Gee, what a surprise. Kerry affair rumors were bogus

[Beagle]

NYT To me, NYT coverage does not indicate that the story is dead. Next: late night comedians.

Spin away, however you want to. I’m beginning to think that the Democrats would rather lecture people than win elections.

[YPOD]

I think somemthing is getting lost in the flames of the pit here - it was the Wes Clark/Clinton campaign people who started the rumor about Kerry, not the Bushies. I am sure they love it, but starting this rumor is one crime of which conservatives are not guilty.

Maybe the next President and Congress should get together and outlaw interns.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

Wes Clark/ Clinton?

Clinton?

Where are you getting Clinton from?

The Clark rumor comes solely from Drudge, btw, and Clark has now endorsed Kerry. I haven’t seen confirmation anywhere else of Clark’s alleged “intern” remark.

Clinton?

[elucidator]

Nonsense! Just enforce the Biblical injunction from Leviticus: Thou shalt not use thy staff for the comfort of thy rod.

[rjung]

@Giraffe

Who gives a flipping fuck about politicians’ sex lives???

Desperate Republicans who can’t find anything better to smear their opponents with, apparently.

[Desmostylus]

@YPOD

I think somemthing is getting lost in the flames of the pit here - it was the Wes Clark/Clinton campaign people who started the rumor about Kerry, not the Bushies.

Assuming Drudge didn’t just make up the whole Clark story, we’ll probably find out next that it wasn’t actually Clark who said it, it was someone who sat next to Clark on a plane once in 1983.

[Eleusis]

Come on Desmostylus, you can do better than that.

That kind of post would be better suited to the Democratic Underground.

Even if Drudge is “right wing”, was he not the first to expose the lewinsky scandal?

Think about it, you aren’t helping anything.

[Sublight]

@Beagle

Seriously, whatever one thinks about all the – many – stories that have finally surfaced in the major media about affairs with politicians, does anyone remember the story turning out to be false?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I have.

[elf6c]

@Desmostylus

Assuming Drudge didn’t just make up the whole Clark story, we’ll probably find out next that it wasn’t actually Clark who said it, it was someone who sat next to Clark on a plane once in 1983.

No it was someone who ate a Clark bar once.

The panicy logic flips of the far-right are amusing. They must be getting worried about Kerry. Having to face a intellectual war-hero will just highlight Bush’s intellegence, courage and honesty issues. But it’s the party extremists’ own fault, they wanted the obedient party hack, does as he is told, daddy’s boy over more independent candidates who dared cut their own path like McCain or Powell. Now some even some conservatives are regretting that choice because of the Patriot Act (for some), massive budget deficit and current fiscal insantity 9for many others). Some have even spoken out. Well too late guys- you could have had McCain and blew it- and now we all are suffering because of it.

[Eleusis]

@Hentor the Barbarian

Very wise, indeed. I’d prefer the president not have sex with the country whatsoever. In fact, I think the country is very tired of being fucked with for the past three years.

Really? I thought it felt pretty good.

[Evil_Captor]

@Diogenes the Cynic

Oh, and the Freepers have apparently all decided that Polier and her parents were bought off by Kerry and that the press is all in on the conspiracy. Comparisons to Watergate keep arising. They are calling for “independent investigations” as though rumors of nookie are equivalent to grave criminal allegations. Are there any smart people at all on that board or are they all unmitigated morons?

They’re morons. Proof: why do they need “independent investigations” of Kerry’s purported affair when the Pubbies control the Justice Dept?

[elf6c]

Oh here is just a few of the many cites for the above, in case certain types claim it never happened.

What has vexed conservatives most is the 31.5% growth since Bush took office in discretionary spending. That is the one-third of the budget lawmakers approve annually for defense, domestic security, school aid and everything else except Social Security and other benefits.

Such spending grew by an annual average of 3.4% during Clinton’s eight years.

