Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
sure. what's it based on? his timeframe is part of the problem with him.

If the Iraqi people embrace democratization as a society, then four years ought to be enough time to put the foundation down and let them build their own system. If they don't embrace democratization as a nation, we won't be able to force it down their throats.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
1. Why would you blame a rape on a woman for wearing revealing clothing? That's offensive.

Good point. Either your dry humor isn't compatible with my browser, or you are Missing The Point.

2. We repeat it because it's true. Kerry has attempted to sell himself as a war hero, and he pointedly spends lots of time and attention on that, while steering away from his record in the intervening twenty years. Unfortunately for him, hanging your hat on only one qualifier leaves you vulnerable. Bush's claimed qualifications, on the other hand, are much more diverse. So, a hit on something like this - something that he doesn't even call out as a qualification - has less voter impact, except in the hard-core Democratic ranks. Whereas Kerry can take a numbers hit on a Swifties sort of thing, I think the impact on Bush is minor.

Kerry is a war hero. Under fire, he saved Jim Rassaman's life. The Navy awarded him a Bronze Star, and Rassaman is grateful. This tends to show toughness, whatever that means.

You keep repeating the GOP talking point that Kerry deserves to be smeared because he asked for it. Don't insult our intelligence by pretending that it has anything to do with the truth.

Whether it works or not is a different question. Of course you think it works -- otherwise, you'd be smearing him with something else.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Even in context, the message is still, vote for us or die. I never doubted he had a framework in which the quote was set. That doesn't mean it isn't still demagoguery. And it doesn't really change the meaning, it only offers a rationale. Your approval of the rationale is what makes the diffference for you.

I guess I have a different definition for demagoguery.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Good point. Either your dry humor isn't compatible with my browser, or you are Missing The Point.

Must be the humidity.

Kerry is a war hero. Under fire, he saved Jim Rassaman's life. The Navy awarded him a Bronze Star, and Rassaman is grateful. This tends to show toughness, whatever that means.

You keep repeating the GOP talking point that Kerry deserves to be smeared because he asked for it. Don't insult our intelligence by pretending that it has anything to do with the truth.

Whether it works or not is a different question. Of course you think it works -- otherwise, you'd be smearing him with something else.

I'm not saying he deserves any of this. I'm simply commenting that his packaging and presentation leaves him very vulnerable to it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
I'm not saying he deserves any of this. I'm simply commenting that his packaging and presentation leaves him very vulnerable to it.

This, my slick conservative friend, is a dodge. You think he deserves it, or you wouldn't keep spreading this crap. When you post that Kerry left himself vulnerable on this count, you are not stepping back from your customary role on this board to offer dispassionate commentary on the efficacy of politics tactics -- you are sticking the barb in and wiggling it around for effect.

[SlaveNoMore]

taxwonk
I would put 16 years in the Senate against four years of increasing deficits, lost jobs, and a military policy that has been thus far unsuccessful, in terms of stabilizing either Afghanistan or Iraq, or decreasing the level of terrorism.

Too bad Kerry didn't agree with you.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by taxwonk
If the Iraqi people embrace democratization as a society, then four years ought to be enough time to put the foundation down and let them build their own system. If they don't embrace democratization as a nation, we won't be able to force it down their throats.

What about Kerry's plan differs in any relevant respect to Bush's plan in this regard--that Kerry's committed to cutting and running if necessary, whereas Bush won't make such a commitment?

[SlaveNoMore]

taxwonk
If the Iraqi people embrace democratization as a society, then four years ought to be enough time to put the foundation down and let them build their own system. If they don't embrace democratization as a nation, we won't be able to force it down their throats.

How long did Japan take?

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
How long did Japan take?

I don't think that Japanese insurgents killed 1,000 US troops during the post-war occupation.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
What about Kerry's plan differs in any relevant respect to Bush's plan in this regard--that Kerry's committed to cutting and running if necessary, whereas Bush won't make such a commitment?

You say cutting and running; I say setting a timeframe for success or avoinding a slow war of attrition that may never be lost, but most certainly will never be won.

An open window with no fixed plan is not a good strategy. If we are going to be in Iraq and Afghanistan, and anywhere else trouble erupts, we need to commit to either (i) going in to clean up hot spots then departing or (ii) taking the step of admitting that long-term effective neutralization of unstable societies requires permanent occupation and control imposed from without.

I'm not necessarily against imperialism. It may be our one hope for global stability. I haven't really thought through the relative costs and benefits seriously enough to have an opinion. But if we're going to take that step, we'd better be prepared for a whole lot more international support than Bush is willing to bargain for.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
How long did Japan take?

US forces were there for 7 years.

Be wary, though, of holding up Japan as the model, as GWB's fidelity to it has been less than passionate.

Compare the US forces in Japan on a per-capita basis after WWII to those in Iraq today, and it becomes clear why the Pentagon acknowledges that large swaths of the country are being effectively held by Terrorist Fucks.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
This, my slick conservative friend, is a dodge. You think he deserves it, or you wouldn't keep spreading this crap.

Well, let's be clear here. I do think that he made the choice to be a single-issue persona, and, to that extent, yeah, I do think he deserves what happens when your single issue suddenly starts to tilt.

If you mean, though, that I think he deserves to be smeared, not so fast. I don't. If the Swifties stuff turns out to be false, then he certainly did nothing to deserve the lies.

But we do know, now, that at least the Cambodia-related stuff was true. We know that he used that story several times as a selling point for various political ends, and we know that he has admitted that it wasn't true. I do think he deserves some opprobrium for lying to serve his political ends.

But the medal stuff? Not a clue. I'll say he deserves that stuff theday I'm convinced it's true. We're not there yet.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Kerry is a war hero. Under fire, he saved Jim Rassaman's life. The Navy awarded him a Bronze Star, and Rassaman is grateful. This tends to show toughness, whatever that means.

You keep repeating the GOP talking point that Kerry deserves to be smeared because he asked for it. Don't insult our intelligence by pretending that it has anything to do with the truth.

Whether it works or not is a different question. Of course you think it works -- otherwise, you'd be smearing him with something else.

And what will that something else be?

• Kerry biographer urging: Release military records
  Brinkley warns Navy medals probe could be 'death knell' for campaign
  
  © 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
  
  John Kerry's biographer today called on the presidential candidate to release his military records and warned a Navy investigation into his medals could prove to be the "death knell" of his campaign.
  
  In the past, Kerry has said he could not release some documents because of contractual obligations to Douglas Brinkley, author of "Tour of Duty." Brinkley said he has no contractual claims to any of the papers.
  
  Clearly some of these military records should be made available to the press," he said on Steve Malzberg's WABC New York radio show today.
  
  Brinkley also said that if the Navy investigation reveals deception in connection with Kerry's medals, it could be the "death knell" for Kerry's campaign. Professing uncertainty about what to make about the Swift Boat Vets' claims, Brinkley said: "Right now it's unclear. So we have to just wait to see what all this adds up to."
  
  "Is it sloppiness, is it purposeful intent, is there an easy explanation for it?" Brinkley wondered.
  
  The Pentagon ordered an official investigation into the awarding of five Vietnam War decorations to the Massachusetts senator.
  
  The London Telegraph says the inquiry is being carried out by the inspector general's office of the U.S. Navy.
  
  "It is the responsibility of all personnel to correct errors in official records," a Navy spokesman told the paper. