# Zell Miller Speaks From the Heart **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 2, 2004, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700 "2004-09-02T02:20:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2004, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/241 "2004-09-08T17:40:03Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Jimmy Carter is one of the architects of the new, emasculated Democratic Party. Everyone should remember his failed leadership in the 1970’s, and our reduced standing in the world during his tenure. > > Lately, his noteworthy achievements have been to make nice with every dictator he can find, no matter how anti-American they are. WHAT! You’re dissing Jimmy, the elder statesman of the Democratic party! But just consider all he achieved! If _he_ had been President, no doubt he would have dealt with Saddam with the same crisp efficiency that he showed when he handled the Iranian hostage crisis. Not to mention his stellar achievement negotiating the 1993 North Korean nuclear treaty, which has been so outstandingly successful in curbing proliferation in the peninsula. And heaven knows the energy crisis of the 70s ended almost overnight when we all saw him wearing his sweater in the White House. If only we had a President who still took foreign policy advice from an eight-year-old. Those were the days. Stagflation, lines at the gas pump, and Mr. Rogers in the Oval Office. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2004, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/242 "2004-09-08T17:41:26Z")
Zell’s traitorous speech is its own mark of dishonor. Carter is merely calling attention to the fact. And **Bricker** , the Democratic Party has not strayed from Zell. Zell has strayed from the Democratic Party. One need only compare the texts of his 1992 Democratic Keynote and his 2004 Republican Keynote to see that. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2004, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/243 "2004-09-08T19:25:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, it is the best approach. You really can’t think of any better way to get Osama than to pull troops out and then do essentially jackshit? You’re getting very hard to consider reasonable with that. > [@](#): > > Because we would still end up paying the lion’s share of the cost, and surrendering our autonomy for insufficient recompense. What surrendered autonomy are you speaking of? And what is the cost of it? A thousand of our troops have died in this “cause”; what would you say to them? > [@](#): > > don’t agree that we’ve got a good shot at winning the hearts and minds of all Iraqis. What did you think when Cheney assured us “we’ll be greeted as liberators”, then? > [@](#): > > As a nation headed by a brutal dictator rentlessly unsympathetic to the US, Iraq was a potential friendly staging area for terrorists. If you slip that word “potential” in, you can say anything at all, can’t you? It conveniently excuses the user from assessing the facts on the ground irrespective of preconceptions. The \*fact \* was that Iraq was \*not \* such a staging area, and furthermore that Saddam did \*not \* trust Osama and Osama hated Saddam. _Facts_. Not “potential”. Please. > [@](#): > > In addition, Iraq was headed by a brutal dictator, and the people of Iraq are better off without him than with him. On to Sudan! Burma, buckle up! Gotta prioritize in the real world, though. If that was a fundamental factor in the decision and not just window-dressing, we’d be in a hell of a lot of other places first. But it was just a selling point, wasn’t it? As for whether or not the people of Iraq really are better off, that’s up to them to decide, and the few polls taken there are pretty much equivocal on the point. But they’re “potentially” better off, so that’s that. > [@](#): > > I’m offering my own reasons for why Zell Miller’s speech resonated with me. If those reasons convince others, fine. If not, then I stand alone in my reaction. Perhaps some consideration of the reasons you’re given in contradiction would be useful to you. If you simply refuse to acknowledge anything that might be to the contrary, you’re wasting as much of your own time here as we are trying to engage you. > [@](#): > > I think the threat from al Qaeda is lessened now due to Bush’s actions. There are many, many assessments from those who spend their lives on the problem to the contrary. But it’s good to know they’re simply wrong because you say they are. > [@](#): > > Both. The intel services failed, and the administration heard what it wanted to hear. Now we’re getting somewhere. But you approve of what they did, damn the facts, full speed ahead, anyway? That does not follow. What does follow from the increasing disconnect from your solid faith in Bush and the facts that you acknowledge should be interpret the other way is that you’re engaging in simple partisanism, not debate. > [@](#): > > I did. An established poster just suggested above that conservatives are less welcome here because the board’s mission is fighting ignorance, and he did so in a forum where such attacks are supposedly _verboten_. Please give generously to the Humor Impairment Foundation. You seem unaware, btw, that Zell Miller is leaving the Senate at the end of the year anyway, making discussion of his “honor” just so much bleating. The assessment of the popular support of any party-changer depends on state-level politics, since you’re determined to bring that up - which you didn’t AFAWK when Nelson and Campbell and Gramm pulled their own switches the other way, huh? You Carter-bashers might think a little longer about security in the Middle East when you consider who’s been the only world leader to negotiate a lasting nation-to-nation peace treaty there. North Korea, btw, was not working actively on nuclear weapons “program related activities” until Bush decided to shit on our diplomacy with them. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2004, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/244 "2004-09-08T19:36:13Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Saddam’s threat to us was twofold: one, as a brutal dictator that hated the US, his country was ripe for use as a terrorist haven. And now it’s riper than ever! ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2004, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/245 "2004-09-08T23:39:32Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So which is the honorable course if your party has adopted a position which you feel is untenable and dangerous to the security of the nation? You keep repeating the fallacious implication that what Zell fundamentally disagrees with the Democrats on is this issue of security even though I have shown you, and you haven’t disputed, that Zell has broken with the party on basically all issues ranging from economics (the Bush tax cuts) to the environment. The reason I keep emphasizing this is that I am guessing that you and your Republican breathren seem to feel that the story works better if one perceives Zell as having broken over just this one issue because then it is easier to make the case that the party abandoned him rather than the other way around and to emphasize this whole national security / fear / war hysteria that the Republicans are running on. (For similar reasons, it has been noted by some that the Republicans cherry-picked what they said Kerry voted against on the basis of his voting against a few of the defense appropriations bills [while voting for many more] during his tenure in the Senate. If they really wanted to follow their logic through to its obvious conclusion, they could just say that Kerry voted against having a funded military at all…But they know that people wouldn’t buy that. They have to keep their lies believable. > [@](#): > > I agree with the latter, by the way. Mr. Miller should resign his seat and seek re-election as a Republican. > > This is, by the way, exactly what I said Jim Jeffords should do. I do not recall ANY DEMOCRATS ON THIS BOARD agreeing with me at that time. Well, I don’t recall any Democrats on this board saying that Miller should resign his seat and seek re-election as a Republican (although maybe a few have?). I don’t even see Carter saying that part about resigning his seat. Personally, I don’t think that is necessary. However, it seems like he should honestly admit that he is basically a Republican now (and seek re-election next time on the Republican ticket if he were not planning to retire). But, more importantly, he should just not make up this whole story about how the Dems have abandoned him rather than he abandoning them and then make up all these lies and deceptions to support it. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/246 "2004-09-09T12:40:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It would be useful, because all I’ve seen from Kerry is criticism of the President’s failure to develop international support before moving to military action. I had assumed that critique was addressed both to the Afghan and Iraq missions. If you can show me that Kerry supported unilateral action in Iraq, with even more aggressive use of military power, I’d be interested to see it. Sorry to be delayed in getting back to this, but here you go. Oh, first, the issue of unilateral action wasn’t necessary then, because we hadn’t yet alienated our allies, nor were we doing something that our allies thought was complete bullshit. [http://slate.msn.com/id/2098781/](http://slate.msn.com/id/2098781/) > [@](#): > > It’s even more obviously false that Kerry would merely “serve our enemies with legal papers.” Kerry not only favored military intervention against the Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan, he favored it more aggressively than Bush. When Osama Bin Laden and his coterie were trapped in Tora Bora in December 2001, Bush inexplicably relied on poorly trained Afghan mercenaries to surround the hideout. Predictably, and maddeningly, this allowed them to escape. At the time Kerry called for American ground troops to do the job instead. [http://www.plp.org/cd01/cd1128.html](http://www.plp.org/cd01/cd1128.html) > [@](#): > > Democratic ‘Hawks’ Say: ‘Prepare for American body bags…’ > The Los Angeles Times, Nov. 9] > WASHINGTON — Several…Democratic presidential contenders…are urging President Bush to intensify and expand the war…. > Sens. Joseph Lieberman of Conn., John Kerry of Mass. and Joseph Biden of Delaware…have taken positions more hawkish than the president. On issues from the use of ground troops in Afghanistan to the targeting of Iraq…. Lieberman and Kerry in particular have echoed conservative activists pressing Bush to pursue the war more aggressively. > **"…Lieberman and…Kerry have been closer to us than parts of the Bush administration," said conservative strategist William Kristol, a leader among Republican hawks….** > The other leading Democrats — including former Vice-President Al Gore, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota and House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt of Missouri — have supported Bush’s decisions…without reservations…. > Biden…told the [Rockefeller] Council on Foreign Relations….“I think the American public is prepared, and the president must continue to remind them to be prepared, for American body bags coming home….” > Lieberman…has been…insistent…in arguing that the U.S. must target Iraq as part of the war…— whether or not it is directly implicated in the Sept. 11 airline highjackings or the subsequent anthrax attack…. [http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?021202fa\_fact1](http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?021202fa_fact1) > [@](#): > > Early on, he criticized the Bush Administration for its tactics in Afghanistan, its slapdash and unsuccessful effort to trap the Al Qaeda leadership at Tora Bora—and particularly its decision not to use American troops to surround the mountain redoubt. “When given the opportunity to destroy Al Qaeda, the President turned not to the best military in the history of man,” he said in July, “but rather turned to Afghan warlords who only a week earlier were on the other side.