Further infuriating conservatives, Bush and the Republican-run Congress have enacted a $400 billion, 10-year enlargement of Medicare; $87 billion in expanded benefits for farmers; and $40 billion for increased veterans’ payments and the Air Force’s leasing and buying of refueling tankers.

“Re-election has become the focus of Republicans in the White House and Congress. And those in power have determined the road to staying in power is paved with government spending,” said Brian Riedl, who monitors the budget for the conservative Heritage Foundation.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-01-05-bush-spending_x.htm

Damn those tax and spend GOP liberals!!

And look at this more people turning down the chance at the Kool Aid.

Things look bleak in the long run, too. Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said the Medicare bill could cost from $1.7 trillion to $2 trillion during its second 10 years, as the huge baby boom generation retires and foists added costs on taxpayers.

“The U.S. budget is out of control,” the investment bank Goldman, Sachs & Co. wrote its clients, projecting large deficits for the next decade. “Any thoughts of relief thereafter are a pipe dream until political priorities adjust.”

The CBO and Goldman Sachs, everyone know how crazy liberal they are-- oh wait.

More crazy liberals hatin’ on poor W:

The Right’s total abandonment of balanced budgeting is stunning. Sure, taxes are unpleasant to pay. But someone, someday has to pay for the government we’re buying every year. Deficit spending just puts off the day of reckoning, but with interest. Trading off smaller taxes today for larger taxes tomorrow is a curious position for anti-tax conservatives to take.

Damn hippies, look at this crazy crap they are saying about Bush’s budget claims:

Once we clear away the political smoke, it is clear that conservatives in Washington have completely abandoned their campaign against big government. Rather than tackle spending head-on, Republican politicians trot out tax cuts as a symbolic surrogate and Republicans respond with ideological gusto, forgetting the fact that tax cuts have nothing to do with the size of government. They have to do with how we pay for government.

Conservatives who are ambivalent about how we pay for government should be reminded that deficit spending invites more spending than would likely be the case if Republicans actually had to swallow hard and raise taxes to pay for the spending bills they’re busily whooping through the Congress. After all, you’ll usually buy more of something when you think you’re getting it at 20 percent off with payments due … probably not in your tax-paying or vote-getting lifetime (that’s the next generation’s problem).

The fact is that domestic spending increases under President Bush are among the largest in post-war history. And, all the while, conservatives happily cheer the administration on, apparently oblivious to the fact that political success is being achieved at the expense of the one thing - limited government - that supposedly divides the two parties. Annual tax-cutting campaigns, the White House hopes, will distract fiscal conservatives from the reality of what’s going on here.

Well who are these leftist treasonous dogs?

Oops- the conservative Cato Institute.

http://www.cato.org/research/articles/vandoren-030727.html

Check out these commies at the Washington Times (oops, wrong D.C. paper):

Conservatives are grumbling about Mr. Bush’s $2.3 trillion budget, complaining that it continues a spending spree greater than that of even the past two Democratic presidents.

"We've got to protect the family budget from the federal budget," said Sean Spicer, spokesman for House Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, Iowa Republican. "There is definitely some concern from some of the members" over the higher Medicare price tag. 

Bush defends deficit-laden 2005 budget

No wonder baseless slander seems like a good idea.

:rolleyes:

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

@YPOD

I think somemthing is getting lost in the flames of the pit here - it was the Wes Clark/Clinton campaign people who started the rumor about Kerry, not the Bushies. I am sure they love it, but starting this rumor is one crime of which conservatives are not guilty.

Dio, how can you question the veracity of this astute observation? When it’s so utterly clear that the entire Democratic selection process is being puppet-stringed by THE DEMON HILLARY? One by one, the contenders for the Dem crown are being weakened or eliminated – all so that, at a deadlocked convention, the delegates will turn as one and proclaim THE DEMON HHILLARY the candidate. No doubt Clark has been bought off with a promise of the Vice President’s spot on the ticket, or perhaps Secretary of Defense in THE DEMON HILLARY’s administration.

Dio, babe, you really must try to keep up with THE DEMON HILLARY’s vast left-wing conspiracy.

