campaign doesnt screen its participants for loyalty. Will the kerry campaign play that point up in this instance? ...they have an opportunity, will they take it?

Someone put him in a headlock? Huh, good thing he wasn't a female protester at a Bush event, some nice Young Republican would have hauled him to the floor and kicked him repeatedly in the gut...

"The claim by Bush and Cheney that the American people must give them four more years in office or else be 'hit hard' by another terrorist attack is a sleazy and despicable effort to blackmail voters with fear," Gore said. "They are going back to the ugliest page in the Republican playbook: fear," he said. "They're not even trying to convince you to vote for George Bush (news - web sites). Their only hope is to try and make you too afraid to vote for John Kerry (news - web sites). It's the lowest sort of politics imaginable.

If someone doesn't tell me how to fix that I am never posting here again.

here is the link

I love President Gore.

every method of recount requested by gore was done in the six months after the election and bush was still found to have won. the left has plenty to stand on without dispensing mistruth. and the right has a proven track record of finding the one flimsy point in an argument and using it to glaze over the important issues. sex satan. milkphone. beef with tender greens. cannot find private key. cheney is a terrorist. fear is terror. this is not democracy. or, democracy has failed. :) :) :) (for kelsey)

In my special world, I still think of Gore as pres., in terms of the popular vote. Of course, in my special world I pretend that my Kerry Edwards pin is referring to a faboulous woman named Kerry. I am totally crushing on Teresa and Obama right now. In my special world, they regularly attend cocktail parties at my fabulous loft.

if you factor in the boxes of uncounted ballots discovered later, the erroneous voter purging, the buchanan misvotes, the polling sites closing earlier than scheduled, gore would have easily won florida by a margin much greater than bush did.

"finding the one flimsy point in an argument and using it to glaze over the important issues." mmmmm...glaze...it's time to make the donuts. make the donuts kerry. MAKE THE FRICKIN DONUTS

john kerry's hot, greasy donut. that's all i have to say about it.

9/9/2004 Revenge of the Not-So-Fortunate-Sons: Here's what we in America ought to hate: ungrateful motherfuckers. George Bush is one ungrateful motherfucker. Here he is, our goddamned President, who every time he has stumbled in his life, every time he has faced adversity or failure, has had a goose down pillow waiting for his ass when he hit the ground. What's so frustrating about the whole Air National Guard debacle is not that he weaseled out of his commitment. It's that he's not grateful for every break he's ever gotten. We who hate Bush hate him because he acts as if his stupid-ass luck of being born into one of the most powerful families in the world entitles him to be a complete motherfucker. From getting into Yale to getting out of his Guard duties to winning the Presidency on a fluke, Bush oughta be the most humble and grateful man in the world. Instead, he acts as if he is somehow something more than a privileged pussy, pampered and powdered, looked after like the favorite poodle of the patriarchy. And we who recognize this want to see him get his comeuppance. 'Cause if this son of a bitch (in the literal and figurative senses) loses the election, he will be abandoned by everyone around him. And maybe, just maybe, he'll get his fate of being forced to be his Daddy's manservant, washing Poppy's balls when Poppy gets so old he can't even scratch himself. Maybe every night lil' George will snort coke to the point that his brain can cope with the utter failure that he is. Fuck it. The Rude Pundit is tired. Back tomorrow with extreme rudeness on 9/11. // posted by Rude One @ 1:41 PM

you know, i don't think he really weaseled out of his guard duty. in fact, i'm pretty sure he fulfilled it. i think the media has spun this one. gnome

What makes you so sure? There's way too much that stinks about the whole thing.

What do you really know about George W. Bush’s time in the Air National Guard? That he didn’t show up for duty in Alabama? That he missed a physical? That his daddy got him in? News coverage of the president’s years in the Guard has tended to focus on one brief portion of that time — to the exclusion of virtually everything else. So just for the record, here, in full, is what Bush did: The future president joined the Guard in May 1968. Almost immediately, he began an extended period of training. Six weeks of basic training. Fifty-three weeks of flight training. Twenty-one weeks of fighter-interceptor training. That was 80 weeks to begin with, and there were other training periods thrown in as well. It was full-time work. By the time it was over, Bush had served nearly two years. Not two years of weekends. Two years. After training, Bush kept flying, racking up hundreds of hours in F-102 jets. As he did, he accumulated points toward his National Guard service requirements. At the time, guardsmen were required to accumulate a minimum of 50 points to meet their yearly obligation. According to records released earlier this year, Bush earned 253 points in his first year, May 1968 to May 1969 (since he joined in May 1968, his service thereafter was measured on a May-to-May basis). Bush earned 340 points in 1969-1970. He earned 137 points in 1970-1971. And he earned 112 points in 1971-1972. The numbers indicate that in his first four years, Bush not only showed up, he showed up a lot. Source

because he was a fighter pilot. he had to train full time for at least a year. he probably put in the equiv of one weekend a month, two weeks a year for his full term in the first year. at the time your obligation was "50 points" per year. according to the records released he earned 253 points the first year, 340 points the second, 137 the third, 112 the fourth and 56 in the fifth. in his sixth year he requested early release and it was granted. before he left, he earned 56 more points, his obligation for his last year, and then was honorably discharged. but that's no big deal. you think a cokehead would bail out of flying fighter jets for free? he was stoked. that said, his daddy getting him into the national guard makes him a big fucking cunt. and he's fucked up enough in the past four years that nobody on the left needs to focus on disprovable bullshit, dirty attacks or character assassination to get him out of office. i'm actually going to vote this year. i'm going to swallow hard and close my eyes and pretend that edwards isn't on the ticket and pretend that kerry is more than he really is.

you miss the point entirely. point is, Kerry's service was brought into dispute heavily. the cocksucker in the white house is not exempt. and the coverage of Kerry's service focused on a small portion of his time served. so what. white house made this shit an issue again when they dragged kerry's service through the mud. tou'fuckin'che there's yet more evidence that the 'straight shooter' lied and thats considerable.

you know, i don't think he really weaseled out of his purple hearts. in fact, i'm pretty sure he earned them. i think the media has spun this one.

"pretend that kerry is more than he really is." ever since that boondocks comic which likened him to a knotty oak tree (or something like that), i've been pretending he's treebeard and running on the Ent platform.

"every method of recount requested by gore was done in the six months after the election and bush was still found to have won. " yeah, requested by Gore. If they had recounted the whole state instead of just a few districts, Gore wins in every situation. Gore made big mistakes, or maybe I should say Gore's lawyers made big mistakes, but Gore still wins. ...and thats only part of the disputed election equation. The majority of the stolen election dispute comes from the scrubbed voters list.

so..... noone has anything to say about the memos saying they had to pull strings to give Bush more points? ...or pressing him to ask WHY he missed his medical exam, when a million dollars was invested in him? and the big one that noone has come forward to say they actually remember him there? even when offered a 10 thousand dollar reward as Doonesbury did?

http://wid.ap.org/documents/bush/040908xfer.pdf

Spunky - On top of using his father's connections to get a plum Air National Guard assignment stateside to avoid being sent to Vam, Bush was AWOL from the National gaurd for nearly a year! http://www.awolbush.com/ When a regular citizen goes AWOL from any branch of the military, THEY end up in the brig for desertion. THAT's the issue here. - RC

"According to records released earlier this year, Bush earned 253 points in his first year, May 1968 to May 1969 (since he joined in May 1968, his service thereafter was measured on a May-to-May basis). Bush earned 340 points in 1969-1970. He earned 137 points in 1970-1971. And he earned 112 points in 1971-1972. The numbers indicate that in his first four years, Bush not only showed up, he showed up a lot. " noones saying he didnt get 'honorably discharged' or didnt get the points tallied up. the question is did he actually show up to earn them? were they just given to them because of who he was? the memos I just posted, which the White House released THEMSELVES, dont exactly work to his favor.

http://www.stereogum.com/sunday.mp3

all i'm saying is that this brand of he-said she-said isn't benefiting anyone. that the right can spin anything that isn't in modern memory to the detriment of the left. the moore-esque attack on bush isn't going to work. nor is it necessary. there is so much to work from in the here and now. let's see what carvel does.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200408310011 Robert Novak's ties to Regnery Publishing the brand of he said she said should at least level the playing field. If its true then the Dems are safe using this as an attack. That Globe piece isnt just a rehash of old accusations, that new stuff is pretty choice stuff, and there'll be more along the lines of this when the Kitty Kelly book comes out next week, though I'm already inclinded to doubt some of her claims (though her "Bush did coke at Camp david" source is Neil Bush's ex-wife) the right can spin lots of things to the detriment of the left. I'm not sure what you meant with your statement, but if this is what you meant... The biggest example I can think of is the claim that Al Gore said he invented the Internet, which just isn't true. As well as the other smear where they made Gore look like a nutjob, saying he lied about being the inspiration for "love story". it was all part of the campaign to make Gore look to be the chronic exaggerator.

carvel? do you mean Carville?

