[zenblader]

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...NG428AGR51.DTL


How predictable! How asbso-feckin-lutely predictable.

I voted for Papa B. Would have voted for MCain in 2000 if he'd have gotten the nomination. I disagree with things on both sides of the spectrum, but I gotta say that under this admin we have reached new levels of hatred, stupidity and political bigotry. Is there no end to the lying? I guess not as long as there are sheep, and I mean sheep, who are willing to buy the line no matter how ludicrous. Do I think Bush has damaged this country in more ways than one? Dang right! Do I have to lie about him or spread rumours that he's a puppy-eating, alien who spent his duty in the ANG ripping the wings off angels? No. There is plenty for all to see openly and honestly regarding what has happened under GW's watch. Kerry volunteered to go to war. He was injured and apparently performed well in conflict. It is the ultimate in hypocrisy to quibble over the severity of his wounds or the length of his duty, especially for those who would consider him a war hero if he just shared their political opinions. If you disagree with someone's politics, fine. Why lie and spread lies? Unless you're a disgruntled political bigot or a paid hack?

[figment]

adds credence to the:

"in battle, a mans brains turn to water and run out his ears"

[Baketech]

MEOW....

[zenblader]

Originally Posted by figment

adds credence to the:

Yeah. This whole attack on Kerry's service is so obviously political. I don't care if Pee Wee Herman commanded a unit, boat or etc., if he volunteered for extremely dangerous duty, kept his men alive and came out with a couple medals, he'd be a hero for that service to his country. Oh, and by the way. Kerry stood up for himself against those who very early on criticized him for being weak and a pacifist. When it counted he stood up for his country and that is what he has been saying in response to those who wanked off in a dorm room while others carried the load. He didn't make it an issue until his commitment to national defense was questioned. Again. If ya don't like his politics then fine. I don't agree with everything he does or says. But attacking his courage or commitment to this country just makes people look bitter and stupid.

[Baketech]

So educate us...who is your rant aimed at?

[zenblader]

Originally Posted by Baketech

So educate us...who is your rant aimed at?

I don't have the time to educate you or anyone you indicate in your inclusive use of "us". My rant is there for anyone to read and reach a conclusion.

[Baketech]

Originally Posted by zenblader

I don't have the time to educate you or anyone you indicate in your inclusive use of "us". My rant is there for anyone to read and reach a conclusion.

Okay then...then just a quick question to help me shape that conclusion. Who are you pissed at...GWB, politics in general?

[ER]

He's mad at those who are questioning Kerry's service in Vietnam.

It has definitely become a sensitive issue. One side claims that he has lied about a number of things he's claimed to have done and he's using those lies to paint himself as a war-hero. The other side says he is what he says. One side is lying and one is not, since there are two distinct points of view. I suppose the other thread could be used to discuss that.

But why does this bother you? Where was the outrage when Bush was being forced to disclose his records for service in the ANG? He doesn't campaign from it yet it's become headline news. Where's the outrage over that? Kerry has made his ENTIRE campaign around his service in Vietnam. Shouldn't his claims be verified and challenged if false?

The outrage has to go both ways, since the Left is Picasso when it comes to mud-slinging.


EDIT: FYI, what was predictable was the response to the attacks on Kerry. If you'd like to read an excellent article, try this.

...The book has the ring of sincerity to it, and the mark of careful research and writing. If they are not telling the truth, all these men have exposed themselves to financially ruinous libel actions by Mr. Kerry — who has the private resources to prosecute such actions. Even as a public figure, he might well win such an action, if this book is the pack of lies the Kerry camp says it is.
If it is not a pack of lies, the nation needs to know that, too. I would encourage some of the major voices of the non-conservative mainline media — Tim Russert, Dan Rather, Leonard Downie Jr. of The Washington Post — to do as I did. Spend an evening reading the book. If they are not struck by the damning picture it paints of John Kerry and the credibility of the presentation, forget about it. But if they judge it as I did, then let their consciences be their guide.

