Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
If the line now is that Moore was truthful in that movie, then the gulf of intellectual disparity has become too wide for communication.

As I said, I haven't seen the movie, and I don't like Moore, so I'm not defending him, just commenting on the gist of the fuss. He said lots of specific things that were (at least mostly) accurate, and strung them together in a way that encouraged people to walk away with mistaken inferences, right? (Like, we supported the Taliban to build a pipeline across Afghanistan, etc.) There's no dispute that Bush sat reading to kindergarten students for several minutes after he learned of the attacks on the WTC, which was one of the parts of the movie that produced the biggest fuss.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by bilmore
If the line now is that Moore was truthful in that movie, then the gulf of intellectual disparity has become too wide for communication.

Umm, you've been posting here how long and you are just now realizing that?

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by bilmore
You, .... now post - what? - five inches talking about how Bush and crew are character-ripping by ommission?

Funny.

1. Are you simply riposting to Ty, or are you saying that you're entirely comfortable with Bush's responses to this?

Sure, this may not be the equivalent of (say) the radio ads that sunk McCain in South Carolina in 2000 (or maybe it is, I have no idea.)

Regardless of the level of Bush's direct involvement or noninvolvement, the Swiftvets stuff is being largely driven by what seem to be close political allies of the Administraiton, and Bush seems quite content to let itself play out, other than a mealy-mouthed "well, we discourage soft money ads generally." If he's not exerting any effort to distance himself from it and condemn it, then you shouldn't be surprised when his campaign gets painted by the same brush.

2. I really was curious about the content and tenor of Bush's MN rally.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Gattigap

Regardless of the level of Bush's direct involvement or noninvolvement, the Swiftvets stuff is being largely driven by what seem to be close political allies of the Administraiton, and Bush seems quite content to let itself play out, other than a mealy-mouthed "well, we discourage soft money ads generally." If he's not exerting any effort to distance himself from it and condemn it, then you shouldn't be surprised when his campaign gets painted by the same brush.

What political allies?

In other words, he is doing exactly what Kerry has been doing with moveon and other groups.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by sgtclub
What political allies?

Check out the Republican fund-raisers from TX who have contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund the book, the ads, and the commermorative T-shirts.

In other words, he is doing exactly what Kerry has been doing with moveon and other groups.

Kerry has also denounced Moveon ads (see McCain). Bush, rather pointedly, has not.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Not "affiliated in any way," huh?
Nope. Gee, club, I would think that someone with your dedication to the First Amendment would be a little concerned when the President of the United States is suggesting that political speech "should be stopped." I guess it's OK with you so long as it's part of this sort of smear and dodge, huh? Kerry saying that book stores should choose not sell lies is "book banning" to you, but the government says that political speech "should be stopped" and you're praising him for it.

I couldn't make out the chart. What is the affiliation?

I'm not supporting his stance on stopping speech. I think all speech I've heard so far is fine, but the legal restrictions on political speech are ridiculous.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The complaint about Michael Moore's movie was that he said a lot of things that were true and left viewers to infer connections between them that were unstated because they weren't true, or couldn't be supported. There were relatively few complaints that the specific allegations made in the movie were untrue.*

But the beauty of it is, is that Bush isn't getting involved. He'd have to get involved to figure out if its true or not, and he said he doesn't care, service is service . Who knows if its true? Get back to us in 6 months, or really just anytime after the election and let us know how much of that is true? The Moore thing was a soft-money smear campaign that included a lot of innuendo no?

Anyhoo, our fearless leader is staying above it all. Y'all keep making that distinction and see where it gets you. You know, Bush lied, along with half the Vietnam era navy! But Moveon didn't when they compared him to Hitler! Now quit picking on our poor downtrodden president. Oh, and he served in Vietnam. That's V-I-E-T-N-A-M!

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Gattigap
1. Are you simply riposting to Ty, or are you saying that you're entirely comfortable with Bush's responses to this?

It goes back to my delicious irony feelings with the whole ""Hey, I was in Viet Nam!" vs. the Swiftboat Guyz" thing, following, as it did, on a couple of years of the most vile, and for the most part unsubstantiated, character assassination ever seen, conducted by the same people who now are expressing disgust that Bush et al could stoop so low. Don't smack me in the face and then later complain that I'm rude for not shaking your hand.

2. I really was curious about the content and tenor of Bush's MN rally.

Ah. Missed that.

