Is Cleland on the Kerry payroll? Did Kerry send Cleland to Texas?
DON’T start political threads in my forum.
Moved to GD. (Sorry, guys).
samclem GQ moderator.
He’s campaigned for Kerry for a while now, I don’t think that politicians are usually paid for doing that kind of thing. But I could be wrong, I guess.
I wouldn’t be suprised if he were drawing some sort of advisor or consultant wage.
They’re friends, in case you didn’t know, and Cleland is going to campaign his heart out for Kerry this season. I guess he might be a little steamed about losing his office because he was portrayed as Saddam Hussien and Osama’s good pal.
While we’re at it, how much is Bush paying McCain to do his pet poodle act these days? Was Dole payed a fee for betraying veterans on the sunday talk shows?
How is this not a factual question?
Good question.
In the same way asking who played Fonzie does not belong in GQ. Questions of fact that can reasonably expected to devolve into political bickering belong in GQ. This is one of those.
??? How is McGain a Bush-poodle in the SwiftBoat controversy? He spoke out against the SB Vet’s ad. And how has Dole betrayed veterans?
McCain is playing along with His Accidency because he wants to run for President again in 2008, IMHO, and he wants the GOP to see him as a team player (and get His Accidency’s support four years from now, win or lose).
I think Cleland’s helping Kerry because:
-
He wants Kerry to win for true-believer political reasons, and
-
He’s bucking for a Cabinet position in a Kerry Administration.
I think that he also is just a teensy bit upset that he appeared in a commercial that morphed from his face to Saddam Hussein to Osama bin Laden that was done by the same crowd that’s supporting the Swifties.
Oh, and the fact that he is also a decorated veteran.
And I have to say that I would definitely not wanna be the poor sap who delivered the letter to Cleland because Bush was too much of a coward to do so himself. I understand that he was also a vet who was in country. I wouldn’t be thinking positively of the TANG veteran and his sissy hawk brigade who forced me into that position if I were him.
[QUOTE=GLWasteful]
I think that he also is just a teensy bit upset that he appeared in a commercial that morphed from his face to Saddam Hussein to Osama bin Laden that was done by the same crowd that’s supporting the Swifties.
[QUOTE]
Then perhaps he shouldn’t have been holding up vital legislation to authorize the Department of Homeland Security just because his union buddies didn’t want it. Jeapordizing the national security of the U.S. to placate unions is not an admirable stand.
There are two sides to every story.
No sap, he was the beneficiary of a $150,000 contribution from swift boat vets bankroller Bob Perry.
Oh sure, presidents often leave their homes to accept hand delivered letters from people who do not support them. He was a “coward” for not getting personally involved in this farce.
It was a foolish publicity stunt, and Cleland was foolish for allowing himself to get swept up in the matter. The thought of political representatives passing notes back and forth to each other through an intermediary like a couple of arguing high-schoolers is ludicrous on its face. The response by the GOP was unfortunately necessary (but no less foolish), as the networks lazily chose to follow Cleland and televise his stunt instead of reporting real news.
I think that’s ridiculous. For one thing, there’s no reason for it to devolve other than poor self-discipline from the membership, for which cause practically any question could devolve. For another, it takes quite some nerve for a person to say what belongs in what forum when he himself has opened an MPSIMS thread in the Pit that basically is a rather pointless joke about Barbara Bush’s handwriting. There was nothing political about this thread’s OP any more than it would be political to ask how much Karl Rove is paid or who is Bush’s Chief of Staff.
Oh, my. . .you actually think that Cleland jeopardized national security? Really? And that the proper way to speak against the ludicrous assertion that you made is to conflate someone with a man who never attacked the US and who posed no imminent threat and someone who is an honest-to-christ terrorist? Man, you really oughta work on your subtle shadings. “Vital” legislation is that which affects the national welfare. Not the Bush re-election.
No foolin’. . .d’you have another side to this one?
Why, yes. Yes he was.
Yep. And Bush fils coulda brought it to a screaming halt by meeting Cleland and saying as much. Pasting a disgusted look on his face as he walked away shaking his head woulda been icing on the cake. Of course, halting this big steaming load of crap is not what Bush wants at all, so the well-recompensed sap got to do his duty.
No, of course I don’t believe that. My assertion is just as ridiculous as when the liberals say that “George Bush compared Max Cleland to Osama bin Laden.” If you’re going to play the hyper-partisan spin game, I just want to show that it works both ways.
As for where Cleland gets his money (to return to the OP), Cleland is actually on the Board of Directors of the Export-Import Bank, and he makes $136,000 a year doing that. Of course, he doesn’t really have to show up to work. He just has to attend one weekly board meeting, and he can do that by phone. So he has plenty of time for partisan campaign stunts.
Interesting fact in the whole matter is that George W. Bush himself appointed Cleland.
Quite often, there are three sides to a story: your side, my side, and the correct side.
Ridiculous? Read. Learn.
Why the Saddam/Osama pictures, if not to create a linkage in viewers’ minds?
Interesting how Bush’s own *opposition * to creating DHS wasn’t “jeopardizing national security” until he gave into Democratic demands, changed his mind, and requested it. Perhaps you can enlighten us about what facts *you * think changed, before you tell us anything more about “hyper-partisan spin”.