Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[the Spartan]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
guy runs 7 minute miles, right? that means he wins on physicality.

On athletic ability, Bush wins. He is a solid runner, especially given his age and job.

As for Kerry, see my last post.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
guy runs 7 minute miles, right? that means he wins on physicality.

Slow as shit.

[the Spartan]

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
Slow as shit.

come on! put in context. He's over 50 and he has what is arguably a full time job. Its respectable.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by the Spartan
come on! put in context. He's over 50 and he has what is arguably a full time job. Its respectable.

I know. Kidding. I definitely only fit one of those characteristics, and that one just barely...

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
guy runs 7 minute miles, right? that means he wins on physicality.

How long is that in the Electoral College?

[Gattigap]

Rob Borsellino of the Des Moines Register made it through the security gauntlet to actually attend a recent Cheney rally in Iowa. No word on whether he had to sign the loyalty oath in order to get permission to go through the gates.

It's show time.

First up is the usually mild-mannered Chuck Grassley, and the senator is worked up. He's yelling, gesturing with his arms, talking about the "best qualified vice president the United States has ever had."

He mentions that the next president might get to appoint three Supreme Court justices and that could leave us with "seven liberals for the next 20 years."

A few of the older folks gasp at the prospect. I worry that some of them won't realize it's just political rhetoric and they'll keel over clutching their hearts.

But Grassley quickly mentions how "we welcome people of faith into our party" and "we love freedom. We love liberty."

Soothing words.

Next up is Jim Nussle, a congressman described as "tough." Nussle opens with some obscure football analogy and talks about how "you have to be tough." As tough as "a bulldog on a piece of steak." Excellent analogy.

He makes a veiled reference to Bill Clinton destroying our security system, and he also mentions that it's important to stay positive because "Democrats are negative."

He finishes up, and the never mild-mannered Congressman Steve King takes the stand and mentions that under John Kerry's policies, "We'll see our families blown to bits."

Niiiiiice. Vote Democratic = mass murder of American families. I didn't expect this rhetoric before, say, September.

Wonder if anyone will ask Cheney if he signs on to that particular statement.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
How long is that in the Electoral College?

DC is flat, so it'll probably be longer in the mountain states.

[sgtclub]

This article summarizes where I am on this issue to date (i.e., Cambodia is the only relevant issue).

Kerry's critics in arms allege that he didn't deserve one of his Purple Hearts and his Bronze Star. They make these claims on the basis of firsthand knowledge. But combat is notoriously confusing, and soldiers in the heat of battle make poor witnesses. Kerry deserves the benefit of the doubt. If the Navy says he won his medals fair and square, that's good enough for me.

What Kerry did (or didn't do) in Cambodia is a different matter.

On March 27, 1986, Kerry told his fellow senators: "I remember Christmas of 1968, sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by the Vietnamese and the Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and the President of the United States telling the American people that I was not there, the troops were not in Cambodia.

"I have that memory, which is seared - seared - in me."

Here's the problem: Kerry's commanding officers and some of his crew members reportedly deny that he was in Cambodia on Christmas 1968. They say he was stationed near the town of Sa Dec, 55 miles from the Cambodian border.

Kerry's people are trying hard to discredit his discreditors. They call "Unfit for Command" co-author O'Neill a Republican hack with a decades-long grudge against Kerry. They say Texas moneymen close to Karl Rove are behind the TV spots and are warning TV stations, in writing, not to air them. They maintain that the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth are motivated by jealousy of Kerry or anger at his post-Vietnam anti-war activities. They want to dismiss all questions about Kerry's war record as sleazy slander.

Sorry, but that's not going to wash. The issue is not whether the charges against Kerry are politically motivated (they obviously are) or who is paying for them. There's just one relevant question: Are the allegations true? Specifically, is it true he lied about being in Cambodia.

Unlike the debate over Kerry's medals, this is a matter that can be checked and verified. If it turns out Kerry was there, the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth are liars and their charges are, in the words of Kerry's friend John McCain, "dishonest and dishonorable." But if he wasn't there, the Kerry campaign is saddled with a problem it can't solve by calling Republicans names, threatening TV stations or even bringing up President Bush's less than stellar war record.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/idea...p-189814c.html

[SEC Issues]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Niiiiiice. Vote Democratic = mass murder of American families. I didn't expect this rhetoric before, say, September.

My husband and his friends still have their "Bush Lied, Thousands Died" bumper stickers. I told him they were uncivil.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
This article summarizes where I am on this issue to date (i.e., Cambodia is the only relevant issue).

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/idea...p-189814c.html

In other words, you don't have anything that's not in the Drum post I linked to above.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
In other words, you don't have anything that's not in the Drum post I linked to above.

I wasn't proferring new info. Just conveying (mostly to you) where I am with this.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I wasn't proferring new info. Just conveying (mostly to you) where I am with this.

Right. So there's no evidence establishing that Kerry was wrong, but for the Nixonesque denial that we were operating in Cambodia and the say-so of a bunch of partisans who are busy smearing Kerry any way they can in an election year.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Right. So there's no evidence establishing that Kerry was wrong, but for the Nixonesque denial that we were operating in Cambodia and the say-so of a bunch of partisans who are busy smearing Kerry any way they can in an election year.

Hasn't JFK backed away from the claim? It sounds like it. And the denial wasn't Nixonesque, it was by Nixon and I posted it as a joke.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by sgtclub
This article summarizes where I am on this issue to date (i.e., Cambodia is the only relevant issue).
[from the Daily News]:
...
Here's the problem: Kerry's commanding officers and some of his crew members reportedly deny that he was in Cambodia on Christmas 1968. They say he was stationed near the town of Sa Dec, 55 miles from the Cambodian border.
...
Unlike the debate over Kerry's medals, this is a matter that can be checked and verified.

How, exactly? In government records? The records of the same government that repeatedly denied going into Cambodia? The best refutation is that he was 55 miles from the Cambodian border? That's tantamount to corroboration of his story, not contradiction. 55 miles away he was stationed. In command of a vehicle capable of travelling twice that distance (and back) in a day. You don't have to be an America-hating conspiracy theorist to connect those dots.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Hasn't JFK backed away from the claim? It sounds like it. And the denial wasn't Nixonesque, it was by Nixon and I posted it as a joke.

I haven't seen Kerry back away from it. Bilmore interpreted a Kerry staffer's reluctance to answer questions (or something) as prima facie evidence of outright mendacity by the senator, but that's bilmore -- always quick to say the other side is lying.

With you on the Nixon thing. You may be joking, but some conservative bloggers are impeaching Kerry with the dated official denials that we were operating in Cambodia.