Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
1) Bullshit. You guys keep saying this on the board, but it boils down to saying that he was there on Xmas Eve when in fact he was on the border on Xmas Eve and there a month later. Bullshit I say.

He was 50 miles away. I do not say I spent Christmas in NYC when I visit family in Trenton.

2) Bullshit again. What he did was par for the course there. Are you really offended by the fact that he was injured by shrapnel from his own grenade? I didn't think so.

Aren't you?

3) The loud ones do. There are an awful lot of vets (especially the enlisted men) who feel otherwise, but they didn't start smearing people.

The American Legion today endorsed Bush. But please go on.

And thanks for the tacit admission that there was a lot of lying involved in smearing Kerry in this way.

Says you.

And so he got a Purple Heart too many -- Rassaman isn't complaining about it.

And yet you were offended by the band-aids

The man was still a hero.

Stipulated. So what? This hardly makes him worthy to be Commander in Chief.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Powerline has been ripping these docs to shreds all day. Now the latest two updates:

• UPDATE 11: CBS is sticking to its story. It's not entirely clear which story, however. Initially, CBS spokeswoman Kelli Edwards said:
  
  As is standard practice at CBS News, each of the documents broadcast on '60 Minutes' was thoroughly investigated by independent experts, and we are convinced of their authenticity.
  Later, however, Ms. Edwards sent out an email that appeared to revise the nature of the "authentication" process:
  
  CBS verified the authenticity of the documents by talking to individuals who had seen the documents at the time they were written. These individuals were close associates of Colonel Jerry Killian and confirm that the documents reflect his opinions at the time the documents were written.
  So what CBS is now saying is not that the documents are authentic, but that the opinions they express are authentic, based on the hearsay reports of anonymous persons alleged to be close associates of Col. Killian, who recall his views of thirty-two years ago. This is what passes for "authentication" in the mainstream media.

• UPDATE 12: In the August 18, 1973 memo "discovered" by 60 Minutes, Jerry Killian purportedly writes:
  
  Staudt has obviously pressured Hodges more about Bush. I'm having trouble running interference and doing my job.
  But wait! Reader Amar Sarwal points out that General Staudt, who thought very highly of Lt. Bush, retired in 1972.
  
  The more I look at these "memos," the more obvious it appears that they are inept forgeries.

Going to be a lot of fired CBS employees getting drunk at the China Grill tomorrow.

OK. I'm still about 10 blogs behind you in following what this story's about, so help a brudda out here.

Sullivan tells me: "If the docs are forgeries, why would the White House have released two identical copies that it had in its possession after the CBS broadcast? Did the White House forge them as well? "

Is it true that the WH release identical copies of these docs, or is Sullivan mistaken? If he's not, then are we really saying that the WH is disseminating forgeries? If they're not, then WTF is everybody screaming about?

[Aloha Mr. Learned Hand]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Vetted, but not fully vetted, since it appears that the White House keeps lying about having released all the documents. It was the cover-up that screwed Nixon and Clinton.

Before we go throwing the word cover-up around, and lest we forget, the only reason we have many of these documents on Bush made public, not counting the forgeries, is that he voluntarily signed the DoD form authorizing their full release -- something Kerry has yet to do...

[SlaveNoMore]

Gattigap
OK. I'm still about 10 blogs behind you in following what this story's about, so help a brudda out here.

Sullivan tells me: "If the docs are forgeries, why would the White House have released two identical copies that it had in its possession after the CBS broadcast? Did the White House forge them as well? "

Is it true that the WH release identical copies of these docs, or is Sullivan mistaken? If he's not, then are we really saying that the WH is disseminating forgeries? If they're not, then WTF is everybody screaming about?

CBS gave the White House copies of these docs in advance for comment. The WH then disseminated copies of these CBS advanced copies (they even have a CBS fax transmission line at the top) to the media.

[Aloha Mr. Learned Hand]

Originally posted by Gattigap
OK. I'm still about 10 blogs behind you in following what this story's about, so help a brudda out here.

Sullivan tells me: "If the docs are forgeries, why would the White House have released two identical copies that it had in its possession after the CBS broadcast? Did the White House forge them as well? "

Is it true that the WH release identical copies of these docs, or is Sullivan mistaken? If he's not, then are we really saying that the WH is disseminating forgeries? If they're not, then WTF is everybody screaming about?

As I understand it, the White House apparently released what CBS sent to them, probably in an effort to seek comment from the White House. Obviously they didn't analyze them (CBS apparently didn't either).

ETA: Slave beat me to it. Still, it seems like for CBS News to admit it's been had the documents would have to reference Howard Stern's buttcheese or something...

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
He was 50 miles away. I do not say I spent Christmas in NYC when I visit family in Trenton.

If you start from NYC in the morning and get to Trenton in the evening, you can accurately say that you were in Trenton even though your diary may say you were in NYC that morning. C'mon, there's no real dispute that he was on the border.

Aren't you?

No. Because he wasn't trying to injure himself, though you guys keep trying to imply otherwise. He was blowing up piles of VC stores.

The American Legion today endorsed Bush. But please go on.

My father endorsed Kerry. Oddly, he's not a member of the American Legion. Since you guys seem to grasp the problems with the blowhards who preside over (e.g.) NOW and the Congressional Black Caucus, it's odd that you wouldn't perceive the same phenomenom with the American Legion.

Says you.

Hello is one who commented on how hard it was to get all the Swifties to stick to their new talking points. Not surprising, since so many of them have said different in the recent past.

And yet you were offended by the band-aids

You might be too if you had a relative who earned a Purple Heart in Vietnam.

Stipulated. So what? This hardly makes him worthy to be Commander in Chief.

On its own, true enough.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore

The American Legion today endorsed Bush.

I'm sure you, as lawyer, think that Clarence Thomas is merely "qualified" to sit on the S. Ct.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

The latest from Drum:

• ARE THE KILLIAN MEMOS REAL?....The big question swirling around the blogosphere at the moment is whether the "Killian memos" that CBS aired last night on 60 Minutes are real or not. Powerline appears to be the central clearinghouse for amateur discussion of typefaces, terminology, signatures, etc.
  
  For what it's worth, I spoke to someone a few minutes ago who's familiar with how the documents were vetted, and the bottom line is that CBS is very, very confident that the memos are genuine. They believe that (a) their sources are rock solid, (b) the provenance of the documents is well established, and (c) the appearance of the documents matches the appearance of other documents created at the same place and time. In addition, people who knew Killian well have confirmed that the memos are genuine.
  
  This won't stop the arguments, of course, since CBS's sources are anonymous and are apparently going to stay that way. But while caveat emptor is always good advice, I thought it was worth passing on the fact that CBS is pretty sure of itself on this.

I still wouldn't mind an explanation of the superscript "th" in the memos.

If you want this story swirling for a few more days, a fight about the origins of the memos is a fine way to keep it alive. If.

[Gattigap]

Cheney's line, I'm becoming convinced, will earn its own little place in political history.

The best analogue for it I've seen so far is the old National Lampoon cover (evoked recently by Sullivan.)

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
The latest from Drum:

• ARE THE KILLIAN MEMOS REAL?....The big question swirling around the blogosphere at the moment is whether the "Killian memos" that CBS aired last night on 60 Minutes are real or not. Powerline appears to be the central clearinghouse for amateur discussion of typefaces, terminology, signatures, etc.
  
  For what it's worth, I spoke to someone a few minutes ago who's familiar with how the documents were vetted, and the bottom line is that CBS is very, very confident that the memos are genuine. They believe that (a) their sources are rock solid, (b) the provenance of the documents is well established, and (c) the appearance of the documents matches the appearance of other documents created at the same place and time. In addition, people who knew Killian well have confirmed that the memos are genuine.
  
  This won't stop the arguments, of course, since CBS's sources are anonymous and are apparently going to stay that way. But while caveat emptor is always good advice, I thought it was worth passing on the fact that CBS is pretty sure of itself on this.

I still wouldn't mind an explanation of the superscript "th" in the memos.

If you want this story swirling for a few more days, a fight about the origins of the memos is a fine way to keep it alive. If.

