Good point Dan, I guess there is no easy answer.
Jesus! You liberals are all alike. A bunch of wafflers, you are. “I guess there’s no easy answer,” indeed. :wally
Well, when the truth is as bad as it is with the younger Mr Bush why would we need to? 
It would be ever so nice to be against the Bush Administration’s policies without being branded anti-American, wouldn’t it? Ah, but far easier it is to castigate than to educate one’s self so as to appear less like a lemming on fire, unaware.
Yes, but even Kerry has conceded that his rhetoric was much overblown. He painted a picture of rampant and institutionalized rape and pillage, which, to his credit, he now regrets. So, I would not call what he said “the painfully obvious truth”. It definitely was a fucked-up war, as you say, but it was sufficiently bad that no exaggeration was necessary.
I’m not so sure about that. When an item has been shown to be counterfeit, it brings the authenticity of similar items into question. Also, are you suggesting that, even though Kerry has confirmed that one of the photos is true, some folks (his supporters, presumably) will continue to assert its falsehood, thereby making him out to be a liar, if only by implication?
Perhaps I don’t, I assumed she undermined our war effort, supported the enemy and arguably gave aid and comfort to them. Evil is a funny word as it goes beyond national boundaries to morality & humanity in totality and I don’t know enough about her activities to make the call “Evil” vs., well, spy/enemy combatant (via media) for lack of a better term.
Do you honestly believe that Senator Kerry’s “anti war action” is comparable to Fonda’s?
[/quote]
From what I knew, they both got A for effort, but Fonda was far more popular and therefore more effective and was able to do more things. So in some ways they were comparable, in others not.
Yes, I guess I did chose my words carefully, and perhaps I may disagree w/ myself. A person will vote for the overall picture they constructed from what they perceive to be the ‘correct’ news. Such picture may get added into the mix. My view of JFK is one that is not too flattering. That picture does nothing to change/reinforce my opinion of him, nor is the info that it was forged (now if you can prove that W fired up Photoshop to create it then that would matter).
I wonder if JKF would have appeared w/ JF if he had the opportunity at the time. That is something that, if one cares to explore that possibility, will be based on the opinion they formed from the news they accept as true.
Agreed, I NEVER understood why people gave ANY credence to ANY actors political views, it is not their job and how would they know any better then anyone else who’s not directly involved. But people do :rolleyes: .
I agree with this to a point, that being they can only ‘see’ the area they are in, and I’m sure you heard of the term ‘fog of war’. Also many who might say they support your statement will discount the ‘Swiftboat Vets for Truth’ org who were also there.
Actually the 2 groups are in direct conflict w/ eachother and to be honest w/ yourself you must assume one or both versions are untrue. Note I didn’t say one or both side(s) lied as ‘lie’ involves intent, perhaps over the years one side convinced themselves that their ‘version’ is the real one. But the story is too different to just say it’s the same story from 2 different sides.
There is a difference between the American people saying Moore (or that actress, I can’t recall her name, who was bared from a private Vegas casino) is a anti-American, then W himself. It seems to me that W is not challenging the right of those who which to speak out against him, while JFK does (trying to prevent free speech of the ‘Swiftboat Vets for Truth’ org).
It’s interesting how the disinformation flow is all one way, and anti-Kerry. It’s interesting how the President of the United States can’t distance himself from outright lies and distortions by those “veterans” and say that he deplores such mis-information being used in his name. He was going to be the President who brings us together, and he can’t denounce people who become so zealous for him?
I’m waiting to see pictures of George W. Bush’s six illegitimate children, born by his black cleaning-woman, all of them on welfare. But the media moguls who want to re-elect the Bastion of Family Values won’t allow those to be seen.
Heh. Sure thing, hoss.
Waffler? Well hell. Why should I continue to argue over which photos are real or fake, if it is obvious I will not get anywhere? The only “proof” would be if we could get the original negatives and that will never happen. Not prints, not digital files off the internet, not copy megatives, the ORIGINAL unaltered NEGATIVES. Not that it would matter at this point. I will stand my ground in my belief that the picture is a fake.
By the way, I am a conservative (not liberal) in many ways. I believe in fiscal responsibility, not runaway deficits. I believe bills should be carefully considered (or at least should be read) before signing them into law. I do not believe in change just for the sake of change, I believe that our Constitution should be taken at face value and not manipulated or misinterpreted or have little slices taken out of context for anyones’s personal political or pseudo-religious agenda. I also believe in such “conservative” ideal such as truth, honesty, and the guts to do your own dirty work when you have to, instead of leaving it to faceless shills and liars.
I don’t think the situation is so dire. As with several others, I noted in another thread that it is a fairly unrealistic to expect that the Republicans would cooly assess their candidate, make the obvious evaluation and then just roll over and die.