Carville

Dick Morris - GACK. this is the man who says all the time on Fox News that the Clintons are against Kerry and its all a big conspiracy to get Hillary in office. He also said that she was going to slime her way past Edwards to get the VP spot, and that Hillary would find a way to get the nomination instead of Kerry. Dick Morris can suck a fuck as far as I'm concerned. I'm been reading already allegations from right wing blogs that the memos in question I posted are forgeries. Its very interesting and there are things they are pointing out I agree are suspicious. However what doesnt make sense is that after CBS showed these, the White House/Pentagon released their own copies of these docs. So what the fuck is up with that then?

I just read the Dick Morris thing after the fact to see if the Clinton conspiracy came up again. It does... bleh blah Carville doesnt want Kerry to win its all about Hillary they're gonna sabotage Kerry blah. bullshit. Dick Morris needs psychiatric help.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9967-2004Sep9.html I'm leaning towards the theory that these are forgeries, but I have to say its mainly because of my own ignorance of what typewriters are capable of. I've spent the last half hour visiting a lot of the various blogs with their own armchair assessments based on their own knowledge of 70s typewriters, etc.... One thing for sure is if its authentic, it came from an IBM typewriter that had introduced kerning and superscript, which did exist at the time since 1962. The two signatures from Killian arent the same so that argument hasnt moved me, but that doesnt necessarily prove anything since my signature is never the same twice either. Sometimes its entirely different. heres a link to a blog convinced they are forgeries: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007760.php if they are this could have an interesting fallout. Who gave these to 60 minutes? Put on your tinfoil, it could have been Democrats, or even Republicans pulling a 'double tinfoil' if you catch my drift, or some regular guy with no affiliation playing prankster. For the time being CBS is standing by its story, saying they had experts check it, have witnesses who saw these memos when they were written, and other witnesses who say Killian had expressed these same comments to them personally. On the other hand, the family of Killian thinks they are fake. That isnt swaying me. its the typewriter analysis thats put all of this in the fog. Could still be real, but they have already been successfully discredited if you ask me. The power of the internet.

http://www.ibmcomposer.org/SelComposer/description.htm one of the typewriters that could have made the memo exactly as it appears

i wanna know if this typewriter was anywhere near a grassy knoll. or if there was more than one typewriter. unfortunately, i don't think this is particularly damaging to bush. it's like saying i could kick prince charles' ass. for one thing, who cares? and for another thing, does anyone really think prince charles is a tough guy in the first place? that said, the whole poo-pooing of the issue by the bush campaign is obviously the only thing they really can do. because you know if bush had a military career even half as decorated as kerry's, they'd be trumpeting it nationwide. so for them and their talk radio surrogates to attempt to sideline it by saying "bush never made a big deal of his service so why should anyone else?" ought to be pretty transparent. once again, you gotta give it up to the republicans for their ball control. maybe we really deserve this shit. i'm glad the assault weapons ban is expiring. the killing spree is gonna rule.

http://www.republicronies.com/misc/bushdoc.gif okay, this is from a Bush bashing site but take a look one is a Times new roman font on modern computer word processor. the other is the memo. the fonts arent the same. spacing nearly identical, but the serifs and other details, the raise in the 'th', etc, are different. so it wasnt just copied/forged over and over to look fuzzy and old, at least not with Times New Roman. Maybe another font. I'm so fucking awake. So awake I'm wasting my time on this shit.

i hate that. you feel so wide awake and you figure you'll make it through the night without sleeping. it feels as if you could go for days like this. like you tapped an hidden power supply. then, around 5 or 6 am, right about a ˝ hour before your normal wake up time, you start to fade and crash.

speaking of fading and crashing. . .

You know, it's pretty sad that we have to focus on some BS that happened 30 years ago, when, like Nate said, there's so much more horrific things that Bush's done in the last four years. Seriously, I don't give a shit whether or not Bush served all his time. He's a weasel and getting out of tight spots seems to be his one natural talent. I'm more concerned that he's essentially handed over our public lands to resource extraction companys at the expense of the public good (and the taxpayer - check out some of the sweet land deals mining companies are getting out west). I'm more concerned that there's been no progress in getting American auto companies to increase fuel efficiency (where's those SOTU hydrogen cars? Do we have to go to Mars to find the dealership?). I'm more concerned that our armed forces are bogged down in the middle east while genocide sweeps across another African country and we do nothing. I'm more concerned that our invasion of a sovereign country that was not posing any credible threat to us meant that we basically handed off Afghanistan to a bunch of petty warlords. When Doctors Without Borders pulls out, then you know it's all completly fucked. I'm more concerned that Bush's pre-emptive war precedent is bearing fruit in Russia. China can't be far behind, methinks. That's what's important, not whether some coked-up alcoholic was too screwed up to fly 30 years ago.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/10/34914/1603 Daily KOS makes a good case for the IBM Selectric defense. I saw Dan Rather on CNN today insist they were real and they thoroughly checked the docs as well as have other people who worked with Killian who say they are real.... No idea what to believe. Anyways, any election that has us all looking at 30 year old typewriters is automatically the stupidest election ever

CINCINNATI - Indicators measure the nation's unemployment rate, consumer spending and other economic milestones, but Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) says it misses the hundreds of thousands who make money selling on eBay. "That's a source that didn't even exist 10 years ago," Cheney told an audience in Ohio. "Four hundred thousand people make some money trading on eBay." oh good lord

John Edwards had a great rebuttal: "If we only included bake sales and how much money kids make at lemonade stands, this economy would really be cooking."

I keep going, but I keep seeing stuff From Bushs other known-true records: Superscript indeed exists in the early 1970s http://img80.exs.cx/img80/4595/threcord.png

If only we could factor in drug dealing... actually...has anyone ever done research into that?

i am on hold with the randi rhodes show. let's hope I don't say anything dumb if I get to talk to her.

nope. not today.

do you listen online or on the radio?

online

i almost called a local station the other day. bill press was hosting and the topic was about the washington judge ruling in favor of gay marriage. some cromag called in saying "why don't we just say to everyone it's ok to have sex with kids or animals?!" and press was actually responding to that absolute red herring as if it were a valid counterpoint. i wanted to call in and advise him to please not even honor that argument with a response. that the issue is who gets to get married, not how people get to have sex with each other and every time the subject gets changed from the one into the other, the cromags win. but, the lines were full and the show was over in 10 minutes so i quit trying.

I wanted to talk about the assult weapon ban expiration crap. One arguement from the other side are how there we need these weapons to be able to match wits should the government decide to do us in. My feeling is that if the government really wants to do us in, assault weapons aren't going to be much help. They'll just engineer a biological attack and blame it on terrorists. I suppose the NRA could start pushing for the right to bear biological weapons. Could you imagine? "heya cletus i done drank somethin outta yer fridge and now i don feel so good" I like how homophobic conservatives are all bent on preserving a *traditional* definition of marriage, but not a *traditional* definition of "arms"

fuck. my formatting and grammar are crap anyway, randi presented the argument that basically said, we need to be able to match wits with the gov't should they decide to do us in.

so, we can't overpower the government by force. and, democracy has failed. what now?

ps. quagmire iraq. when freedom is threatened by the violent response of our government upon its own people, the right to bear arms will play a part.

I don't disagree with that entirely. I just don't think if the gov't does us in, that assault weapons will help much. bio weapons in the asthmar inhalers too much x-files no. i can't accept letting the ban on assault weapons expire.

kazu, your messed up formatting is because you use a mac. try using a different browser. like firefox.

http://gadflyer.com/articles/?ArticleID=204 this article is dead on. if kerry loses this election, look back to this article for the reason. that one statement should have crystallized the democratic offensive strategy. practically every issue could be spun back to that statement, "i don't think we can win." economy, jobs, education, foreign policy. you don't even have to quote the entire sentence or state the actual context. just "i don't think we can win" using bush's own voice. fuck, the mind reels at the possibilities.

re: assault weapons what doesnt make sense to me is that Bush is all about terrorism and 'making the homeland safer' even if it means sacrificing rights. I dont see how not renewing the assault weapons ban goes along with his supposed line of thinking.

