Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[Return of the Sarge]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
In Slate, William Saletan examines -- and rejects -- the claims in the advertisement by the Swift veterans:

Did I miss the fisking of the Cambodia story?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
She should have said "they're deranged," "they're UM students," or "they're vegetarians," since each of these groups doubtless is statistically much more likely to be a member of the protest.

She did say, they're deranged. She just used the vernacular.

Are you kidding? This is like signing them up for the Young Democrats. Mom was basically saying, when you start to rebel, this is how you do it. Think Alex Keaton in reverse.

No, mom was saying, they're rude assholic barbarians. The kids were scared. The kids are now anti-Democrats, if anything.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by taxwonk
I demand . . . .

All I'm left with whenever I'm faced with this statement is, fuck you.

(ETA: In retrospect, I'm sorry for that. That was intemperate. It's my reaction to "We demand more funding!!", or "We demand our programs of choice!!", or "We demand your respect!!" "Demands" are usually put out by people with no entitlement to make those same demands, and are based only on the idea that an unmet demand might cause guilt amongst the unmeetors. Maybe that's not the situation here.)


RT, my best advice to you is, from now on, act in no way that is imperfect. It's your only hope.

Wonk, I hope you'll return. I think your politics are childish and indefensible, your argumentative style churlish, your attitude selfish and intolerant, and your sense of proportion lacking. Those things aside, you are intelligent, well spoken, entertaining, and I've always enjoyed your posts, this past week being no exception. I'd have several beers with you (and I'd likely have to drink yours, too, I suspect.) I know you disagree, but what you ascribe to political chill, I chalk up to personal misunderstanding amongst friends, and, while one is unforgivable, the other is a passing fart. Please put all of this behind us. Only you can do that.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Return of the Sarge
Did I miss the fisking of the Cambodia story?

The story is that he got the date he was there wrong by a month or two more than ten years later. So what?

So many conservative bloggers who know the story is a smear working so hard to get it some play to hurt Kerry . . . .

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Return of the Sarge
Did I miss the fisking of the Cambodia story?

Nope. We've decided to treat that story like you conservatives treat the stories about the circumstances of Bush's entry into the "champagne unit" of the Texas Air National Guard, or his transfer to and honorable service in the Alabama Guard, or the drunk driving, or the drug allegations, or the self-dealing and conflicts of interest connected with the Ballpark at Arlington, etc.

In other words, big deal.

S_A_M

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
In other words, big deal.

I still feel violated that Bush ran on a platform of "I'm a war hero, a business hero, and a teetotaler all my life."

(Oh, wait, . . . )

Get off it, Sam. It's Kerry's main, and sole, selling point. "What will you do about unemployment?" "If elected, I will . . . Hey! I was in Viet Nam!"

If he would shut up about it, and tell us what he will do as president, we might be able to move on. As it is, complaints like yours are unseemly and transparent.

[bilmore]

Just a comment on Minnesota and Minnesotans:

Big crowds tonight. Rather huge crowds. Lots of yelling and chanting on one side, big numbers and an amused and loud undercurrent on the other. Hostility, and high emotions. Had the two groups mingled, it would have been ugly.

The cops lightly taped their yellow Police Line tape across trees, parking meters, cars, and pedestrians who were too slow.

And NO ONE TRIED TO CROSS THEM.

Damn, we're a polite people.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
I still feel violated that Bush ran on a platform of "I'm a war hero, a business hero, and a teetotaler all my life."

(Oh, wait, . . . )

Get off it, Sam. It's Kerry's main, and sole, selling point. "What will you do about unemployment?" "If elected, I will . . . Hey! I was in Viet Nam!"

If he would shut up about it, and tell us what he will do as president, we might be able to move on. As it is, complaints like yours are unseemly and transparent.

This is so bogus. The fact that he was in Cambodia has nothing to do with his presidential campaign -- he's mentioned it about three times since 1979, right -- and the particular month that he was there is of no consequence at all. The only reason it's being discussed is that you guys are having a hard time telling the difference between the smell of blood in the water and the smell of horseshit.

Meanwhile, I can't get over the irony of conservatives complaining that Kerry is running on character instead of specific policies. But if you want to discuss policy, hoss, find a response to what he proposes other than, "he's lying."

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The story is that he got the date he was there wrong by a month or two more than ten years later. So what?

Like Josh with Wilson, you are admirable, but, in the end, pitiful.

Remember the touching story he told the Senate in order to push his point? It depended, centrally, on those "small details".