Keep in mind that he's preaching to the choir at these things, just as Kerry is. Lots of homilies, equal emphasis on Iraq, terrorism, the economy, "values", education, etc. He was surprisingly at ease and friendly - he comes off much more fluid and clear and likeable in person than he does in a news conference. Substantive comment? Not so much. That's not the purpose of these rallies. MN could go either way - it's currently slightly in Kerry's column, but it's close, and - migawd! - for a repub president to have a shot at Wellstoneland is unheard-of.

In short, a chance to press the flesh and reassure the reassured. Lots of cheering. Lot sof familes and kids. Laura Ingr . . however you spell her name . . . gave the intro, and you can tell that she's a national-scope commentator and we're a local audience (she had to remind the audience to boo when she spoke of the EU), but she was okay. Our senator spoke, to good effect. All in all, a rousing rouser.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Check out the Republican fund-raisers from TX who have contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund the book, the ads, and the commermorative T-shirts.

But what is the affiliation? So some republicans living in TX contributed money. Is THAT what you and Ty are hanging your hat on? This isn't exactly George Soros/$15 billion we are talking about, but I don't think George is affiliated with Kerry either.

Kerry has also denounced Moveon ads (see McCain). Bush, rather pointedly, has not.

Cite please? Bush has denounced all 527, which would include both Moveon and Swiftees.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Kerry has also denounced Moveon ads (see McCain). Bush, rather pointedly, has not.

Yeah. I bet he just hates Soros.

(Hey, I'm gonna shut down my campaigning for three weeks. Could you possibly spend tens of millions on me while I'm gone? Gee, thanks.)

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I couldn't make out the chart. What is the affiliation?

You can change the display size on your browser to make it larger, or just follow the link ("Graphic: Connections, Contradictions") on the NYT front page, which will size it better.

I'm not supporting his stance on stopping speech. I think all speech I've heard so far is fine, but the legal restrictions on political speech are ridiculous.

You were just praising him for his stance on 527s, which is (apparently) that all of them should be stopped from running ads.

Originally posted by bilmore
It goes back to my delicious irony feelings with the whole ""Hey, I was in Viet Nam!" vs. the Swiftboat Guyz" thing, following, as it did, on a couple of years of the most vile, and for the most part unsubstantiated, character assassination ever seen....

Why do you guys always have to bring this stuff back to the Clintons?

But obviously, it all does go back to the delicious feeling you guys get from character assassination. We get that.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
Anyhoo, our fearless leader is staying above it all. Y'all keep making that distinction and see where it gets you. You know, Bush lied, along with half the Vietnam era navy! But Moveon didn't when they compared him to Hitler! Now quit picking on our poor downtrodden president. Oh, and he served in Vietnam. That's V-I-E-T-N-A-M!

FYI - polls show the Swiftees for Truth/Kerry=baby killer/liar ads are working in the swing states.

FYI - anyone check the margin of error in the latest polls? The election is too close to call based on the margin of error.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by bilmore
It goes back to my delicious irony feelings with the whole ""Hey, I was in Viet Nam!" vs. the Swiftboat Guyz" thing, following, as it did, on a couple of years of the most vile, and for the most part unsubstantiated, character assassination ever seen, conducted by the same people who now are expressing disgust that Bush et al could stoop so low. Don't smack me in the face and then later complain that I'm rude for not shaking your hand.

What's good for the goose, eh? OK, this is gonna be a fun fall campaign. Time to buy the extra-high hip boots.

Ah. Missed that.

Keep in mind that he's preaching to the choir at these things, just as Kerry is.

Thanks for the description, but I disagree that it's "just as Kerry is." I'll grant you that Kerry's campaign stops are overwhelmingly filled with Dems, but not exclusively so. He occasionally has to deal with pro-Bush hecklers, which is more than GWB has to contend with.

The prospect of filtering these rallies (and the reports of some -- Albequerque, I think it was -- requiring that attendees sign a "loyalty oath" to get it) is one of the things that bugs me most about the BC'04 campaign.

(It also provides some humor when Bush responds in interviews to questions about people disagreeing with his policies by saying "well, I don't see it when I'm out on the campaign trail," though not nearly enough to balance it out.)

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Gattigap
What's good for the goose, eh? OK, this is gonna be a fun fall campaign. Time to buy the extra-high hip boots.

Won't argue with that at all.

Thanks for the description, but I disagree that it's "just as Kerry is." I'll grant you that Kerry's campaign stops are overwhelmingly filled with Dems, but not exclusively so. He occasionally has to deal with pro-Bush hecklers, which is more than GWB has to contend with.

Not the case here. I saw quite a few people attending whom I know to be hardcore Dems. I saw a number of Kerry t-shirts.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Cite please?

See here for an example.