Dumbest. Election. Ever. By William Rivers Pitt t r u t h o u t | Perspective Friday 10 September 2004 "I hate television. I hate it as much as peanuts. But I can't stop eating peanuts." - Orson Welles The clearest indication that the country is coming out from under the massive psychological concussion of September 11 is the fact that we are all enduring the stupidest Presidential election season in recent memory. If we were all still walking around in the cat-like state of readiness we operated under for at least a year after the attacks, we wouldn't put up with this garbage. Swift Boats? 527s? Who served or didn't serve, and how and why and when and where? They're talking about a war that ended 29 years ago. Bush v. Dukakis was close - a mythically stupid race, to be sure - but this current crapgasm is pinning the needle on the Dumb-O-Meter. It is no small thing that the guys who ran Bush's race against the Duke are the same guys running Bush's race against Kerry today. In '88, the thing turned on flag-burning, Dukakis in a tank and the racist meta-message of Willie Horton. This entire election, thus far, has been about television. All the issues widely discussed stem from television advertisements. For the television news media, this is like free money falling from the sky. They cover to the hilt any story stemming from a television advertisement - which they can show, and then talk about, and then show, and then talk about, lather, rinse, repeat - and so the campaigns make this garbage the focus of their whole act. It's like a Mobius Loop for really dumb computers. The entire Presidential debate thus far, performed in 30 seconds: The Swifties! Denounce the ad! I denounce all ads! But denounce that ad! I denounce all ads! He didn't denounce the ad! I like eggs! 527s! Response ads! The ad said you lied in Vietnam! How dare that ad say such things! You must react more strongly to the ads! He's not responding strongly to the ads! Shakeup because of the response to the ads! Guard duty scandal revived to respond to the Vietnam angle in the ads! The documents are forged! No they aren't! Yes they are! Vote Bush or die! We need another ad! Not to make this too personal, but I blame the Boomers. The fact that the Baby Boomer generation is the most important demographic in the country right now - both economically and politically - is really the only way to explain this. Think about it. The first generation raised by television is slogging, along with the rest of us, through a campaign where the only issues discussed have to do with television advertisements. Let's not forget, as well, the fact that the two main candidates spring from that particular demographic, as well. I'm kidding. I think. Marvin Minsky once said, "Imagine what it would be like if TV actually were good. It would be the end of everything we know." Let's spool that thought out a bit. If TV was good, three of the major news networks (NBC, CNBC, MSNBC) wouldn't be owned by a defense contractor that profits from war. If TV was good, another major news network (CNN) wouldn't be wedded to the outsourcing of technological workers to cheap-labor nations because its parent company lives and dies by paying pennies on the dollar for geeks. If TV was good, another major news network (Fox) would require its anchors to say, "We are an auxiliary wing of the Republican Party, deal with it" every fifteen minutes. In other words, if TV was good, that would mean TV news would actually be informative, and not a commercial platform for the handful of corporations that own and distribute all the information we the people need to intelligently run the show. If such a thing were to exist, it would indeed be the end of everything we know. It would be the end of non-issues. It would certainly be the end of this amazingly stupid election. Issues we are not hearing about because we have spent so much time talking about television advertisements: Millions of jobs lost in the last four years; Unbearably expensive health care; A total loss of confidence within the international community in our moral leadership; The underfunded farce that is the Department of Homeland Security; The underfunded farce that is the No Child Left Behind bill; The fact that military assault weapons will soon be making a perfectly legal return to a neighborhood near you; The deeply illegal outing of a deep-cover CIA agent by Bush administration officials, who did it because they wanted to silence a critic; The rape and torture of men, women and children in the Abu Ghraib prison, horrors that were sanctioned in writing by Bush's own lawyer and the Secretary of Defense; The allegation by Senator Bob Graham of Florida that Bush torpedoed any aspect of the 9/11 investigation that came within spitting distance of his friends in the Saudi royal family; The allegations by several generals that Bush's people started stripping necessary troops and resources from Afghanistan to bolster their ill-conceived charge into Iraq; The myriad accusations by a dozen insiders that Bush and his people ignored the terror threat until the Towers fell, and then used the attacks to scare the American people into an unnecessary war in Iraq and a mammoth payday for their friends in the weapons and oil business; The fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq; The fact that no connections between Hussein, bin Laden and 9/11 have been established beyond the bloviating hyperbole of a few senior Bush officials who haven't yet gotten the memo; Does anyone even remember Enron? Tomorrow is the third anniversary of September 11th. We deserve better than this. Yesterday, we ran a feature article that carried a photograph of every soldier who has died in Iraq. The article read, "The men and women whose faces fill the page below were not told this. They were, in fact, told the exact opposite. They raised their hands and took the oath, they donned their uniform and picked up their weapon, they boarded a plane and flew far from home, and they died. They were doing their duty, and they believed their President." Look into the eyes of those 1,000 lost faces and tell me they don't deserve better than this stupid election and its stupid public debate.

i love it when sling blade carl calls in to the mike malloy show. truthout.

nice impression but I thought that was boring. I put on this Crank yankers compilation I downloaded instead. Right now Super Dave is running for office promising an old couple to beat up their kid.

thanks dave. i figgered it was the mac thing but wasn't sure why, one of my posts, half of the formatting was okay and the other part was messed up.

I emailed Crossfire today. Novak made a stink about how CBS must reveal their source. I agree with him... ...and as an act of good faith he should reveal his Valerie Plame story source on national TV

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/trall/2004/trall040911.gif speaking of HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That Ted Rall cartoon could have been easily been comparing Patrick and Spunky on these boards.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/040920/usnews/20guard.htm US news and world report takes aim at the 'points' system to prove Bush fulfilled his duty, saying that Bushs own records contradict the points system.

http://www.rowboatvets.com/intro.htm Rowboat Veterans For Truth

I was trying to figure out why TIME polls keep putting Bush so far ahead. I decided to read the details. Check this out "F12. Regardless of how you feel today, did you vote for Bush or Gore four years ago? Date Gore Bush Sep7-9 41% 53% Aug31-Sep2 41% 54% Aug24-26 41% 53% Aug3-5 44% 50% Jul20-22 44% 51%" in other words, disregard the Time poll

I wonder how they keep hitting that same slanted group of people. Got a link to the full poll?

Ah, I got it. Note, also, that with registered voters (as opposed to likely voters) they're tied.

also note that with registered voters, nader would fatally cripple kerry. i've never understood how you can test 1000 voters and claim 95% accuracy over the entire sample, +/- 3%. of course, both quarters of statistics i was either drunk, stoned or sleeping.

I love Garrison Keillor: http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/979/

Some swift boat vets' names were used to discredit Kerry without their permission.

Kerry and Bush tied again: http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB109526872487418642,00.html?mod=todays_free_feature (You'll have to cut 'n' paste the link} The interesting thing is that a majority don't think Bush deserves re-election.

may be tied, but electoral-vote.com puts Bush way ahead. the results on that site swing WILDY day to day, its ever consistent one person or another.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v43/chickenhawkdown/39_1_091604_hurrican329A6B.jpg Foxnews put this image on their homepage coverage of Hurricane Ivan. accident? or cheap shot?

Oh, certainly not an accident. The Kerry sign is cropped just barely into the shot, and note that the sign has the same proportions as the rest of the picture. That's a compositional trick to bring attention to the sign and make a mental connection between the Kerry sign and the rest of the shot. (i.e., between the Kerry campaign and a scene of disaster or destruction.)

Check out this upstanding republican family.

9/24/2004 Debate or Debase? - One Question For Bush: Oh, how the next few days are gonna be intense ones at the ranch in Crawford for our President as he preps for the first of three debates, to be held next Thursday, September 30. Karl Rove is shinin' his cattle prod, ready to shove it into Bush's haunches whenever Bush goes off script. Man, Bush will wonder, can't a man just pay someone to do this debatin' for him? Like back at Yale? Yeah, there's gonna be a lotta broken pencils, all-nighters, Krispy Kreme runs, and sweaty brows as they try to triangulate around whatever they predict Kerry'll say. (Kerry is gonna be in Boston this weekend, doin' his own prep.) Next week will be filled with advice and predictions. We'll hear the well-worn lie that Bush "won" the debates with Al Gore, which, if you mean "Told lies with a straight face" and "Didn't fling actual feces at the questioners while smacking the podium with his cock and screeching to Jesus to coke him up so he could make it through one answer without breaking down into blubbering monosyllabic grunts and sobs," yeah, sure, Bush won. If, however, you mean, "Gave coherent, substantive answers backed up by facts," well, you're pretty hard pressed to prove Bush prevailed. We'll also hear how masterful a debater Kerry is, so everyone will expect the President to fling shit, smack the podium with his cock, screech to Jesus, and blubber grunts and sobs. That way, when Bush doesn't fling, smack, screech, and blubber, he'll have defeated that "great debater." There's a website called "Just One Question," which boils Bush down to a single thing issue that might be asked at a press conference, interview, or, say, a debate: "How many times have you been arrested?" It's a fine question, but it ain't an election winner. The Rude Pundit has his own one simple question that needs to be asked specifically at a debate because it's about character, policy, and leadership in the here and now: Mr. President, do you believe Jews, Muslims, and others who die without accepting Jesus Christ as their savior will be allowed into Heaven? That's a "let's-put-our-cards-on-the-table" question. It risks alienating a whole fuckin' lot of people with the answer. To answer "Yes" or anything squishy about loving everyone will wreck Bush's base. To answer "No" would wreck any chance with moderates. And, besides, here's the bonus: it's a legitimate question because it lets us know what is guiding the President in his decision-making and attitudes. In fact, it's a more relevant question than any about the National Guard. Now, does any moderator have the balls to ask? Let's open this up: send your ideas for a single debate question to ask Bush that you think would devastate him or his campaign. The best will be posted next week. Send to rudepundit@yahoo.com. The Rude Pundit, meanwhile, will be awaiting the call from the Kerry campaign to head up to Beantown to help the candidate delicately eviscerate his opponent. // posted by Rude One @ 10:40 AM

President Eisenhower's son endorses Kerry. It's a pretty good read: "As son of a Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, it is automatically expected by many that I am a Republican. For 50 years, through the election of 2000, I was."