Oops.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by bilmore
Get off it, Sam. It's Kerry's main, and sole, selling point. "What will you do about unemployment?" "If elected, I will . . . Hey! I was in Viet Nam!"

If he would shut up about it, and tell us what he will do as president, we might be able to move on. As it is, complaints like yours are unseemly and transparent.

Despite all available evidence, I think you're smarter than this.

There's loads of detail about what Kerry has said he will do as President. In fact, you pointed to some of it earlier and called him a liar because or your psychic foreknowledge that he has no intention of doing it. If you'd like more detail visit his website. The Kerry campaign is at least as substantive as your Bush campaign.

Furthermore, while I am pleased by your return, I regret to see that you continue to lump all of your respondees into one basket and respond randomly. Where do you find a complaint in my last post?

I am pleased, actually, that y'all have nothing better to say, and apparently so little in the way of positive accomplishments by your man to trumpet. That is a good omen for our eventual success in the November referendum on President Bush. God Bless You.

S_A_M

P.S. Unseemly and transparent?

P.P.S. Hillary in 2008.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Like Josh with Wilson, you are admirable, but, in the end, pitiful.

Remember the touching story he told the Senate in order to push his point? It depended, centrally, on those "small details".

Oops.

Centrally? No. Rhetorically, the fact that it was Christmas gave it added punch, but that's all. It was a story about the irony of fighting in Cambodia when the official position of our government was that we weren't there, not a story about the irony of fighting in Cambodia on the anniversary of the day that the son of God was born in a manger.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Despite all available evidence, I think you're smarter than this.

No, I'm not. I'm just that smart. Take that as you will.

There's loads of detail about what Kerry has said he will do as President.

Exactly. However, it is so against the grain of the Historical Kerry that I do not believe that it represents anything more than what Kerry SAYS he will do. He has fudged and obfuscated enough to make me believe that he will do none of it. The True Kerry could not win this country, and he knows that. Look at his history of campaigns - he has done this over and over. Plus, he always comes up with some image-fix in the short weeks before voting day, wins the vote, and then sort of quietly ignores what he promised to do in that short period. Those who ignore history are doomed to _________. (Fill this in for extra points.)

Furthermore, while I am pleased by your return, I regret to see that you continue to lump all of your respondees into one basket and respond randomly. Where do you find a complaint in my last post?

You lost me here. I was responding to you, and your post. Have you succumbed to the argument of the lazy, too? (Find someone's meme, and stick to it, applicable or not.)

I am pleased, actually, that y'all have nothing better to say, and apparently so little in the way of positive accomplishments by your man to trumpet. That is a good omen for our eventual success in the November referendum on President Bush.

I've said more than enough about why I think Bush's actions have been positive for all of us, and why I think changing the path now will hurt us. The fact that I failed to repeat all of that in this one post is not something you can (validly) point to when you make the claim that I can find nothing good in his tenure.

God Bless You.

There is no god. There is only math.

Actually, they are the same thing, so maybe I draw a distinction without meaning.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Centrally? No. Rhetorically, the fact that it was Christmas gave it added punch, but that's all. It was a story about the irony of fighting in Cambodia when the official position of our government was that we weren't there, not a story about the irony of fighting in Cambodia on the anniversary of the day that the son of God was born in a manger.

And he had no story unless he could say "I, too, was unjustly made to fight in Cambodia." His point was that his government was dishonorable for sending him to Cambodia in circumstances where it would disavow his presence in Cambodia. Sort of takes a hit when combined with "oh, sorry, I wasn't in Cambodia."

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
And he had no story unless he could say "I, too, was unjustly made to fight in Cambodia." His point was that his government was dishonorable for sending him to Cambodia in circumstances where it would disavow his presence in Cambodia. Sort of takes a hit when combined with "oh, sorry, I wasn't in Cambodia."

Since it appears that he was in Cambodia, albeit in January or February instead of December, your musings, while thought-provoking, are irrelevant. Douglas Brinkley has seen his journals, which corroborate his account.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Since it appears that he was in Cambodia, albeit in January or February instead of December, your musings, while thought-provoking, are irrelevant. Douglas Brinkley has seen his journals, which corroborate his account.

Was it seared - SEARED! - in Brinkley's memory, too?

(Sorry, but the after-the-fact justifications have seemed so lame as to make me think that someone is thinking "okay, what can we say that fits in with the public evidence?" There were two changes in details about facts, followed by two changes in the Kerry camp story, accompanied with a "oops, sorry." I don't buy that shit from my kids.)