Note To Sen. Ted Kennedy: Engage BRAIN Before Opening Mouth!

No, friend, you waited until now to learn to read, and then you started with Drudge. Using the patented Scylla cite technique, look here for enough to dispel that thought. Kennedy has been criticizing Bush foreign policy all along.

If you had any response to the substance of the Kennedy speech, no doubt you’d enlighten us with it. But you don’t.

We aren’t Bush-haters here, we’re lie-haters and ignorance-haters. That accounts for the response to your bullpucky. Now back to Free Republic with you.

Woops, guess I should have hit ‘refresh’ prior to posting. :stuck_out_tongue:

Ralph, as you have already been asked, do you have any substance to what you are posting, or just ad hominem attacks on the man?

I, speaking as a registered democrat, will agree that the Dems have not been terribly courageous the last 2 1/2 years regarding the administration and its behavior, but beyond that, you have to have something worthy to say besides “Kennedy’s a druuu-uuunk” and parroting it over and over.


I don’t know about ralph, but like my man MC Hawkings, all my shootings be drive-bys.

I just had to congradulate the OP on being the bestest OP evAR!!!11

Teddy had AMPLE opportunity to air his criticisms of the Bush foreign policy…and yet he WAITS until NOW to badger us! Such courage!

Oh, you right-wingers! What would you do if you didn’t have Ted Kennedy and the Clintons to kick around or haul out as bogeymen to scare your followers into pulling the Republican lever in the voting booth? :rolleyes:

Anyway, as ElvisL1ves correctly pointed out, Kennedy has been publicly critical of Bush’s Iraqi policy since the administration started beating the war drums back in early 2002. Apparently, you chose not to pay attention until now when you figured you could score some easy Chappaquidick/boozehound points off it.

Also, while we’re on the subject, whenever there’s a thread discussing Ted Kennedy’s politics, I think there should be a variation on Godwin’s Law stating that whenever somebody invokes Chappaquidick, excessive consumption of alcohol, and/or Palm Beach, the thread is over and the person who brought them up has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. (In this case, that would mean this thread was D.O.A.)

(BTW, in the interest of full disclosure, Senator Edward Kennedy is a former employer of mine.)

They would have to settle for Carter. “The economy was shit under him! There were no jobs!” Oh wait, that’s why they can’t go back to Carter…

Badger, badger, badger, badger… :smiley:

Well, hell, that invalidates all his arguments!

Seriously, I’m glad that the level of discourse on this MB is almost always much higher than this.

In the interest of fighting ignorance, I’ll mention that members of the minority party in a house of Congress have no chairmanships.

I’m no fan of Ted Kennedy, but leave out this type of crap. When you resort to these type of slanderous accusations, it makes it look like you’ve got no ammo in your gun.

Point out that Kennedy voted for the Iraqi War Resolution. Point out that Kennedy said this a day after Paul O’Neill disavowed the exact accusation Kennedy made. Point out that this statement contradicts his earlier accusations that the war in Iraq was cooked up back in Texas. But making unfounded accusations is not a good response to unfounded accusations.

As recounted by ralph124c, AKA the SDMB’s dumbest poster.

Ted could have could have ripped out the girl’s heart with a wine corkscrew and showed it to her still beating, but it would still have no bearing on whether he is correct about Iraq or not.

IIRC, it was recorded in Woodward’s book.

Here some CBS coverage of it

Dude, when Age Quod Agis says your posts are mindless partisan crap, it’s over, knowhatimean?

My technique. My patent. You used it without my permission infringing on my copyright you bitch.

Dood. The revolooshun liivves.

Oh, shit. The unholy fusion has been made. We’ve managed to join Scylla with the Copyright Feuds with the dreaded Political Bullshit. This thread will be the one that implodes the boards.


As a general rule, I tend not to have much sympathy for the severely over-privileged. Teddy is a mediocre man of middling-fair intellect. I can’t even imagine having JFK and RFK as brothers, see them murdered and try to carry on in thier stead. Bless his heart, he means well, but he’s…well, he’s Teddy, isn’t he?

And while we’re about it…

Now where did you get this crystalline nugget of horseshit? No,seriously, I’ve got just enough morbid curiousity to want to know.

I’m no huge fan of Senator Kennedy, either, but reading through his speech in its entirety (thanks, vibrotronica), I have to admit I was impressed. It was lucid, clear, and well put-together. I wish I could have seen it.

If the best criticism conservatives can come up with for what he said he “Yeah, but he’s a drunk!” then they really are shooting blanks.

Should be an interesting election year.

But of course “he’s a drunk,” is not going to be the party line. Just as Senator Kennedy serves as the stalking horse for the Demo candidates, the GOP’s politician in charge of trial balloons is Tom Delay (R-TX) (who really ought to get his rabies shot now, before it’s too late). Rep. Delay hoisted himself up on his hind legs, kicked a few puppies, strangled a kitten or two, and relieved himself of the judgment that Sen. Kennedy’s statements were a dastardly attack on the Commander in Chief.

The GOP’s position will likely be that we are at war, War, WAR, I say we are at war, and that anybody who does anything that might diminish the fervor for this undeclared, undefined, unending war hates America. After all, if Senator Kennedy had his way Saddam would still be in power in Iraq. That’s the argument. As seductive as it is it has been repeatedly contradicted, rebutted and refuted on these boards.

The alternative argument is the Big Dawg approach that says Saddam sassed the USA and that is all the justification that is needed for putting him in his place and eating his lunch to boot.