I read that. Pretty amazing.

bush just got his ass waxed. we'll see how the pundits parse it and what sticks but kerry clearly showed himself to be presidential. i watched it on c-span and they had a split screen, which i thought was against the rules (they adjusted the camera so their heads were at an equal height but the podium, with it's horizontal lines, may as well have been a yardstick marking off the height difference in inches). did the networks show it like that? did everyone get to see bush getting pissed off as kerry made an ass out of him? please say yes.

did you hear Guliani's take on the Daily Show? what a fuckhead

I DO NOT GET THE DAILY SHOW! AND, IN ADDITION, THEIR VIDEO ARCHIVE SWITCHED TO WINDOWS MEDIA FORMAT AND HAS SUCKED BROWN STARFISH EVER SINCE. HEY COMEDY CENTRAL -- DUMP M$ AND GO BACK TO REALMEDIA: IT WORKS. THANK YOU AND GOODNIGHT!

PBS didnt show the split screen. I dont know about the networks. Probably not. I thought Kerry missed some opportunities to make Bush out to be a complete dumbass, but then again, if i were Kerry I would have walked over to Bush and start shoving his wormy ass around. what is sad is the quantitative and strategic value in terms of votes this statement has "But people know where I stand, people out there listening know what I believe." -Bush I mean, you know thats meaty stuff there. You know where he stands. He's a wall despite prevailing wisdom. Fucking evangelicals. Did you guys see this? http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040930/pl_afp/us_vote_politics_bible_040930185230 Hey spunk, token republican, your people taking the high road again? fuckin A.

that's not a republican ideal. the republican party is rotting from within. bush and his gang are not acting like republicans.

There was some split screen on CBS. Did you note when Bush made ANOTHER weird "love" statement in concerns to a woman - when he was talking about the war widow he met at a rally and how hard it was to love her or something like that? What about when he asked for a 30 second rebuttal and totally BLANKED? He fucking bombed, and the undecided voters saw that.

God let's hope so.

that 'love' statement was creepy. hard to love them widows.

it's a very born again thing to say. everything that came out of his mouth was unpresidential, whiny, blaming. apparently, all this presidentializing is hard work. what a pussy. i can't wait for cheney/edwards.

will farrell has perfected it http://whitehousewest.com/

oh, i didn't see you there. you caught me mending my fences. i love that in a non-creepy way. they need to keep making more of those.

Check out the "Faces of Frustration" video from democrats.org. It were funny. link

nice music. I AM SO CRUSHING HIM

Check out this bucket 'o' spin from CNN.

Oh, this is classic. Is this a lively political news day, or what?

CNN is trying to become FOX news. They can kiss my ass. I watch Headline news in the morning just to get a handle on any breaking news I should scope out on the internet later. There was a great editorial cartoon lately, depicting these group of dinosaurs, representing the major networks. They were all looking up into the sky in fear at a flaming asteroid labeled "Internet".

Kerry is so good at answering questions, much much stronger than making speeches or coming up with soundbites. These debates suit him well. The only danger for Kerry now is that expectations are even lower for Bush now into the other debates. Kerry will be expected to be even better, and if Bush just avoids embarrassing himself like he did last night more people will think he wins. Then again, foreign policy was supposed to be Bush's best foot, and now he has to account for domestic issues. ouch.

They had split screen on CNN. *Wisper's Top 3 Debate Moments* 1) I don't know about you guys, but our house went crazy when Bush kept sticking up for Poland. It's the new catch phrase around here today. Threatening each other with Poland, asking why D forgot about Poland over at the store, wondering what Poland thinks of my dinner selection.... WHAT ABOUT POLAND, MOTHERFUCKER?! That's what you would hear in the background, if you were to phone me. That was solid gold comedy, I was so glad the Daily Show picked up on it. http://www.youforgotpoland.com God, like Poland is voting for this fuck... 2) when Bush was defending his actions in Iraq, he said- "...they'll be a help to us in the war on terror" And i said- "Yes, what with all their massive stockpiles of weapons and- oh! OH CRAP!" 3) I've forgotten number 3. I'll let you know when it comes back to me. hehe,

what was Bush scribbling? http://www.livejournal.com/community/bush_sucks/1980583.html#cutid1

i like the little swirly.

The Rude Pundit Proudly lowering the level of political discourse 10/5/2004 What Edwards Should Say (Rude Version): If, at tonight's "debate", when Edwards is asked, "How do you believe your career as a trial lawyer affects your approach to government?", he doesn't answer, "What the fuck kind of question is that, Gwen? What the fuck are you implying? Holy fuck, have you even looked at the cases I've tried? Doesn't the press do any actual goddamn research on, say, Lexis-Nexis or even fuckin' Google? Or maybe my fuckin' book? My legal career was based on helping individuals dicked over by the very kind of corporate and government culture this evil motherfucker across this stupid ass table has fostered. And don't you fuckin' gimme that stroke victim smirk, Dick, or I'll come across and start shovin' aluminum tubes up your ass, all 60,000 of 'em, one anodized tube at a goddamn time. Then, with all those tubes up your ass, you can tell me, tell all of us, if they feel like centrifuge tubes or just plain ol' rocket tubes. And then I'll shove yellow cake uranium from Niger up your ass. Then I'll shove the bones and blood of over 1000 Americans up your ass. And the bodies of tens of thousands of Iraqis, right up the motherfuckin' asshole, Dick, right on up. We'll follow that up with Energy Task Force documents, reams of 'em, get it, Dick? Gettin' reamed with reams? Then I'll shove Halliburton up your ass. I'll shove Kellog, shove Brown, shove Root, right up into your dessicated colon. I'll shove no-bid contracts and deferred compensation in there until your sphincter is aching and bloody. That's right, Dick, it's all goin' up there. Bribes to Nigeria and business with Iran. We're packin' it in, bitch. And let's go back, Gwen, let's get old school on this man whose heart is so small it needs a machine to make it pump, this vile, depraved political attack dog, this insider who massages the system to the benefit of his bastard cronies like a Korean hooker at a Japanese spa. Let's shove South African apartheid up Dick's ass. Let's shove water pollution, air pollution and other environmental degradation up Cheney's ass. Let's shove the bodies of women who will die of botched abortions if he gets his way up Cheney's ass. Let's shove the Project for a New American Century up Cheney's ass, along with Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Perle, and all the motherfuckin' neocons, pack 'em in, into Cheney's ass, alongside draft deferments, Lynne, SDI, and more. And when Cheney's cryin', yellin' that it hurts, his ass hurts, when he's weepin' and wonderin', 'Why? Why are you shoving all this up my ass?' I'll say, 'Because you've been shovin' it all up our asses for years, you vicious, soulless bastard. Now, stay bent over, 'cause, trust me, there's tons more shovin' to do and then I'm gonna fuck you Deliverance style, you corporate pig, so start practicin' your squealin'.' Does that answer your question, Gwen?", then the debate will be worthless. // posted by Rude One @ 9:53 AM

it's hard work!

Senator Patrick Leahy will be in the second row of the debate tonight. I hope he wears a big grin everytime Cheney looks at him.

thats a rather glossy picture of Edwards. that aside....i've had thoughts to the effect of none of it matters. the democrats, the souless bastards they are,washed their hands of howard dean before he had a chance because of the potential threat to the corporate establishment he posed. to think democrats suck any less at the corporate teat is silly. another trauma center closed in metro LA yesterday because it was hemmoraging money. how many people, who otherwise go without, could get basic healthcare in this country for a 1/3 of the campaign funds those two assholes have spent thus far? we're the richest nation in the world and yet one of the most soulless. some days, it makes me sick. somedays, it doesnt matter to me whether its fucking frankenstein kerry or that smirky sumvabitch bush who wins. i love the pundits rant though....

Kerry ROCKED against Bush in St. Louis tonite! Esp. when that chick asked him about his Pro-Choice position. All his answers were well-organized & thorough -- he did NOT resort to quips & soundbites as Bush did. And Kerry TOTALLY NAILED BUSH on the importation of Canadian drugs! Hopefully, if that crowd was really picked from 'undecided voters' (& Bill O'Reilly told Jon Stewart he is undecided -- who knew?), I think Kerry will have changed a few minds by tomorrow. So what do y'all think? - RC

".......want some wood?"

1) Shortly into the debate, all my neighbors were treated to me screaming "FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU" at the top of my lungs when Bush was talking about canadian drugs. I mean, really. It makes my blood boil. Such ignorance I've never heard in my life. Is ANYONE so dumb that they think our drugs are unsafe? I can't even comprehend it. Our standards are higher than that of the FDA. Motherfucking HIGH-ER. And as for brand names- THEYRE THE SAME FUCKING DRUGS. "Sure you could buy drugs from Canada. They might cure you, they might kill you!" I can't even... god, i don't even have the words for how deeply wrong that whole argument is. I'm offended by the insignificant little prick. I'd even go so far to say- how dare he. How dare he mock our standards and our system, when his is flawed, falling apart and evil. On live tv. In front of the whole world. Fuck him. I can't decide if our government should issue a hard-ass retort, or not even glorify it with a response. Where does this guy come from? 2) as for the abortion part, it was like a buzzword crossword puzzle vs. a dictionary. Kerry's response was as eloquent as anyone will ever hope to have. Good game. 3) Bush said "internets". My mind = blown. 4) Bush lost his shit and argured with the mediator. Classy. 5) the whole time Kerry was just making an "I'm SO crushing him!" face. tee hee. 6) wisper says- Buy canadian! 7) Current CNN poll- Kerry 86%, Bush 16%

"want some wood?"