[Baketech]

MoveOn timed their ad very well with Kerredy's denouncement today. I've seen two on the tube today already....

[ER]

The mudslinging comes from both sides which is why it's hypocritcal to cast a blind eye to MoveOn and the likes while blasting those who were part of the attacks on Kerry's service. The ad I linked in implies that Bush used daddy's influence to get into the AWG -- to avoid Vietnam -- and then promptly went AWOL to attend Harvard. Fine...maybe he did or didn't. Where is the documentation though? Unfit for Command is meticulously documented with sources from what I understand and the Swift Boaters -- while casting opinions -- can identify themselves as those appearing in Kerry's Band of Brothers picture.

Hey, the level of smearing in politics is disgusting and it happens on both ends. That's just our political system today. I can't see how the power of a Senatorial or even a Presidential seat can be worth having you and your family's name dragged through the mud.

[luvtolean]

Originally Posted by zenblader

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...NG428AGR51.DTL


How predictable! How asbso-feckin-lutely predictable.

I voted for Papa B. Would have voted for MCain in 2000 if he'd have gotten the nomination. I disagree with things on both sides of the spectrum, but I gotta say that under this admin we have reached new levels of hatred, stupidity and political bigotry. Is there no end to the lying? I guess not as long as there are sheep, and I mean sheep, who are willing to buy the line no matter how ludicrous. Do I think Bush has damaged this country in more ways than one? Dang right! Do I have to lie about him or spread rumours that he's a puppy-eating, alien who spent his duty in the ANG ripping the wings off angels? No. There is plenty for all to see openly and honestly regarding what has happened under GW's watch. Kerry volunteered to go to war. He was injured and apparently performed well in conflict. It is the ultimate in hypocrisy to quibble over the severity of his wounds or the length of his duty, especially for those who would consider him a war hero if he just shared their political opinions. If you disagree with someone's politics, fine. Why lie and spread lies? Unless you're a disgruntled political bigot or a paid hack?

Kerry chose to make military service his main issue. This is the only place he wants to play, so the Bushites will play with him there. Why complain about it? Kerry chose the battleground.

The moveon.org ad is more sickening than anything I've yet seen.

[BDA116]

The inrony of this latest leftist attack against regular war-hero citizens is amazing and sickening. It is O.K. to attack Thurlow, a decorated war hero on all fronts, but not O.K. to even question kerry's "performance" in his short 4.5 months in Vietnam.
Why? Because Thurlow is an ordinary citizen and Vietnam veteran that is, along with hundreds of thousands of other Vietnam veterans, sick and tired of kerry?

What's even better is how the leftist media is covering over the fact that in kerry's own diary he made an entry that while he has been on many combat patrols, he had yet to take or see any enemy fire whatsoever. So what, you may ask? Well this entry was made AFTER the patrol where he claimed to have been injured for his first Purple Heart. The patrol where EVERYONE stated there was no enemy fire, including kerry. The Purple Heart kerry begged for initially, but the physician had already been told that there was no enemy fire, and kerry had been screwing around with a grenade launcher. Well, after most of the men that were on that patrol had been transferred out, and weren't there to tell the doc there was no enemy fire, kerry applied again and got his first band-aid so he could start his quest to get home.

When kerry signed up for the Swift Boat program, it was the safest thing one could do in the Navy. They weren't running active combat patrols. AFTER kerry had gone through training the Swift Boat program changed, which is why he started his quest to get home with his purple band-aids.

If you disagree with someone's politics, fine. Why lie and spread lies? Unless you're a disgruntled political bigot or a paid hack?

Ask kerry that very question, as that is his forte. He has no record to run on, which is why he chose from day one to run on his Vietnam service. He hoped the truth would never come out, he hoped everyone would forget that he betrayed his countrymen in Vietnam.

Go ahead, kerry, switch to your record in the Senate. You're an even bigger joke there.

[Baketech]

Kerry's words and accusations yesterday expose him for what he is...a whining complainer.

