Ask Geraldine Ferraro.
Oh, and as for Stoid’s reference:
On a campaign stop some time in early July, Kerry reportedly claimed to represent conservative values.
OK - mebbe you’re right. Beers it is.
Diogenes, you are unmarginalized. Please continue to rant in an unobstructed (albeit close-minded, and dogmatic) manner, whilst I lustily eat my burrito off the taught, tattoed belly of my young and ill-mannered Spanish mistress.
I tried, but failed.
commondreams.org is not a cite.
Do you have a real one? A transcript from ABC would be nice, or at least a contemporaneous news report of such a quote. Citing “Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community” means bupkis.
I suspect this booka person has again crept from its hole due to the encouragement of other posters here. Personally, I regret my own post will surely feed its unkempt nastiness, but some things just need to be said.
booka: who the fuck are you? From where I stand, you’re little more than a sniping, immaterial douchebag. Have you ever had anything important to say?
Considering that cite is from Newsmax, I question how credible it is. I’d like to see an actual direct quote from Kerry saying he represents conservative values and not one that’s been distorted and repeated second-hand by right-wing spinmeisters.
Let’s please not start any membership elitism.
Besides, I thought lefties were above that sorta thing.
milroyj: The full transcript is available from transcripts.tv, but only at a price you’re not worth. [Here’s a second-hand transcript:](httpz;//boards.charlierose.com/ board/topic.asp?ti=6858&pg=11 )
It’s not at all hard to find, really.
It’s not? Well, your link doesn’t work. :rolleyes:
Copy/paste error. Or take your pick.
Funny how such a widespread “lie” being told by the Dems hasn’t been picked up and thoroughly denounced by the Reps, ain’t it?
Didn’t say it was. In fact, I’ve said many times that it isn’t. The only point I’ve been trying to make for months now is that Republicans are pushing the right buttons and Democrats aren’t. Incidentally, Kerry did indeed make the inexplicably politically naive statement, “I don’t want to claim that God is on our side.” Out of context? Sure. But that doesn’t stop the spin. Frustrating? Yes. But that doesn’t stop the spin. Damn fucking low-life Republicans being dishonest as hell and playing unfairly? Certainly. But…
One guy went to Vietnam and served his country.
The other guy dinked around in the Guard for a while, then wandered off, and no one is quite sure what he was doing at the time, including him, if you believe him.
And now we’ve let the second guy not only get our soldiers into a war, but he may well become president again after crapping all over the honor and reputation of the guy who went to Vietnam and served his country.
Not even to mention everything ELSE Bush has screwed up.
And if we let him get away with it, then that will be the day that marks the beginning of my metamorphosis into “bitter old man.” Because any group of people that can believe that Bush is a good and honorable man after this election is truly either the dumbest bunch of folks alive… or the most self-deluded.
It will mark the ultimate victory of spin over truth, glitz over substance, lies over reality.
It will mean that we may never actually have a decent government, ever again.
The one argument I keep hearing, over and over, EVERY TIME one of these threads come up is, “Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11!! We shouldn’t be there!”
This is CLASSIC mis-direction. Of COURSE Iraq had nothing DIRECTLY to do with 9/11. What people tend to forget (and this is the purpose of the mis-direction) is that OFFICIAL U.S. POLICY after 9/11 was we would pursue not only terrorists, but also those who “harbor and aid” terrorists, whether individuals, businesses or governments. In that respect, Iraq was indeed a target; can anyone honestly deny that Iraq harbored and aided terrorists? Does anyone remember $25k payments to families that let their kids blow themselves and civilians all to hell-and-gone?? That certainly sounds like “aiding terrorists” to me.
Additionally, those who chose Iraq chose it for what I believe are obvious reasons, in light of the “official policy.” First, we already had a “beef” with Iraq, and so did a large portion of the UN at the time, due to the UN resolutions that had been largely ignored, so it seemed like a shoo-in to get UN backing for an invasion. It didn’t work out that way, but that was the thinking. Secondly, it was likely figured that, militarily, Iraq would be an easier fight than Syria or Iran - who, incidentally, didn’t have the issue with UN resolutions and would have been an even more difficult sell for invasion in the UN. Thirdly, and this is pretty common military strategy, if a friendly base of operations could be established out of Iraq, then military action against surrounding “terrorist-harboring” countries could be accomplished more readily. I don’t think anyone in the US administration thought that we could take on ALL terrorist-harboring countries at once because we simply didn’t (don’t) have the manpower, but establishing a base would be a priority. After all, how do you eat an elephant? (One bite at a time.)