Fact-check.org says: "President Bush himself would have qualified as a 'small business owner' under the Republican definition, based on his 2001 federal income tax returns. He reported $84 of business income from his part ownership of a timber-growing enterprise."

Last question of the debate... Citizen: Mr president, you've made thousands of difficult decisions in the last four years. Could you give three concrete examples of decisions you would have made differently? Bush: Iraq was not a mistake!

And I can't wait for a debate transcript. Bush's answer to the environment question was an incohernat pseudoscience rant. I thought I was listening to Salvador Dali talk about melting green flower pots or something. It was that surreal.

according to the transcripts, i'm out of line. it should be "need some wood?"

http://www.needsumwood.com/ Wood is the new Poland INTERNETS?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/08/politics/main648302.shtml tha transcript.

YEAH, BABY! ALL the poll results from EVERY NEW SOURCE show that the public thinks KERRY CRUSHED BUSH! Take a look -- & while your're there, click on the links & VOTE! The polls will be open for the next 48 hrs. http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/000516.php Of course, FoxNews shows the lowest margin, with Kerry only ahead 51% vs. 48% for Bush. But who beleives anything coming from Fox? Maybe we really won't end up Bushwacked again come Nov! But I'm still extremely worried about those Diebold voting machines... - RC

those are online polls. they don't actually have any value. the 'scientific' polls based on 'sound' statstics are disturbingly close. closer than even the foxnews polls. america is divided. there are two nations. three if you count mine.

The 'close' polls like Gallup I saw showed a higher polling of Republicans than Democrats. Telling.

how exactly is that telling? republicans tend to vote in higher numbers than democrats. you want your sample to proportionally mirror the population if you want your results as accurate as possible. or whatever, statistics are all witchcraft anyway. and the polls are meaningless.

It's all about the Australian drugs now, people. I order all my veterinary medications online from them because it's so much cheaper. And my cats have yet to explode, lose their hair, or turn republican. About halfway through the debate the power went out, and the radio station decided not to air the finish. Sounds like I didn't miss much, however. sllop nate?

"how exactly is that telling? republicans tend to vote in higher numbers than democrats." what I was talking about has nothing to do with actual voting in the elections. For the debate polling they sampled more Republicans than Democrats, and Kerry still was ahead in most polls. Theres no reason to oversample one side in a debate. its not meant to reflect election voter turnout, its meant to reflect who won a DEBATE. Anyways, to me it was telling that more people acknowledge Kerry is killing in these debates, that if you evened out the sample to even Repub/Democrat Kerry's numbers are even higher. regardless of how the media seem to want to make it look as close as possible. It seems the media are calling it a draw based only on the fact that Bush attacked back. It was the same piss-poor performance as last week, except this time it was stumbling and tripping and shouting while attacking back, instead of just stumbling and tripping and shouting on the defensive.

Yeah -- funny how "the polls don't matter" now that Kerry is ahead. Yet those same internet polls from a month ago were being treated like some great oracle by the press when Bush was ahead. The opinions people come away from these debates with are going to be reflected in the way they vote. With the election less than a month away, scientific or not, Nate, THESE POLLS MATTER. - RC

polls didn't matter when bush was ahead. polls are small sample bullshit. i'm a registered democrat voting for kerry, so don't misassume my bias. "Theres no reason to oversample one side in a debate. its not meant to reflect election voter turnout, its meant to reflect who won a DEBATE." what you fucking canadians don't seem to understand is that the whole point of the debate is to win the hearts of voters. these guys don't give a fuck about non-voters. who won the debate is who swayed the most voters. we are two americas, without a doubt. and those americans who don't realize this, consciously or subconsciously, are the target audience of these debates. are the point of these debates. everyone else already knows who they are going to vote for. they knew before the primaries started. the ass or that big-eared dickfaced thing, there is no swaying them. those who can be moved will get sucked to one side or the other or just give up and lock their doors and pull the shades. it's all about what moore got right in bowling for columbine. we're scared shitless. and we're either scared shitless of the kaiser or hitler or osama bin fucking laden, or we're scared shitless of the man at the helm taking away our freedoms. one or the other, and we're going to back the candidate who's presence feels most like daddy. feels most like womb. let the evils of our side be ignored and dissolve into the dissonance that placates our reality. i don't even know why i care anymore. this population is like cattle with rings through their noses. television has zombified everyone. both sides throw out false news stories and then hide the corrections a week later deep in page 12 and 6pt type. no body knows whats going on so they glom onto one side or the other and only hear what they want to hear. everyone is overconfident. no one listens. gone are the great compromisers. there is no comprimise when you are dealing with corporations with billions of dollars. you just shut your fucking mouth and vote where they tell you. no, the polls don't matter. the debates don't really matter. who gets elected probably doesn't even matter. it's all an illusion to keep you thinking you are free. michael badnarik and david cobb, the libertarian and the green party candidates, where arrested outside of the debates. they were trying to get inside. the libertarian was trying to serve an order to show cause against the CPD. the CPD is a private, "nonpartisan" nonprofit corporation. by nonpartisan they mean bipartisan, as in thier bylaws they have clearly established to "represent the interests of the Republican and Democratic parties." badnarik and cobb have already debated 4 times this year. real debates, without scripts, without pre-screened questions. have you seen them on the zombie box? did you know about them at all? there are two parties in this country and they are both owned by the same small group wealthy wealthy people. people who have perfected tyranny through democracy. pacification of a population through the illusion of freedom. sllop slurp.

Yeah. So? Who can compete against a "people who have perfected tyranny through democracy" than another "people who have perfected tyranny through democracy"? I want my manipulator to only mostly fuck us up, not totally fuck us up. Anyway, you're all poised to enter the manipulator class, right? I mean, if you're a published author, that's what you'll be: Johnny Memeseed planting his memes in the minds of mankind.

"what you fucking canadians don't seem to understand is that the whole point of the debate is to win the hearts of voters. these guys don't give a fuck about non-voters. who won the debate is who swayed the most voters." The purpose of the debate may be to win voters, but you can win the battle and lose the war. The sampling should NOT reflect turnout of 4 years ago, especially when that turnout isn't even accurate anymore. In most swing states at least, the Democrats are registering new voters around 2.33: 1 compared to the Republicans. Polls dont matter in many senses, but with it this 'tight' in the medias eyes, right now EVERYTHING matters. "there are two parties in this country and they are both owned by the same small group wealthy wealthy people. people who have perfected tyranny through democracy. " I'm sure I'm going to blubber on forever here... not even very long ago I was quite hardline in this thinking. its still there but I think now I was out of touch with reality - with my own bitterness that there wasnt any candidate - US or CDN - who could win that closely defined me. I've come to decide now its not really the Dems or Reps fault. The people allow it to happen with their own apathy and desire to be on the winning team, that they arent willing to see any dark side of capitalism existing to the point its taking over their lives, their wages are dropping and their CEOs are making disprortionate salaries compared to corporations any other country in the world. Apathetic to no price cap on their drugs so that Canada actually becomes an issue. Apathy to Monsanto poisoning their milk, apathy to corporations patenting life and suing farmers when THEIR grain accidentally grows on their land. So inundated by fear they wont vote their true feelings for fear of 'losing' 4 years. You have to blame the people as well as the media and politicans for not being able to see through bullshit. I understand people work X amount of hours and dont have the time to read the Guardian or Reason Magazine or whateverthefuck but come on. That I actually encourage people to vote strategically this year is just me saying thats HOW BAD Bush is, 4 years ago the way they presented themselves it wasnt so scary. In 2008 it will hopefully be different. Anyways, people are so scared by something so vague as terrorism, they cant see the more direct threats to them personally. Their air quality, AIDS, unfair taxes, labour law reform, their childrens education... And the media dont take an interest in other candidates because the people themselves dont. they follow the money and are only interested in a horserace. I saw Badnarik and Cobb on CSPAN. To be fair, they made a huge mistake themselves in the scheduling of one of their debates during the RNC. What did they expect? They seem way too eager to preach to the converted, and guess what? people arent going to vote for a Nader or a Cobb or a Badnarik no matter how much they like them, because if they did get elected they have no party to support them. People have been smart enough to figure this out. They're not organized and they purposely make their platforms over the top becuase they themselves know they wont get elected and just want to get attention. They dont even take themselves seriously enough. If they were smart they would be using their entire campaign to rally people to accept reality and push their view into the 2 major parties. I think a lot of Libertarians and Greens this year realize this which is why less people care in the fringe parties than ever. I dont know whats up with Nader voters who dont see this as an option, that they have to vote with whoever reflects them most every time. They should see that people like them are why Howard Dean happened, which even though he didnt win, changed the entire Kerry campaign for the better. the fringe parties'll never be up there without money. This is what happens when capitalism is taken off its leash, people like Nader and Cobb need major donations and funding to even get in there. Have you read much about Canada's NDP? They're pretty far left, but are incredibly energized and organized, the leader is a regular guy with "zazz" and even after years of being an official party they're STILL not ready to lead the country. it takes a long time. People in Canada switch parties a lot more often, taking more into account than one issue or one candidates likability. After years of Bill Maher and Alex Jones and Bill HIcks I have to acknowledge even to myself that I'm sick of being so jaded. It aint healthy. At this point in time I'm trying to actually have a little faith in someone and that people actually care so much right now they'll be more involved and will try to insert their views into a major party and actually influence major people. Right now I'm glad Kerry's a moderate, I think the world (yes I said the world, everyone is sleeping next to an elephant now) needs a level head. I seriously think once Kerry is in power the nation will actually see what a moderate he is and things wont be as tense. yep. Blubber. I think my light started flashing red a couple paragraphs ago.