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/247 "2004-09-09T16:12:52Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > I did. An established poster just suggested above that conservatives are less welcome here because the board’s mission is fighting ignorance, and he did so in a forum where such attacks are supposedly verboten. > > Please give generously to the Humor Impairment Foundation. Ah, a joke. Well, since I offered it to show that conservatives are not made particularly welcome here, the fact that it’s a joke doesn’t change that. A pattern of making jokes at the expense of conservative positions, values, and leaders certainly would contribute to a feeling of exclusion, wouldn’t you say? But you may argue that one joke is not a pattern. And I would point out in return that it’s NOT isolated – that such remarks, “jokes” or not, are made all the time around here, and no one bats an eye. Proving that would, of course, require that I go back and pick out the remarks along with a URL that points to them. That’s a fair amount of work to do to prove a point that, quite frankly, I would simply hope an intellectually honest debater would concede. Here: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5244456&postcount=7](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5244456&postcount=7) What’s the problem? The Bush girls’ conduct seems perfectly compatible with the Republican philosophy of contempt for the American worker. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5233141&postcount=24](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5233141&postcount=24) It really is a disgusting affront to decency and integrity. Sadly, it’s what I’ve come to expect from GWB. He personifies the old saying, “You know how you can tell when George W. Bush is lying? His lips are moving.” Really, really pathetic. And frighteningly, stupid people all over this country are falling for it. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5235723&postcount=11](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5235723&postcount=11) _In reply to the greeting of a conservative poster’s return with, “Welcome back?”_ I grant you, it is questionable. More power to you for saying it. You’re a better woman than I am. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5238717&postcount=25](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5238717&postcount=25) The left does not have the ability to hate and to lie as much as the worst of the right does). [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5240448&postcount=8](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5240448&postcount=8) anyone dumb enough to think of voting for Bush after the last four years isn’t smart enough to be swayed by Bush’s chickenhawk ANG no-show. > **[I Thought I had seen Zell Miller's speech before....](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=274341)** > > I thought I had heard Zell Miller’s speech before. I think he just substituted a few words and phrases. Here are some excerpts from the original German; it sounds better that way. Josef Geobbels’ famous Sportapalast “Total War” speech: RISE UP AND... I thought I had heard Zell Miller’s speech before. I think he just substituted a few words and phrases. Here are some excerpts from the original German; it sounds better that way. Josef Geobbels’ famous Sportapalast “Total War” speech [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=271165&page=2&pp=50](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=271165&page=2&pp=50) 82 posts on the subject of same-sex marriage. One poster - only one - suggests that same-sex marriage is a bad idea. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5191638&postcount=13](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5191638&postcount=13) But your best hope at a “win”, and it’s no small one, horribly enough, is Diebold. Outside of that, Bush is history. > **[Is intelligence the most important leadership quality?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=272430)** > > According to the Lovenstein Institute, Democratic presidents over the last 50 years have been more intelligent than their Republican counterparts, with GWB dumbest of all. Here’s the full list with IQs first: 147 Franklin D. Roosevelt (D) 132... In GD: “According to the Lovenstein Institute, Democratic presidents over the last 50 years have been more intelligent than their Republican counterparts, with GWB dumbest of all. Here’s the full list with IQs first: … 91 George W. Bush (R)” [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5176262&postcount=10](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5176262&postcount=10) From a site administrator, in GD: "Or maybe he just thinks if he says “September 11th” often enough he’ll get reelected. 😃 " [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5155191&postcount=25](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5155191&postcount=25) I’ve also heard McKinney floated some conspiracy theories about the 9-11 attacks – I mean, of course it was a conspiracy, but I mean theories that the Bush Admin might have intentionally allowed it to happen – and I certainly would not class her as a “raving lunatic” based on that! [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5242299&postcount=5](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5242299&postcount=5) In many ways, the modern Republican Party more and more resembles a cult. Unfortunately, it’s a cult with a lot of money and very few scruples, which makes them even worse than Scientologists. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5245231&postcount=52](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5245231&postcount=52) Responding to an OP about the value of third-party votes: The point of this OP is not to discuss third party voting. [The OP’s] post is meant to establish “Kerry cannot win” as conventional wisdom. He’s just doing his part to perpetuate the meme like a good little soldier. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=4526990&postcount=24](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=4526990&postcount=24) … if the gods are unkind and we get The Dumbass back for another 4 years how’s about you gloat by shaking the hand (or stump, if he/she was unlucky) of a returning Iraqi war vet? ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/248 "2004-09-09T16:42:39Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I simply don’t agree. You place a premium on international cooperation; I contend in the long run that we are better off having handled this essentially alone, rather than subjecting ourselves to UN or NATO “leadership” that is anything but. Who said anything about UN or NATO “leadership”? We managed to form a cooperative coalition in Afghanistan and still maintain our leadership role just fine. I could possibly understand your argument better if it were based on reality and not speculation. The reality is, we _had_ international cooperation and support. It benefitted us, the Afghani people, our goals and the international goal of ridding the _world_ of terrorist threats, to have that cooperation. And, with the exception of some poor strategic decisions (see Tora Bora), it worked. Yet, we did the exact opposite in Iraq and it has been, by every standard I’ve seen, an almost complete failure. > [@Bricker](#): > > How much did the boxcutters cost? What a ridiculous strawman! And you know it. > [@Bricker](#): > > I would want to hear the administration’s response to the one side of the story that the cite you’ve provided gives before comment. > [@](#): > > [[Source](http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=P7GWaEMIcoblNDvjoZwu%2BB%3D%3D)] > > … > > According to anonymous military officials, on three occasions in 2002 and 2003 detailed plans were drawn up for attacks on the Ansar enclave, which was nominally in Kurdish-controlled Iraq but effectively uncontrolled by either Kurds or Baghdad. > > … > > Even in the absence of the NBC story, this would seem to open the question of why the U.S. didn’t attack the Ansar base in the year or more before the invasion of Iraq. Indeed, senators were asking just that question, in public and private hearings with Powell and intelligence officials, in the months leading up to the invasion. Apparently no satisfactory answer was given at the time. Since the NBC story broke, administration officials such as Rice have said that there was never a known missed opportunity to kill Zarqawi. This is a pretty low standard, akin to the defense that \*of course \* action would have been taken if the administration had known that Al Qaeda planned to fly airplanes into buildings on September 11. It leaves open the question: Why not attack the camp, destroy the apparent poison weapons facility, and take the best available shot at killing Zarqawi and as many of his fighters as possible, as soon as possible? Our prewar knowledge of the Ansar enclave sufficed to make it a prime, and possibly urgent, target in the war on terrorism, independent of whether Saddam was ultimately toppled or not. \*\*No administration official has denied that the Pentagon drew up plans for an attack; nor has anyone said that there were logistical difficulties with the plans, or otherwise offered any affirmative reason for not following through on them. \*\* I realize that there are _allegations_ floating around out there that would paint John Kerry as a liar. As of this time, not a single one of those allegations has withstood close scrutiny, let alone been proven true. George W. Bush, on the other hand, has a proven track record of lying. Repeatedly. As does his administration. Not just acting in good faith on what ultimately turned out to be bad information, but outright lies and deceptions. Subterfuge and threats. This administration is guilty of intentionally withholding critical information from Congress in order to see their version of the Medicare bill passed, and high ranking officials have committed the criminal act of offering a bribe to a congressman _on the House floor_. The corruption in this administration is _rank_. There is absolutely nothing they can say to me, now or _ever_ that I will believe on faith. So when an investigation reveals that inside sources claim that the Bush administration killed several Pentagon plans to go after a known terrorist and his training camp in lieu of targeting Sadam Hussein, I believe it. In every measurable way, John Kerry proves to be _much_ stronger on defense and on actually fighting terrorism than George W. Bush. Any other interpretation of the evidence can only be arrived at by a “gut sense,” rather than an examination of the facts. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/249 "2004-09-09T17:15:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, since I offered it to show that conservatives are not made particularly welcome here, the fact that it’s a joke doesn’t change that. > > A pattern of making jokes at the expense of conservative positions, values, and leaders certainly would contribute to a feeling of exclusion, wouldn’t you say? > > But you may argue that one joke is not a pattern. > > And I would point out in return that it’s NOT isolated – that such remarks, “jokes” or not, are made all the time around here, and no one bats an eye. Are you serious? This is your laundry list of cruel taunts? Well, I guess it makes sense. Most bullys do run away blubbering when you hit back. (It does seem incredibly telling that BushCo supporters [please note the distinction I’m making] feel unwelcome in a place that is devoted to battling ignorance. It isn’t like a call went out to all the Mother Jones subscribers to sign up at the Straight Dope and harass the right. It evolved this way organically.) ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/250 "2004-09-09T17:18:02Z")
> [@](#): > > Yet, we did the exact opposite in Iraq and it has been, by every standard I’ve seen, an almost complete failure. Really? So Saddam is still in power in Iraq? The US and its allies don’t control any of the country? There is no independent government there? The perceived threat has not been eliminated? The stealing from the oil-for-food program continues unabated? Saddam and his sons are still kidnapping and raping women, and feeding their opponents into plastic shredders? > [@](#): > > …high ranking officials have committed the criminal act of offering a bribe to a congressman on the House floor. Cite? Please include whatever documentation you have on the grand jury indictment and/or conviction of this criminal offense. > [@](#): > > According to anonymous military officials, on three occasions in 2002 and 2003 detailed plans were drawn up for attacks on the Ansar enclave, which was nominally in Kurdish-controlled Iraq but effectively uncontrolled by either Kurds or Baghdad… So you are alleging that you would have supported an attack on Iraq earlier than it actually occurred? So you don’t object to the invasion itself, only the timing - is that it? So if Bush had attacked in 2002, you would have been all over the boards praising him, right? > [@](#): > > In every measurable way, John Kerry proves to be much stronger on defense and on actually fighting terrorism than George W. Bush. What kind of measurable ways do you mean - recorded votes? Support for military action? Actually sponsoring legislation aimed at attacking international terrorism? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/251 "2004-09-09T17:25:56Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > So when an investigation reveals that inside sources claim that the Bush administration killed several Pentagon plans to go after a known terrorist and his training camp in lieu of targeting Sadam Hussein, I believe it. Psst, Shayna: “in lieu” means “instead”. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/252 "2004-09-09T18:20:54Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Are you serious? This is your laundry list of cruel taunts? > > Well, I guess it makes sense. Most bullys do run away blubbering when you hit back. I offered those quotes not as a “laundry list” – which implies some sort of complete or exhaustive list – but rather as a representative sample. And I offered it in support of the contention that conservatives are not made to feel as welcome here as liberals. Your response appears to acknowledge that this is so, but justifies this unwelcoming attitude on the grounds that conservatives are “bullys” [sic] and thus deserving of such scorn. Is this an accurate interpretation of what you said? > [@](#): > > (It does seem incredibly telling that BushCo supporters [please note the distinction I’m making] feel unwelcome in a place that is devoted to battling ignorance. It isn’t like a call went out to all the Mother Jones subscribers to sign up at the Straight Dope and harass the right. It evolved this way organically.) I do note the distinction. To my way of thinking, there is a dramatic difference between three main categories: (1) lambasting Mr. Bush or the administration, (2) lambasting all those that support him over his challenger, and (3) lambasting all those that identify as conservative or Republican. Cruel taunts and harsh jokes directed at (1) are, of course, not nearly as valuable in fighting ignorance as calm, reasoned debunking of the policies in question. But since political debate can easily become rancorous, I regard these as only slightly problematic. When the target is (2), it’s a bit more serious, and when the target is (3), it’s _prima facie_ what I was observing: the board is unwelcoming to conservatives. I agree it evolved this way organically. But the reason it evolved this way is not simply that the left’s positions are more secure in the fight against ignorance than the right… it evolved this way because the initial population of the board was weighted towards the left, and that weighting has simply reinforced itself over the years. The board started by leaning left, and remained self-selecting for that property. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/253 "2004-09-09T18:37:17Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Really? So Saddam is still in power in Iraq? No, but that doesn’t make it any less dangerous. > [@Shodan](#): > > The US and its allies don’t control any of the country? Define “control.” > [@Shodan](#): > > There is no independent government there? Define “independent.” And are they at all effective? > [@Shodan](#): > > The perceived threat has not been eliminated? Nope. > [@Shodan](#): > > The stealing from the oil-for-food program continues unabated? This makes the world more safe from terrorism, how, exactly? > [@Shodan](#): > > Saddam and his sons are still kidnapping and raping women, and feeding their opponents into plastic shredders? Cite about the plastic shredders (which you already know has been roundly debunked). > [@Shodan](#): > > > [@Shayna](#): > > > > …high ranking officials have committed the criminal act of offering a bribe to a congressman on the House floor. > > Cite? Please include whatever documentation you have on the grand jury indictment and/or conviction of this criminal offense. See [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5247680&postcount=2) (I’m not reposting the entire thing here, especially given that cross-posting is against the rules). And give me a break with the need for indictments or convictions nonsense. Investigations are supposedly ongoing, and you know damn well that just because no one’s been convicted _yet_ doesn’t mean the crime wasn’t committed. We have Rep. Smith’s own words attesting to the bribe: > [@](#): > > [http://slate.msn.com/id/2092153/](http://slate.msn.com/id/2092153/) (bolding mine) > > [Update, 5 p.m.: Chatterbox has now listened to Smith’s taped interview with Kevin Vandenbroek of WKZO. (To hear it yourself, click [here](http://img.slate.msn.com/media/28/031206_Excerpt.wma).) In addition to demonstrating that somebody offered “$100,000-plus” to Smith’s son’s campaign if Smith voted yes on Medicare—why else would Smith have said so?—the tape comes close to establishing that this “somebody” (or somebodies) belonged to the House leadership. Smith doesn’t flat-out say, “I was offered a bribe by the House GOP leadership.” But his mention of the “$100,000-plus” comes during a larger discussion about pressure he received from … the House GOP leadership. At the end of his comments, Smith seems, as usual, to absolve Hastert and Thompson. > > Because context is so important here, Chatterbox reprints Vandenbroek’s entire interview below. The question Vandenbroek kicks off with mentions President Bush because Smith had just spent the afternoon with Bush in Dearborn. > > Q: Now, just last week, the controversial bill passed, the health care reform bill passed the Congress. Have kind of the axes been buried? Is everybody kind of make up and move on? How did you communicate with the president about the vote from last week? > > A: [inaudible] when civility breaks down, and arm twisting gets so serious. Kevin, here’s sort of what happened. If the bill gets on the floor, and it’s up for a vote, and they start the vote, the prestige of leadership is partially at stake if the vote doesn’t succeed for the