As further proof, CBS has released the following:

CBS reporter Dan Rather today released the text of a recently discovered email from then-Lt. George W. Bush's Air National Guard commanding officer which casts more doubt upon the military service of the man who would become the 43rd President of the United States.

The revelation of the email comes just hours after questions were raised about the authenticity of typewritten memos from the same officer, shown yesterday by Mr. Rather on 60 Minutes.

According to the previously unseen email message sent in May 1972 by squadron commander Jerry Killian, Lt. Bush phoned Col. Killian because "his internet connection was on the fritz and he couldn't IM me."

From Scrappleface

[Aloha Mr. Learned Hand]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
As further proof, CBS has released the following:
From Scrappleface

You left out my favorite part --

Mr. Rather said the authenticity of the 32-year-old email has been confirmed by several Nigerian officials who specialize in electronic funds transfer by email.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
blah blah I won't be paying in December blah

how come you all quit posting that nifty liberal backed electorl-vote.com stuff? Because is has bush clearly leading now (254-243), on an obviously lib biased page? because ohio and missouri aren't inplay anymore? I hope Kerry does win the polpular vote and that ole electoral thing kicks in again.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
1) Bullshit. You guys keep saying this on the board, but it boils down to saying that he was there on Xmas Eve when in fact he was on the border on Xmas Eve and there a month later. Bullshit I say.

I remember being 14 and coming home drunk one night. My parents *suspected* that I'd been drinking. I told mum and pops that I was at the library with X & Y, but they busted me with the old "X & Y stopped by an hour ago looking for you and said they hadn't seen you at all tonight". For me at least, mum and pop didn't care 11 years later when I told them that I had actually been at the library a month earlier, and with Z (who I was now married to). They knew I still told a bald-faced and deliberate lie that night. Kerry was neither drunk nor a teenager when he pounded the table with his lie in 1986 (or whenever).

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

2) Bullshit again. What he did was par for the course there. Are you really offended by the fact that he was injured by shrapnel from his own grenade? I didn't think so.

And yet, some people actually signed up for second and third tours. When you say Kerry did something dishonorable that was "par for the course" among a million veterans, I hope you fully understand why so many others treat him like a leper. It might have been par for the course for people like Kerry (and in direct contrast with the absolutely unassailable service of many other democratic politicians), but hundreds of thousands, or perhaps more than a million, of Vietnam veterans sit back and think "I didn't write myself up for purple hearts under such circumstances".

Oh, and I'm glad that you brought up the injured by shrapnel thing. He continually manages to use that shrapnel line in the same sentence as his purple hearts. Is it just clever wording, or does he actually have shrapnel from enemy fire that was used for a Purple Heart citation? Because, if not, its misleading and deplorable to tie the two together.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

3) The loud ones do. There are an awful lot of vets (especially the enlisted men) who feel otherwise, but they didn't start smearing people.

And thanks for the tacit admission that there was a lot of lying involved in smearing Kerry in this way. And so he got a Purple Heart too many -- Rassaman isn't complaining about it. The man was still a hero.

Start "smearing" people? This started in March, and Kerry was one of the original smearers. Now his allies in the media appear to be using forged documents to continue that effort, ironically just 3 weeks after Kerry cried like a little girl about questioning of his military service (and no more than 6 months after the Dems and Moveon et al. started this line of debate by questioning Bush's Nat. Guard service). Who is smearing who again?

And a "lot of lying" isn't really all that accurate. A "lot of hatred" is. The lying that has been exposed is Kerry's own lies, as told throughout his political career. His own campaign has been forced to revise his history in how many ways?

Care to lay your odds on a Kerry victory in November?

Hello

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You might be too if you had a relative who earned a Purple Heart in Vietnam.

I have a relative who got a fucking limb blown off in Vietnam. He is offended that Kerry was awarded a purple heart for one of those "injuries."

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Cheney's line, I'm becoming convinced, will earn its own little place in political history.

The best analogue for it I've seen so far is the old National Lampoon cover (evoked recently by Sullivan.)

For it to be truly an analouge there would need tobe history similar towhat actually happened 9/11 because of Clinton. Do you know if the Harvard Lampoon actually did kill some dogs?