i don't disagree, rowlfe. the point of the libs and the greens wasn't that i thought they should be elected, but that i thought they should be acknowledged. their influence on the main candidates is what i want, and i want it in a real debate between all the candidates. even then, though, we're past that mattering. we are right now at the point where all media can be easily, inexpensively, rapidly spoofed. you can put some dude on the whitehouse lawn from a thousand miles away. we have no way of trusting anything we are told. there is no basis for 'proof'. the cia released that report the other day that said that saddam was bribing goverment officials billions of dollars to skirt the food-for-oil program. russians, french. the key players in the fight against the implementation of the UN resolution that justified our move into iraq. that's kind of a big deal. that kind of says bush did the right thing and kind of says the US should go contrary to the UN on occasion. that cia document is either right or wrong. it's either honest or propganda. we have no way of knowing. you have to have faith in one side or the other. "the fringe parties'll never be up there without money" that's the problem with the CDP. with the republican/democrate corporation that runs our government every year. there should be a consistutional amendment that limits campaigning via the media to X debates. and if you're on the ballot of enough states that you have the possiblity of getting the electoral votes to win, you're in the debate. does that abridge the freedom of candidates' speech? it sure does. but guess what, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater, either. the supreme court has made it clear that the freedom of speech should be abridged when it impinges on the freedom of others. and that is just what this buy-your-election system is doing. i don't know, rowlfe, i think we're flinging the same shit from the same pulpits. a think i might just be a little more resigned than you, a few more years jaded. or whatever, i'm still voting this year. for the first time since i "helped" vote the other bush out of office. i'm scared shitless. like everyone else. cheers to the new tyranny, tiggy. if the w wins this one i'll be in the market for an overseas bride.

honestly, i think what is really making me grumpy has more to do with the number of liberal, out-of-iraq, peace loving people of my region who have said something to the tune of "every time i see a BUSH '04 bumper sticker i just want to swerve over and slam into their car." obama's speech fell on deaf ears. that makes me really sad. both sides have the same blindness. there is no attempt to try to understand what the other side says. they are just automatically wrong because they are idiots. or hippies.

In other news...

Obama's speech simply didnt get heard. We heard it cuz we were looking out for it, but that was on the day that the cable networks didnt cover as much. "they are just automatically wrong because they are idiots. or hippies. " I think theres more understanding than we think. Since we're internet junkies we just see all the hardliners. We dont talk to a lot of people on the street who are one-issue voters but acknowledge the other side has a better stance on this/that/the othe rthing. At the same time I find a lot of the 'undecideds' way more frustrating than the hardliners. That they can have 4 years of Bush and not know if they want more of it or not is just crazy. Hardliners may be stubborn but at least they seem to be paying attention enough to know what they hate.

i don't know rowlfe. i'm talking about the people around me. you talk to anyone around here and they just don't understand how anyone could vote for bush. anything right-leaning comes out and it is WRONG WRONG.. no one is listening.

"i'm a registered democrat voting for kerry" ...i thought you were a registered libertarian?

you re-register every time you move. when i moved here i re-registered democrat.

You can't see this without a Salon membership, but I think it's important enough to cut 'n' paste here: Bush's message to pro-lifers We were as bewildered as anyone on Friday night when President Bush referenced the Dred Scott decision when asked what kind of Supreme Court justices he would appoint. Was he making a play for the runaway slave voting bloc? Actually, it looks like he was making a play for pro-lifers, assuring the anti-abortion rights crowd that he would appoint justices who would overturn Roe vs. Wade if re-elected. You read that right. For many who oppose abortion rights, Roe is "Dred Scott II," denying the unborn rights they deserve just as the Court once denied blacks. Here's the logic from the National Right to Life Committee: "In an 1857 court case, known as the Dred Scott decision, the Supreme Court ruled that slaves, even freed slaves, and all their descendants, had no rights protected by the Constitution and that states had no right to abolish slavery. Where would Blacks be today if that reasoning had not been challenged?" "The reasoning in Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade is nearly identical. In both cases the Court stripped all rights from a class of human beings and reduced them to nothing more than the property of others. Compare the arguments the Court used to justify slavery and abortion. Clearly, in the Court's eyes, unborn children are now the same 'beings of an inferior order' that the justices considered Blacks to be over a century ago." Pro-life Sen. Rick Santorum made the point in an interview with The New York Times: "[He] likened Roe to the Dred Scott decision of 1857, when the court ruled that blacks born into slavery had no constitutional rights. 'The more people understand how wide open Roe v. Wade is, how unlimited it is,' Mr. Santorum said, the more they turn against it." And as Paperwight pointed out, a simple Google search shows how widespread the Roe = Dred comparison is. A sidenote: We found this interesting article that shows how Antonin Scalia's angry dissent in the anti-sodomy law case last year, in which he argued against gay rights, echoed the logic used to justify slavery in Dred. Yet Scalia has taken issue with Dred in the abortion context, citing the decision in his dissent in Casey v. Planned Parenthood. - Geraldine Sealey

i am a pro-life democrat. i think i can pretty much agree with the point, in that the supreme court has erroniously judged against the rights of a class people in the past. i think the pro-abortion arguments are bullshit. more about skirting responsbility than liberty.

with apologies. i don't mean to judge anyone, i've skirted plenty of responsiblity in my life. and i break the law whenever i feel the need to. and often just for kicks.

everyone is a slave to their own biology but women are particularly and uniquely so and the argument about being personally responsible for both personal and mutual actions sort of breaks down on this one topic of reproductive rights. i don't think there's any reasonable argument for forcing a being to host another being in or on its body. whether it's a tapeworm, lice, a human fetus or anything else, an individual ought to be able to make the decision to seek a medical remedy that will cure the condition. i might not be personally comfortable with someone's decision to abort, but i'm far less comfortable with disallowing the decision. i think of a current example of the arabs raping africans in the sudan with the sole purpose of getting them pregnant and forcing them to bear a child that will culturally stigmatize the baby and the mother. incest, child molestation, and rape are all legitimate reasons to abort a fetus but so are stupidity, fear, revenge and mental illness. now, in a perfect world, i might, might, be willing to limit the conditions upon which abortions are available but i doubt, even then, that i could righteously demand a woman to bear the child in her womb.

If you force a woman to have a child you are making her a slave. By the "slavery" argument, you make a slave out of either the mother or the child. There is no avoiding this if you follow that argument. So I choose enslaving the child. It ends up being better for society, my several measurable factors. The pro life side, to my knowledge, hasn't put forth measurable reasons why the mother should be enslaved instead of the child. I'd love to be educated, though.

You know who's really bugging me these days. These pro-lifers ... You ever look at their faces? 'I'm pro-life!' 'I'm pro-life!' Boy, they look it don't they? They just exude joie de vivre. You just want to hang with them and play Trivial Pursuit all night long. You know what bugs me about them? If you're so pro-life, do me a favour - don't lock arms and block medical clinics. If you're so pro-life, lock arms and block cemeteries. Let's see how committed you are to this idea. "She can't come in!" She was 98. She was hit by a bus! "There's options!" What else can we do? Have her stuffed? I want to see pro-lifers with crowbars at funerals opening caskets - 'get out!' Then I'd be really impressed.

Hee! Nate, no comment. Really. Grrr. I mean, no comment.