No, given what they have to work with, it is pretty much inevitable that desperate tactics will follow.
By contrast your Democrat partisan has no such difficulty. Finding demerits in Bush is downhill work. No wonder it is taken up by so many. Add to that the basic soundness of their candidate and it all begins to add up. IMHO.
Ah, another classic Brutus post: crisp, succinct, and vacuous. I’m sure poor ol’ Dex is simply devastated by the pithy sarcasm.
But you disappoint your many fans, in your haste to defend GeeDubya (Praise the Leader!), you have neglected once again to include any dreary details, like facts, cites, dates, that sort of thing. No doubt, you have reams upon reams of such, why not include five or ten of the most heinous examples of Kerryista disinformation?
You got it, you bring it on. You ain’t got it, post droll drive-by haiku of horseshit.
Nahh…they’re pure of heart…I can’t imagine that they would ever try to push the “Dubya is dumb/evil” message through hoaxes.
Oh. Wait.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/presiq.htm
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/bush.htm
Gee, Boggledave, I don’t know quite how to break this to you. The cat is on the roof?
When Snopes notes that something was “collected on the Internet” that pretty much means its glurge. Weirdass shit passed by e-mail to e-mail. Signifying nothing. I’m about as partisan as you’re going to find outside of the Witness Protection Program, but I didn’t know about most of those, and the ones I did know about…eh, feh, shrug.
Your implication that these snippets of road kill on the information superhighway somehow rise to the level of the Swifties program of libel and lies would be laughable if there were not so much at stake.
Thank you! 
Gee, genius, I hate to break this to you…but this OP was about …lemme see…oh yeah the faked Kerry-Fonda photo…the same one that got passed around the intraweb. You know, the same one debunked at…wait for it…Snopes…you know, exactly like MY examples?
Help me out here sport…where are the Swifties mentioned in the OP? Come on…I’m sure you can do it! :smack:
Specifically…dropzone said this about the photo:
The amusing thing here, is that dropzone has backed himself into a bit of a corner.
He either has to say "Yup…the dems are doing the same damn thing that the OP stews about…and have a “anti-Bush disinformation campaign”…or claim that it’s OK if the Kerry supporters do it.
Since the OP is about the Kerry-Fonda photo (and NOT the Swifties) and the “disinformation campaign”…what say you…are the dems as guilty of the kind of thing that the OP talks about? Can we expect some clarification from dropzone concerning the OP?
Uhh…for what?
Am I the only person who actually read the damn OP?
I (silly me) thought that THIS OP (unlike plenty of others) was about faked photos being used as part of a “disinformation campaign”.
You know I looked and looked and looked through my post and saw NO comparison between faked photos and Swifie ads…perhaps you can point out where I made such a comparison (as opposed to responding to…you know…the OP?)
Gosh, am I ever embarassed! Boogledave has a point, he can reasonably claim to be focused on the trivial and insignificant, bearing down on the pointless and silly with laser-like intensity. Whereas I have made a craven attempt to draw attention to issues of relevance and importance, which the OP specificily forbids!
I go now to the river, to perform the Ancient Tasmanian Ritual of Self Abasement, accompanied by a Chorus of Bitter Virgins, intoning dirges of Woe and Humiliation.
For pointing out that there is too much at stake in this election to fret so much over piddly shit.
(John Gielgud, in Arthur…
“It’s what I live for, sir.”
Wow…I think you just insulted dropzone there…since he was the person who began a thread about “tivial and insignifcant” faked photos passed around the internet (and I was just responding to said post). You DID read his OP right…you seem to be blissfully skipping past it, genius?
Funny how you never responded that way to the OP…only to someone who pointed out the hypocricy in the OP?
Let me make sure I got this right:
-
dropzone posts about the “disinformation campaign” from anti-Kerry folks…this all based on “trivial and insignificant” faked photos…NO mention of Swifties in the OP. Did you read that elucidator…no mention of the Swifties in the OP, he only talked about “trivial and insignificant” faked photos.
-
Any response from elucidator about the trivialness of such things? Hell, no.
-
I (and SPOOFE) point out that those photos are pretty similar to the kind of crap from anti-Bush folks…just wondering if anyone would get equally as worked up. The clever reader will note that SPOOFE responded before anyone even MENTIONED Swifties in the thread…and my response was of course just a followup to his point…obviously I (nor SPOOFE) was not making any comparisons to Swiftie campaigns or Willie Horton or my Aunt Hilda’s fudge brownies…but responding to the OP.
-
elucidator NOW gets his panties in a wad (using the HIGH-larious "Boggledave’ to highlight just how witty he really is) that these photos are not on par with what the Swifties are doing…(even though I never claimed that they were…here is your straw man award, genius).
I think that about covers it…doncha think?