[Evil_Captor]

@Eleusis

Really? I thought it felt pretty good.

Careful, you may be revealing more about your sexual tastes than you know.

[Hamadryad]

@Eleusis

A wise man once said, “A man who will cheat on his wife will also cheat on his country.”.

Which wise man? I can’t find a single original source for this quote and now I’m really curious.

[Bricker]

That quote’s often attributed to Harry Truman. I’ll find a cite.

[Marley23]

You can certainly color me stunned.

I think a lot of hardcore conservative nutjobs will have to start cleaning the stains out of their pants this morning.

[elf6c]

And for those trying to pretend Bush doesn’t have legitimate issues with his Guard duty:

• Bush was accepted into pilot school even though he scored in the 25th percentile on a standardized test. The test was given to all prospective pilots and there was no specific score that disqualified a candidate. In addition, Bush had two arrests for college pranks and four traffic offenses before applying for pilot training. Former and current military pilots say it was uncommon for an applicant to be approved for training with such a record.

• There is no record of a formal procedure called a “flying evaluation board,” which normally would have been convened once Bush stopped flying in April 1972.

• Bush’s records do not show he was given another job in the Air Guard once he quit flying. Pilots and Bush comrades say his records should reflect some type of new duties he was assigned.

Here are a few of the attempted White House spins, and the real deal:

The president’s advisers and friends have explained that Bush stopped flying because his unit was phasing out the F-102 in 1972. They also say he was not able to get a required flight physical in Alabama, where his records show he was granted permission to train in the fall of 1972. Bartlett said there was no need for a physical exam because Bush stopped flying.

Guard records, however, show pilots in Bush’s unit in Texas were still flying the F-102 in 1974, a year after Bush left the Guard.

And Bush would likely have been able to get a flight doctor in Alabama to give him a physical. The White House released records last week showing that Bush had received a dental exam at Dannelly Air National Guard Base in Montgomery, Ala., in January 1973.

Pilots who stop flying are given other Guard duties. In Air Force jargon, it’s called DNIF, or Duties Not to Include Flying, which is a written order. There is no indication in Bush’s records that his supervisors assigned him another job. Aides say Bush has told them that once he stopped flying, he performed “odds and ends” for commanders whose names he can’t recall.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/usatoday/20040216/ts_usatoday/whybushstoppedflyingremainsamystery

So yeah, the Bush’s shameful Guard history is just like the entirely made up, factually incorrect Kerry story. Now the right-wing just need to invent something to compare to the 16 word disaster, the WMD disaster, the Enron disaster, the Halliburton disaster, the Spy leak disaster, the Deficit disaster. . .

Better get busy!

More cites for the head in the sand set.

Enjoy the last part especially for the unintentional humor:

After graduating from Yale, Bush leaped to the top of a 500-man Texas Guard wait list, despite scoring poorly on a pilot aptitude test. At the time, Bush’s father was a G.O.P. Congressman from Houston, and Ben Barnes—who was speaker of the Texas House in 1968—testified in 1999 that he had put in a good word for Bush with Guard officials at the request of a Bush family friend. Bush got into the Texas Guard’s “champagne unit” (along with the sons of other Texas politicians, like John Connally and Lloyd Bentsen) and was trained to fly the F-102 Delta Dagger. After spending more than a year in training, Bush was obligated to report for duty one weekend a month at Houston’s Ellington Air Force Base, protecting the Gulf Coast of the U.S. from aerial attack. “No one used political influence to get him into the Guard,” Walter B. (Buck) Staudt, Bush’s commanding officer in the Texas Guard, insisted last week. “He passed all the tests, did all the stuff that’s required. I thought he was a success.”

The Texas Guard immortalized Bush’s first solo flight in an F-102, issuing a press release at the time celebrating the patriotism of the freshly minted jet jockey. “George Walker Bush is one member of the younger generation who doesn’t get his kicks from pot, hashish or speed,” it began. Bush got all the high he needed, it continued, flying the F-102. “I’ve always wanted to be a fighter pilot, and I wouldn’t want to fly anything else,” the 23-year-old Bush said.