And now, for something entirely different... http://tinyurl.com/4p84p

taking a life is taking a life. you can't go shoot your invalid parent in the head just because she can't live without your support any longer. regarding slavery, say a woman has a baby and goes the single mom path with child support from some guy who was the unlucky other half in some sweaty drunk endevor. now this guy is legally required to pay some percentage of his salary for 18 years to this mom and her child. isn't that slavery? what if the guy didn't want the baby? it's not like he can mandate an abortion or go drown the kid when he gets the family court summons. "your honor, i request the child be euthenized on account of me not wanting to have a child." i don't know. i figure it is ok that for medically necessary reasons and rape. you make a judgement call. i figure it is ok to shoot a man if he is standing in your living room at 3am with a knife in his hand. i figure there are reasons why is ok to kill people, and reasons why it isn't ok. casual abortion, abortion as birth control just isn't ok in my head. i don't judge though. honestly. and i don't see to change the law. it's one of those interal moral issues that i can't get over for myself. i have many friends who've had abortions, and each one makes me sad, and i've never told anyone of them that it makes me sad. it made them sad, too. it certainly won't sway my vote. we're killing our babies in much worse ways these days.

karen ryan strikes again. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=703&e=4&u=/ap/20041011/ap_on_el_pr/school_ads that's why it's a personal issue, nate. a government that launches a war of choice, killing thousands of innocents, has no credibility on the issue of saving innocent life. i also think death with dignity is a personal choice and it should be a right. essentially, until we get to a point where life is guaranteed to be totally awesome, people need to be allowed to make the choice. you didn't say it but i assume you're only concerned about human life. to me, the only credible pro-life argument is one that treats all life as sacred and protected, which would be practically impossible to uphold.

As a take-off from what dave said, i can't imagine some people can spend all day crying in front of an abortion clinic and then go home and eat a whole steak. They fight for the rights of an inanimate cell cluster, that may or may not mature, but ignore the millions of dead chickens we make every day, or 100 year old trees. Why aren't they chasing down deer hunters every fall? Do they swat at flies? Of course not. Only humans are "life". Right? One fetus is somehow worth more than thousands of trees. But i have a real question. On the second season of Six Feet Under, (heh) one of the main characters has a one night fling and the girl ends up pregnant and decides to keep it. She doesn't tell him about it until she's almost ready to birth, and she knows he doesn't want the kid so she serves him with papers to sign away all of his parental and custody rights. Do such legal papers exist? Why are men so fucked over by laws if these papers do indeed exist?

they do exist. it is the woman's choice. the man has no choice in the matter. "One fetus is somehow worth more than thousands of trees" huh? isn't that a slightly absurd argument? do you refuse medical treatment because of the plants that may have been harmed? for christsakes! the germs they kill in hospitals! it's a fucking bloodbath. i guess it is really just a personal belief, so techically i am pro-choice, whatever. abortion horrifies me. usda prime beef does not. i do think men should have some choice, though. half the choice. or choice of involvement.

Naw, nate, it's a protoplasm bath.

"isn't that a slightly absurd argument? do you refuse medical treatment because of the plants that may have been harmed?" it is, and i don't, because everyone has a scale of 'worth' in their morals, and to me, something like, say, a 100 year old redwood forest is worth more than a fetus, and probably more worth protecting. What would do more good to the world in the end? the forest or the fetus? And that's me. And my best friend since age 12 stands firm in her belief that I'm a sociopath. Rowlf sez: "or like how 3000 american lives are somehow worth more than 12000+ Iraqis!" yeah. But my point is that they've invested so much time and emotion arguing that an unwanted immature cell group is precious life, and would not do the same for a 20 year old moose with generations of babies. I'm saying that if they find the fetus to be such precious life, why not every insect or fish? All life? And I'm saddened again to find out that the magic forms exist, but are in the woman's favour. However, i'm not surprised. We gotta change that shit.

Men do have a choice: PUT ON A DAMN CONDOM -- EVERY TIME! None of the women I know ever complain when a guy says "Hold on, lemme get my jimmie on first." We're not the ones whining about how we 'can't feel anything with a raincoat on', blah-de-blah-blah... SEX IS THE MOST SERIOUS THING A MAN & A WOMAN CAN DO TOGETHER! We all learn that in 7th-grade health class, but too many people don't take it to heart. It takes 2 to make a baby -- but either party can make a unilateral decision to use b.c. Men need to be more responsible about sex if they want to avoid making babies. I still feel the Pro-life position is really a supply-side racial issue undercover. Never in my life have I seen a Pro-life demonstration in front of a clinic in Bed Stuy or Harlem or Little Dominica. They only protest in front of clinics in WHITE areas. Because with so many White women finding themselves infertile now, sometimes even before they hit 30, Whitefolks are desperate to make sure there are as many White babies available for adoption as possible for the ones who can't afford $10k a pop for in vitro or foreign adoptions. That's the REAL issue. When Shaniqua wants an abortion, no one really cares -- not Bush, not the Pope, not Jerry Falwell. Bush may not want tax dollars paying for it, but he doesn't give a shit if some ghetto girl gets an abortion. But when blonde, blue-eyed Susie wants an abortion, some infertile White chick feels disenfranchised because that could have been the pretty little White baby she got to adopt. And SHE'S the one writing the check to the Pro-life candidate, who prolly doesn't really care about abortion -- he'll epsouse whatever platform will get him those checks. But the Shaniquas of the world don't contribute to political campaigns. And the Pro-lifers never seem to care what the hell happens to those kids once they get born. They don't support increasing Medicare or other social services, or boosting the minimum wage so the 16-yr-old they insist should have her baby can afford to take care of it. Child support enforcement is a joke -- if the father has half a brain, he can find a job off the books so the state never knows he's working. Bottom line is, NOBODY should have the right to tell someone she HAS to give birth to a kid she doesn't want. Personal morals are just hat -- Personal. You can't force them on others. Sure, a woman can make a man a father against his will -- but she can't force him to raise a child. If he doesn't want to be involved, fine -- he can just mail the check every month, same as he would for his car note or rent. But the mother has to care for that kid every day for the next 18 years. So I really don't see how the 'father' is getting the the shaft. - RC

OH, SNAP! i dunno, though. the anti-abortion banner may be flown by mostly white folk here in the usa, but the pope and his crew do a pretty good job of stifling it in many of the browner parts of the world. i'm pretty sure islam is also very much against abortion. in fact, you could probably argue that most nations with a pro-choice posture are predominantly protestant european. oh, and china. actually, here this unverified internet source: http://www.pregnantpause.org/lex/world02.htm just a quick glance at that confirms, with some exceptions, my statement above. but i agree that the majority of the anti-abortion freaks in this country are envisioning little pink fetuses as opposed to little brown fetuses. just like they see jesus as a white guy. i think it's beautiful irony that jesus, if indeed there ever was such an individual, probably looked more like osama bin laden than a white hippie dude.

And condoms don't work all of the time. And why should the man spend 18 years paying for something that a woman wanted by herself? But, this line of discussion has already been done here.

shit RC, you just flipped the race card on me. the vast majority (vast) of pro-lifers in california are brown. if women want to pull the whole "it's my hot body, i cant do what i want" then they hold the responsibility for birth control. bottom line. men can't get pregnant. abortion, eugenics, gassing retards; murdering the people you don't want is wrong. "inanimate cell cluster" is not what we're talking about. we're talking about little humans with little hands and little smiles. "Personal morals are just hat -- Personal" huh? so if i catch my kid stealing cookies i can cut his finger off? it doesn't work that way. personal morals are personal when they don't affect another living human being. "Sure, a woman can make a man a father against his will -- but she can't force him to raise a child. If he doesn't want to be involved, fine -- he can just mail the check every month, same as he would for his car note or rent" and that's slavery. she can force him to work some percentage of every month and not see the rewards of that work.

I've never heard an intelligent pro-choice argument that didn't include birth control somewhere in there. abortion is a physically painful and emotionally terrifying procedure. I know that some women have used it as birth control, but the vast majority of them don't. And I don't care if you think of it as a cell-cluster or a baby, reproductive rights are about autonomy and the protection of bodily integrity, not evading responsibility, and the so-called rights of a fetus do not trump those of the mother. In McFall v. Shimp, Shimp's bodily integrity was legally protected to the extent that he was permitted to refuse a procedure (a bone marrow extraction and donation) that could have prevented his cousin's death from aplastic anemia. (McFall died two weeks after the ruling). Now, we can argue that for Shimp to refuse to provide his cousin with lifesaving tissue is morally questionable, if not repugnant, to some but his body is his own and that is not subject to legislation. I don't see the issue of abortion as that much different. Regarding child-support. I don't think it's right to force child support payments, but then again, once a child is born there is an individual there who had no choice in the matter and who cannot take care of himself. I don't think that you can legislate responsibility. The fact is women and men have different roles with respect to the bearing of children, but once a child is born both people are parents...so what do you do with that? Although in some cases, I have no problem forcing payments. My friend A's father left her mother after 12 years and refused to pay childsupport because he just decided he didn't want to be married or be a father anymore. Are they entitled to nothing? And then, if a mother *refuses* to let the father see his child and still expects payments...fuck that. That is utter horseshit.

And when I say you can't legislate responsibility, I don't mean that you can't hold people criminally negligent. I meant it on a more personal, individual level anyway. To me, rights always come with responsibilities. Regarding the race issue, I think that the fundamentalist christian anti-choice movement is partly concerned with producing more white babies than brown ones. At least the adoption rhetoric is reflective of that when it cites the millions of parents who want to adopt, but leaves out the millions of children who waiting to be adopted. But that doesn't mean that only whites are adamantly opposed to abortion rights.

oops, i didn't see all of RC's post on other parts of the world. RC, have you read Dorothy Robert's book, Killing the Black Body? I taught a chapter from it last week. The students seemed to get it, but one woman was really affected, said right in class that it made her cry.