Now, you are allowed to disagree with the official policy - I’m not going to say if it’s right or it’s wrong for purpose of this discussion, merely saying that I’m getting tired of the mis-direction and dishonesty behind it.
Exactly my fear. It still is not too late. It begins with Democrats taking back their party and their philosophy, and installing leaders who believe in it.
DirkGntly, by that reasoning, we should also go after Saudi Arabia, since they had more to do with harboring terrorists than Iraq. Think we’re gonna do that?
A post on a talk show host’s message board != “a second-hand transcript” of anything. How about a primary news source? ABC.com, would be the obvious choice, but any primary news source would do–CBS/NBC/CNN/NYT/Washington Post/BBC/etc.
If anyone can provide a direct link to a primary source showing that Barbara Bush made the “beautiful mind” comment, I will eat my hat.
Just for fun, here is a quote from a randomly selected link in your google list of “cites”:
http://www.freepressed.com/barb.htm
Do you really think she made those remarks, as well? :dubious: :smack: :wally
So we should pursue ourselves then. We have aided both Saddam Hussein and Al-Queda. Bombs away.
Screw the Democrats. That’s not what I’m talking about.
What Reagan began – and what Bush and his team are turning into a science – is the concept that truth is irrelevant, that spin is everything, and whichever side has the better advertising and is willing to be more vicious and brutal wins.
Reagan began the process with his trick of visiting nursing homes for photo ops with old people, even while he was slashing their benefits. The truth was that his administration was screwing the elderly sideways… but the appearance was that he cared deeply for the elderly, and was working to help them.
America swallowed it whole.
And now, I see a second-generation plutocrat whose connections not only kept him out of Viet Nam, they allowed him to simply walk away from his National Guard obligation.
This man beat out legitimate war heroes to become not only a President… but a Wartime President. This man had the incredible gall to make a speech ending with “Bring it on!” to a hostile nation. He used misdirection and outright lies to begin a war in which Americans and many others would die, just like in the war he successfully avoided so many years ago.
Would Kerry be my first choice for President? No. But whatever else you say about the man, he served his country, and he did so in a fairly unpleasant and dangerous capacity. Regardless of whether or not one thinks Kerry is fit to be President, one owes him the same regard and respect one would pay to ANY individual who went through a crappy couple of years in his country’s service. This is why we have things like “Veterans’ Day.”
…and now, Bush is leading in the polls. He has managed, via chicanery, spin doctoring, and flat-out lying, to convince a substantial portion of the electorate that he is better suited to run a country and a war than people who actually fought and commanded soldiers in previous ones.
He has done this by ridiculing and besmirching the reputation of a veteran… a veteran of the same war he sneaked off and hid from.
And people still want to vote for him. This amazes me. It horrifies me. What does the man have to do, molest a child on national television? And could he still spin and dodge and talk his way out of THAT? Are enough Americans that incredibly STUPID?
Because if they are, we are all well and truly screwed. If Bush wins this election, the lesson will be sharp and clear and well-etched upon the wall:
TRUTH IS IRRELEVANT. WHOEVER SCREAMS THE LOUDEST HAS THE FLOOR. WHOEVER PUTS ON THE BEST SHOW WINS. WHOEVER IS MOST SUCCESSFUL AT SMEARING HIS OPPONENT WINS.
The issues will be of no importance whatsoever. It will be a matter of who has the most money, who has the best advertising, who has the best spin doctors, who puts on the best dog and pony show. Reality will be a minor concern, if any. The importance of the press is already downright minimal.
Some would say this has already happened. I don’t want to believe that. And if Bush wins, then I will have no choice but to believe it, because it will be so obviously true, then.
THAT’s what I’m bitchin’ about.
I seem to recall that Tip O’Neill addressed this-that yeah, if Reagan felt he should cut social spending, that was his right. But then Reagan would turn around and say that he INCREASED it, and that wasn’t right.
And considering that there are people who still think that Clinton’s blow job (and no, he shouldn’t have lied about it, but that’s besides the point) was a great deal worse than Iran-fucking-Contra, I don’t have much faith in my fellow citizens these days.
Personally, I just cannot see the wisdom in voting for Bush. I cannot IMAGINE how anyone can believe that this man would do a better job than Kerry. I just cannot do it.