majority. And that’s what happened in this case. They didn’t have the votes. I had voted against, last year and last spring, against the prescription drug add-on provisions that’s gonna [sic.] cost [our] grandkids a heck of a lot of money. And the arm-twisting was probably as strong as I’ve ever seen it in my sixteen years in the Michigan legislature and my eleven years in Congress. > > \*_They threatened—here’s what they did. They started out by offering the carrot, and they know what’s important to every member, and what’s important to me is my family and my kids. And I’ve term-limited_ myself, and so Bradley my son is running for office and so the first offer was to give him $100,000-plus for his campaign and endorsement by national leadership. \*\* And I said No, I’m gonna stick to my guns on what I think is right for the constituents in my district. **And so what they did then is come forth with sort of the stick, and they said, Well, if you don’t change your vote—this was about 4 a.m. Saturday morn—then some of us are going to work to make sure your son doesn’t get to Congress. And that kind of personal attack is just sort of beyond what anybody should do. So I told them to get the heck out of there and I mighta used a different word besides heck, I don’t know. But it’s a tough situation when civility breaks down.** > > Q: A week later, are we seeing that we are getting back to more civil climes, more civil environments under the dome? > > A: Well, you know, the leadership is, they talked, when they scrunched me in between the secretary of Health and Human Services, Tommy Thompson, and the Speaker of the House, Denny Hastert, they talked about philosophy and principle, and what this would mean policy-wise, maybe in future years. And it still, in terms of the tremendous increase in cost to future generations, was a no for me. It doesn’t do that much for seniors. It’ll probably help in the election next year. But three and five years from now, people are going to find out what’s in the bill and they’re gong to start hurting, and I think they’re gonna start blaming the people that voted for it. > [@Shodan](#): > > So you are alleging that you would have supported an attack on Iraq earlier than it actually occurred? So you don’t object to the invasion itself, only the timing - is that it? No. I would have supported an attack on Zarqawi’s terrorist training camps, which happened to be in Kurdish controlled Northern Iraq, exactly as I supported the attack on Osama bin Laden’s terrorist training camps which happened to be in Afghanistan. > [@Shodan](#): > > What kind of measurable ways do you mean - recorded votes? Support for military action? Actually sponsoring legislation aimed at attacking international terrorism? Yes. Yes. Yes. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/254 "2004-09-09T18:38:37Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > What a ridiculous strawman! And you know it. Taken literally, it is indeed a starwman. But it was merely a comment intended to point out that terrorist funding needs are on a different scale than full-blown military operations, and cutting funding in the manner you suggested was not as serious a blow as you suggested. > [@](#): > > I realize that there are _allegations_ floating around out there that would paint John Kerry as a liar. As of this time, not a single one of those allegations has withstood close scrutiny, let alone been proven true. I don’t know if I’ve made this explicitly clear before, so let me now: I don’t think for a moment John Kerry is a liar. I regard him as a war hero and a man of good faith. > [@](#): > > George W. Bush, on the other hand, has a proven track record of lying. Repeatedly. As does his administration. Not just acting in good faith on what ultimately turned out to be bad information, but outright lies and deceptions. Subterfuge and threats. This administration is guilty of intentionally withholding critical information from Congress in order to see their version of the Medicare bill passed, and high ranking officials have committed the criminal act of offering a bribe to a congressman _on the House floor_. OK - what criminal bribe was offered by what high-ranking official to what congressman? You show me Bush committed this act and my support for him vanishes. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/255 "2004-09-09T19:00:51Z")
[Moderator Hat ON] Stoid, Bricker, the rest of you, “the posters on this message board are biased against conservatives vs. ARE NOT!” is not a Great Debate. Take it to the Pit if you want to discuss it further; anything that is solely accusing/defending the opinions and posts of a particular bunch of posters on a particular message board is more of a personal issue than a great debate. [Moderator Hat OFF] ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/256 "2004-09-09T19:11:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > OK - what criminal bribe was offered by what high-ranking official to what congressman? > > You show me Bush committed this act and my support for him vanishes. See above. Click the link contained therein and listen to Rep. Smith (R-Mich) say so himself. And then tell me if you _honestly_ think that any of this went on right under Bush’s nose, without his knowledge. Keep in mind that the administration has already acknowledged that they even knew threats were being made against the Medicare actuary to withhold vital information in order to get this bill passed… > [@](#): > > [http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/politics/08medicare.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/politics/08medicare.html) > > The Bush administration illegally withheld data from Congress on the cost of the new Medicare law… > > The investigators, from the Government Accountability Office, said Mr. Scully had threatened to fire the chief Medicare actuary, in violation of an explicit provision of federal appropriations law. > > Accordingly, they said, federal money could not be used to pay Mr. Scully’s salary after he began making the threats to the actuary in May 2003. > > The conclusion came in a formal legal opinion by the accountability office, an investigative arm of Congress formerly known as the General Accounting Office. The agency applied its interpretation of the law to factual findings previously made by the inspector general at the Department of Health and Human Services. > > **The Bush administration did not quarrel with those facts** , but said on Tuesday that it was unconstitutional for Congress to compel the disclosure of data over objections from the executive branch. > > … > > The Government Accountability Office rejected that argument. No court has ever held the law unconstitutional, it said, and the cost estimates were neither classified nor privileged. Indeed, it said, Mr. Scully’s threats to the actuary were "a prime example of what Congress was attempting to prohibit’’ when it outlawed “gag rules.” ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/257 "2004-09-09T19:31:00Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Really? So Saddam is still in power in Iraq? > > No, but that doesn’t make it any less dangerous. You claimed the conquest of Iraq was a complete failure. Now you are saying that its main objective was achieved, but that it was a failure nonetheless. Tell you what - when you decide where you finally want the goalposts, you let us know. > [@Shayna](#): > > Define “control.” I would say that when the US conquers a country, captures their dictator, and revamps their government, that this would constitute “control”. > [@Shayna](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > The perceived threat has not been eliminated? > > Nope. So you think they still might be trying to develop nukes, or attacking Kuwait and Iran. Or maybe you think they are still not cooperating with the inspection regime. Or maybe you are just playing games with definitions. > [@Shayna](#): > > This makes the world more safe from terrorism, how, exactly? By removing one of its sources, refuges, and supporters. > [@Shayna](#): > > See [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5247680&postcount=2) (I’m not reposting the entire thing here, especially given that cross-posting is against the rules). The scruple does you justice. Your unconvincing cite does not, because it states; > [@](#): > > Smith doesn’t flat-out say, “I was offered a bribe by the House GOP leadership.” But his mention of the “$100,000-plus” comes during a larger discussion about pressure he received from … the House GOP leadership. At the end of his comments, Smith seems, as usual, to absolve Hastert and Thompson. IOW, you have no evidence of any criminal activity, no evidence of any involvement by Bush or any member of his staff, or much else at all. Just a slanderous accusation that somebody pulled out of her ass. > [@Shayna](#): > > We have Rep. Smith’s own words attesting to the bribe: No, we don’t. > [@](#): > > “No specific reference was made to money,” (Smith) said. > [@Shayna](#): > > And give me a break with the need for indictments or convictions nonsense. Investigations are supposedly ongoing, and you know damn well that just because no one’s been convicted _yet_ doesn’t mean the crime wasn’t committed. How about a need for some credible evidence? See if you can come up with some. Because I know damn well that just because the usual suspects are slinging the usual shit, that doesn’t mean that anything real has happened. Politically motivated slander. As if that were anything new. > [@Shayna](#): > > No. I would have supported an attack on Zarqawi’s terrorist training camps, which happened to be in Kurdish controlled Northern Iraq, exactly as I supported the attack on Osama bin Laden’s terrorist training camps which happened to be in Afghanistan. You aren’t making any sense. You don’t support an attack on Iraq, just an attack on Iraq. See if you can make up your mind what you support, and what you attack, and then get back to us. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/258 "2004-09-09T19:57:49Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > This administration is guilty of intentionally withholding critical information from Congress in order to see their version of the Medicare bill passed, and high ranking officials have committed the criminal act of offering a bribe to a congressman on the House floor. Asked to support that charge, you say: > [@Shayna](#): > > We have Rep. Smith’s own words attesting to the bribe: You then link to a Slate story which says: > [@](#): > > Smith said that somebody—he wouldn’t specify who, but an Associated Press report said it was “House GOP leaders,” and a Smith press release issued the day after the vote seemed to hint it was House Speaker Dennis Hastert or Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson—“made offers of extensive financial campaign support and endorsements for my son Brad who is running for my seat.” > . > . > . > Until this past Thursday, Smith stood by his accusations, but declined to identify the person (or persons) he was accusing, except to say that it wasn’t Hastert, Thompson, or Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Even disregarding Rep. Smith’s later recantation, the most a finder of fact could possibly conclude from this evidence is that some person or persons attempted to bribe him. Smith explictly denies it was Hastert, Thompson, or DeLay. For all we know, it could have been a member of industry that stood to benefit from the bill’s passage. Your attempt to make me believe that it was a member of the Bush administration is ludicrous. You cannot point to a single shred of evidence that identifies a member of the Bush administration. Smith’s press release does does say: > [@](#): > > Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson, who had been working the Capitol all day, defied custom and moved onto the House floor. He and Hastert avoided the back rows where many of the conservatives were clustered, and targeted “no” voters such as Reps. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) and Nick Smith (R-Mich.), who were standing or sitting alone. > The broad-shouldered speaker, moving through the crowded aisles like a fullback, plumped down next to Smith, who is retiring next year after 40 years in a succession of public offices. Hastert threw an arm around Smith’s shoulder and leaned in as Thompson moved into the seat on the other side. Aides recounted that Hastert said Smith’s help was vital to the party and the president – a fitting gift at the end of a long career – and suggested it would also help Smith’s son, who plans to run for the seat. > > But the former dairy farmer, a budget hawk, waved his hands as if in dismissal and told Hastert that his son had advised him, “Do what is right.” He was unmoved – and remained so as Hastert and other legislators returned often to plead the case." Even taking that in the most favorable light possible, there is no mention of an illegal inducement. > [@](#): > > And then tell me if you honestly think that any of this went on right under Bush’s nose, without his knowledge. Keep in mind that the administration has already acknowledged that they even knew threats were being made against the Medicare actuary to withhold vital information in order to get this bill passed… If anything illegal went on, I’m sure it was without Mr. Bush’s knowledge or involvement. And to accuse someone of a criminal act, you need something well beyond vague inferences. The evidence above couldn’t even get someone indicted, much less convicted. Discussions with you about the efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan have revealed that you are passionate about the accuracy of information and a zealous advocate for your side. This latest accusation, without even flimsy evidence to support it, is quite surprising and vitiates your position as an honest broker of information. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/259 "2004-09-09T20:08:44Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > You claimed the conquest of Iraq was a complete failure. Now you are saying that its main objective was achieved, but that it was a failure nonetheless. No I didn’t. I said that our invasion was “_almost_ complete failure.” It would help you understand my position if you’d read what I actually write and not merely what you want to see. The actual capture of Saddam was about the only thing that went according to plan, or that could be considered a “success.” Pretty much everything else has been a complete clusterfuck. The interim government in impotent, the Iraqi people see us as occupier and not liberators, people (ours _and_ theirs) are still being killed every day, our Secretary of Defense authorized interrogation methods that violated the Geneva Conventions and dozens of prisoners were severely abused under his command/watch and so on and so on and so on. > [@Shodan](#): > > I would say that when the US conquers a country, captures their dictator, and revamps their government, that this would constitute “control”. First of all, there you go using that word ‘conquer’ again. Was ‘conquering’ Iraq really our goal? Secondly, the mere fact that we ‘conquered’ them, hardly supports the idea that we actually have any _control_ over there. > [@Shodan](#): > > So you think they still might be trying to develop nukes, or attacking Kuwait and Iran. Or maybe you think they are still not cooperating with the inspection regime. Same old, same old crap that’s been disproven over and over. I’m not going to go there again. > [@Shodan](#): > > Or maybe you are just playing games with definitions. Or maybe you are. > [@Shodan](#): > > The scruple does you justice. Your unconvincing cite does not, because it states; > IOW, you have no evidence of any criminal activity, no evidence of any involvement by Bush or any member of his staff, or much else at all. Just a slanderous accusation that somebody pulled out of her ass. You’re skating really close here, **Shodan**. I pulled nothing out of my ass, which you would know if you had honestly read the source documents and **LISTENED TO REP. SMITH’S OWN WORDS**. He _tried_ to back out of his claim, but he couldn’t, because they got him **on tape**. > [@Shodan](#): > > > [@Shayna](#): > > > > Originally Posted by Shayna > > We have Rep. Smith’s own words attesting to the bribe: > > No, we don’t. Are you being deliberately obtuse here? > [@Shodan](#): > > How about a need for some credible evidence? See if you can come up with some. Since when is a PERSON’S OWN WORDS – THEIR VOICE ON TAPE – not credible evidence?? > [@Shodan](#): > > Because I know damn well that just because the usual suspects are slinging the usual shit, that doesn’t mean that anything real has happened. And just because the usual apologists deny, deny, deny, doesn’t mean that nothing real has happened. > [@Shodan](#): > > You aren’t making any sense. You don’t support an attack on Iraq, just an attack on Iraq. I’m making perfect sense, you just seem to want to twist my words. I’ll thank you not to. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2004, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700/260 "2004-09-09T20:29:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Discussions with you about the efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan have revealed that you are passionate about the accuracy of information and a zealous advocate for your side. This latest accusation, without even flimsy evidence to support it, is quite surprising and vitiates your position as an honest broker of information. Oh, please. We have the guy saying that pressure was brought to bear by “leadership” because their “prestige” was at stake. “Arm-twisting.” “_They_” didn’t have the vote. There _is_ no other “they” than the administration. “_They_” could not possibly be referring to anyone from some “industry,” even by the most generous reading. He was asked, specifically, how he communicated **with the president** , and his response was to explain how he’d been offered a **bribe** and then, when he didn’t accept it, his son’s campaign was threatened. Yeah, “industry” folks threatened his son’s campaign. Right. His denials after-the-fact are meaningless when we have his original statement on tape. His refusal to name names doesn’t mean it didn’t happen exactly as he originally said it happened. We’ve just yet to learn how far up the ladder this fish stinks. But go on living in your fantasy world that Bush is above this kind of behavior. He’s already admitted to the findings of the GAO, that charge him with intentionally obstructing Congress and threatening the job of the Medicare actuary. That you can tolerate this vile behavior in your president is appalling. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/zell-miller-speaks-from-the-heart/262700.md?page=14)