No, Kaz -- I'm not hip to KILLING THE BLACK BODY. But I'll look for it next time I'm in the bookstore. And Nate, race card or not, you know I'd have your baby in a heartbeat if you'd just gimme some of that Natorious Sweetness, just for one nite! :) (See Kaz, I've had a crush on Nate since the late 90's, but he never gives me the time of day...) - RC

And I'm not saying there aren't black & brown folks who are rabidly Pro-life in certain parts of this country. But the demonstrators *I've* seen outsdie of clinics were almost always White Pro-lifers, in White neighborhoods. There are clinics in the hood too, but they never seem to get picketed. And Nate: Aren't you supporting contradictory positions here? Cant' do that, dude -- you've gotten be consistent all the way down the line. I'm Pro-CHOICE -- meaning I think a woman should get to choose whether she wants to have a baby or not. But I don't believe anyone should be FORCED to have an abortion. CHOICE is the operative word. You're Pro-Life, no abortions for anybody unless her life or future reproductive health are in danger. Because the life of the unborn fetus trumps everything. (Are you also against stem-cell research on the same grounds?) But you claim having to pay child support is tantamount to SLAVERY? WTF izzup with THAT!? If you were running things, every woman would have to give birth to every baby she gets impregnated with, inc. yours -- yet you bitch about having to support that baby you made? ??? - RC

I didn't get the impression that Nate would outlaw abortion, just that he has personal feelings about abortion that are similar to folks that are consider themselves politically pro-life. In my opinion, any position that respects life must also deal with the fact that outlawing abortion doesn't do much to reduce it's occurence--it just pushes them abroad (if the woman can afford it) or into the back alley, where women can and will die.

back to the point. another http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/ for ya.

RC, here's the line. _______________ here's you crossing it RC. "And Nate, race card or not, you know I'd have your baby in a heartbeat if you'd just gimme some of that Natorious Sweetness, just for one nite! :)" holy fucka moly

BUSH DOES NOT FEAR THE FLU LETS ROLL (perhaps the flu shots were coming in from Canada. .... therefore poison.)

i don't fear the flu, either. here's to bush picking up some exotic, south-of-the-border flu and dying. but not before he passes it on to the republican leadership. natural causes, baby.

Check out this site about the whole "was Bush wired" question. It has some great video from FoxNews showing Bush following along while being fed lines from a speech. (The audio from his earpiece was accidentally played on the air...)

Wait a sec. That video looks to be faked. I think someone just replayed the audio track offset and distorted a bit.

though the most boring of the 3 debates, id have to suggest it was bush's biggest loss. never did he look more silly when he said he never stated that bin laden wasnt important or that he wasnt thinking about bin laden that much. i remember that quote verbatum. never did he look for snarky when he dropped that line about ted kennedy and being liberal. never did he come off more wrong when he said his tax cut was largely spend on the middle and lower class. the other thing that is driving me nuts.....the Cheney's. Fucking hypocrits. Their never want to make a judgement call on the gay issue. They walk a fine line. Now, they act as if Kerry called their daughter a flaming hot carpet muncher. He stated a fact. It forced their hand and reminded the country of their deep dark secret they keep hidden away in the basement.

Yeah, but they touch on a theme in conservative society: protect your own. See, the reason conservatives can grudgingly accept Cheney's gay daughter is because she's Cheney's kin. It's also the reason they'll respond negatively to Kerry mentioning her: he's 'attacking' Cheney's kin. That's how you get in with a conservative. It doesn't matter who you are or what you do if you're kin. If you're kin, you're in. :) I'm hoping Bush's worst moments were when he was saying "the troops have everything they need" and whatnot. That should turn soldiers against him because it's patently not true. The fact he had a smirk on his face when he said it is icing on the cake. Another thing: There's currently about 50 web articles mentioning the white ball of spit Bush had on the right side of his mouth for abouthalf the debate. Also, the left side of his mouth was drooping more than it usually does. The articles have mentioned this but not speculated on the cause. What could make your face droop and not notice you're drooling a bit, eh?

This was posted on DailyKos, and it makes some scary sense: Bush: Health Problems? Stroke? by heynewt Thu Oct 14th, 2004 at 14:26:47 GMT Look first of all, I'm not trying to send everyone off into Oliver Stone land, so I'd love a smackdown from a doctor or someone who actually works with stroke victims to tell me this theory is absurd, but... I've worked doing medical documentaries for 14 years. I've done several shows on stroke victims, and something kept bothering me about Bush last night. Then I got a call this morning from another medical producer. First thing he says is: Bush has had a stroke. And it hit me, that's exactly what I saw. Check Bush's mouth, where the spittle was coming out. It's slightly droopy. If you go back and look at video from his earlier days, his mouth isn't drooping, that side of his face is far more animated. It's very subtle but it's there. Now if you look at video from the FIRST debate, there is no droop. The right side of his face is pretty animated. Why? The thing on his back. Listen, I've put wireless mics and wireless IFBs (2 way transceivers) on talent for years. They're the size of credit cards now. That wasn't a transceiver on Bush's back. It was some kind of medical device. He wasn't wearing it last night, and that's why he was forcing himself to stand with such a rigid expression. The best he could muster. Why would he have lost so much of his verbal capacity in the last 4 years? Think about the choking episode a few years ago. Who witnessed it? That's all we got. Whddya think?

And this posting from fark.com: 2004-10-14 12:47:33 PM Occams_Electric_Razor Given the droopy left side of Bush's face, the goober in the corner of his mouth, and his slurred speech, the impression I got of him watching him speak last night was that he had suffered a stroke, albeit small one, at some point in the not too distant past. Given the physical signs and that fact that he's skipped his mandated yearly Presidential physical, it makes me wonder about the man's health.

I just searched Google, and the only reference to a "Presidential physical" for Bush is his first one: linky

a co worker had a condition about a 3 years ago. he was under extreme stress. the left side of his face went entirely numb. droop, drool everything. it wasnt a stroke, it was a just a nerve reaction to the extreme stress he was under.

the only really exciting part of the debate was that white shit on the side of Bush's mouth.

Yeah, I couldn't concentrate on anything else when he was talking except that dried spit and the crookedness of his mouth. Probably a good thing, because similar to how Lewis Black puts it, "my brain would have exploded" if I tried to concentrate on what he was saying. I watched it on PBS, and they must've noticed it too, because after a while, they weren't doing closeups of him -- they zoomed out on him.

OMG ! I hadn't thought of that until I read the DailyKJos post. I through the drool was because Bush had cottonmouth & was too busy being macho to take a drink of water. But aftet seeing the photos from that Bush Is Wired site - esps. the one of him in his pick-up truck -- it makes perfect sense! He wouldn't have needed any sort of transmitter to have someone feed him answers if he was just doing a quickie soundbite from his truck. The bulge in the truck photo is IDENTICAL to the one on his back in the debates! IT'S A MEDICAL DEVICE, not a transmitter! I have no idea what the device would be for. But I beleive the mofo DID have a stroke in the last few weeks. That gizmo is prolly feeding him current to keep his facial muscles looking normal. Man-oh-manischevitz -- how sweet would it be if Kerry could get PROOF that Bush had a stroke & has kept it from the public???! - RC

Fuck me...Jon Stewart was on Crossfire. He handed them their asses...

STEWART: You know, the interesting thing I have is, you have a responsibility to the public discourse, and you fail miserably. CARLSON: You need to get a job at a journalism school, I think. STEWART: You need to go to one. The thing that I want to say is, when you have people on for just knee-jerk, reactionary talk... CARLSON: Wait. I thought you were going to be funny. Come on. Be funny. STEWART: No. No. I'm not going to be your monkey.

CARLSON: OK, up next, Jon Stewart goes one on one with his fans... (CROSSTALK) STEWART: You know what's interesting, though? You're as big a dick on your show as you are on any show. (LAUGHTER) CARLSON: Now, you're getting into it. I like that.

STEWART: It's not honest. What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery. And I will tell you why I know it. CARLSON: You had John Kerry on your show and you sniff his throne and you're accusing us of partisan hackery? STEWART: Absolutely. CARLSON: You've got to be kidding me. He comes on and you... (CROSSTALK) STEWART: You're on CNN. The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls. love him!

oh this is too good: APPLAUSE) CARLSON: Well, I'm just saying, there's no reason for you -- when you have this marvelous opportunity not to be the guy's butt boy, to go ahead and be his butt boy. Come on. It's embarrassing. STEWART: I was absolutely his butt boy. I was so far -- you would not believe what he ate two weeks ago.

i heard it replayed on randi rhodes earlier. it was priceless. stewart is godly.

i have aquired a .wmv file of the show. AWESOME. once i find a place to put it up, it shall be yours to download.

bless you.

what you don't get from the transcript is stewart's timing and carlson and begala's fumbling. carlson could only repeat that stewart is "boring" as a lecturer. as if that would hide the fact that carlson is "useless" as a defender of the indefensible, i.e. his career.