Press releases and all- yep no special treatment there. Nice to see flying kept W. off the drugs though. More details:

Bush returned to Houston after Blount lost his Senate race in November 1972. But there is no official record that Bush performed Guard drills during the next six months. In May 1973, Bush’s superiors in Houston wrote that they could not give Bush his annual evaluation because he had “not been observed at this unit during the period of this report”—from May 1, 1972, to April 30, 1973. Also in May 1973, the Texas Guard issued two “special orders” directing Bush to report for duty. Over the next three months, Bush returned to his original Texas Guard unit and crammed in 36 days of active duty, apparently fulfilling the Guard’s demands. In October 1973 he received an honorable discharge—nearly eight months early—so he could attend Harvard Business School.

http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101040216/nservice.html

Bush’s Guard service time line:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040210/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_national_guard_timeline_2

More tough questions:

But the hundreds of pages of documents did little to answer questions about Bush’s military history. Why, for example, is there no definitive documentation – except a single dental exam – that places Bush at Dannelly Air National Guard Base in 1972-73 and shows how he performed his temporary duty in the Alabama Guard?

and this is particullary funny, in an Inspector Clouseau sort of manner- but I doubt that’s what they are going for:

Although documents released last week show that Bush performed some Guard duties in October and November of 1972, a time he was in Alabama, and dental exams show he was on the base in January 1973, none of the documents shows where on the base he worked or what his tasks were.

Only one person has vivid recollections of serving with Bush at Dannelly field. John B. “Bill” Calhoun, 69 – whose name was provided by a Republican ally of Bush’s – said he saw Bush sign in at the 187th eight to 10 times for about eight hours each from May to October 1972.

But Calhoun remembers seeing Bush at Dannelly at times in mid-1972 when the White House acknowledges Bush was not pulling Guard duty in Alabama yet; his first drills were in October, according to the White House. White House press secretary Scott McClellan on Friday was at a loss to reconcile the discrepancy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42735-2004Feb14_2.html

Gee did the same guy think that up, that ok’ed outing an intellegence asset to get at her husband, who dared tell the truth? I am sure that investigation will go far before the election, just like the one in the 9/11 failures and the one for the WMD disaster. I bet someone is glad he helped torpedoed the Independent Counsel statute after taking office.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@EddyTeddyFreddy

Dio, how can you question the veracity of this astute observation? When it’s so utterly clear that the entire Democratic selection process is being puppet-stringed by THE DEMON HILLARY? One by one, the contenders for the Dem crown are being weakened or eliminated – all so that, at a deadlocked convention, the delegates will turn as one and proclaim THE DEMON HHILLARY the candidate. No doubt Clark has been bought off with a promise of the Vice President’s spot on the ticket, or perhaps Secretary of Defense in THE DEMON HILLARY’s administration.

Dio, babe, you really must try to keep up with THE DEMON HILLARY’s vast left-wing conspiracy.

Oh, that Clinton. I was pretty sure that Bill wouldn’t want to go anywhere near another “intern” scandal.

So why is the right so convinced that Hillary is lying in wait to snatch this nomination? She’s repeatedly stated that she doesn’t want to run for prez and in fact she isn’t running for prez. Hell, if she really wanted the nom she probably could have had it without any subterfuge…

…wait a tick. I get it. She wants to sabotage the election for Kerry so that she can run in '08. Yeah, that makes sense. She’s so power mad and crazy that she’d rather have four more years of Shrubya than see another DEem in the WH.

Yeah, that makes sense…

Is this what it’s like to think like a Freeper? My head hurts and I’m drooling.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

Note that Larry Flynt claims he’s poised to reveal that Bush paid for a girlfriend’s abortion in the seventies. Allow me to be the first to say that, although showing his hypocrisy is sweet, this has no place in a national discourse about how we choose our leaders.

Daniel