In the past 6 months, Soros, MoveOn, Moore, et all have used soft money to fill the media with negative attacks on Bush from all angles. But I haven't heard Bush complain or accuse Kerry of "having others do his dirty work"

The Swift Boat guys are American citizens, and have a right to express their opinion. Kerry chose to run on his war record and thus opened the door for counterpoint. To act surprised or disgusted is disingenuous at best.... Who can say which version is correct. Safe to speculate that it's probably somewhere in the middle.....and that both Kerry and the SBV have distorted the facts on purpose or inadvertently. But, both sides should be told...

Frankly, I am glad to live in a country where different ideas and opinions can be expressed. Just as I was interested in the message of "Fahrenheit 9/11", I am equally interested in what the Swift Boat Vets have to say.


FWIW, I believe they trotted out Kerry's war record for two reasons.

1. It clouds the real issue which is Kerry's poor Senate performance.

2. It plays into the overall DNC strategy of martyrdom and victim mentality..
If they run on a war record, it forces the RNC to run a negative campaign, as any repudiation is seen thusly. The DNC strategy is always to portray their candidates as oppressed underdogs....it's a clever ploy that induces minority groups to identify with the candidates "plight", either real or percieved.

[ER]

Originally Posted by Baketech

Kerry's words and accusations yesterday expose him for what he is...a whining complainer.

In the past 6 months, Soros, MoveOn, Moore, et all have used soft money to fill the media with negative attacks on Bush from all angles. But I haven't heard Bush complain or accuse Kerry of "having others do his dirty work"

The Swift Boat guys are American citizens, and have a right to express their opinion. Kerry chose to run on his war record and thus opened the door for counterpoint. To act surprised or disgusted is disingenuous at best.... Who can say which version is correct. Safe to speculate that it's probably somewhere in the middle.....and that both Kerry and the SBV have distorted the facts on purpose or inadvertently. But, both sides should be told...

Frankly, I am glad to live in a country where different ideas and opinions can be expressed. Just as I was interested in the message of "Fahrenheit 9/11", I am equally interested in what the Swift Boat Vets have to say.


FWIW, I believe they trotted out Kerry's war record for two reasons.

1. It clouds the real issue which is Kerry's poor Senate performance.

2. It plays into the overall DNC strategy of martyrdom and victim mentality..
If they run on a war record, it forces the RNC to run a negative campaign, as any repudiation is seen thusly. The DNC strategy is always to portray their candidates as oppressed underdogs....it's a clever ploy that induces minority groups to identify with the candidates "plight", either real or percieved.

Excellent post.

[figment]

Originally Posted by Baketech

2. It plays into the overall DNC strategy of martyrdom and victim mentality..
If they run on a war record, it forces the RNC to run a negative campaign, as any repudiation is seen thusly. The DNC strategy is always to portray their candidates as oppressed underdogs....it's a clever ploy that induces minority groups to identify with the candidates "plight", either real or percieved.

This "mentality" / "strategy" is an argument of the type "red herring" Its fallacy is based on an appeal to emotion.

[Baketech]

Originally Posted by figment

This "mentality" / "strategy" is an argument of the type "red herring" Its fallacy is based on an appeal to emotion.

On my part, or the DNC's?

[figment]

Originally Posted by Baketech

On my part, or the DNC's?

no, you did not "appeal to emotion"

[Baketech]

[figment]

Emotional Appeal Type: Red Herring: Exposition: An appeal to emotion is a type of argument which attempts to arouse the emotions of its audience in order to gain acceptance of its conclusion.

[Baketech]

I know what a red herring is....I just wanted to clarify whether you though my assertion was a red herring, or the DNC strategy....

[figment]

Originally Posted by Baketech

I know what a red herring is....I just wanted to clarify whether you though my assertion was a red herring, or the DNC strategy....

I just wanted you to see Dr. Spock. Mission accomplished.

[Baketech]

Originally Posted by figment

I just wanted you to see Dr. Spock. Mission accomplished.

Didn't hit the link....heading there now...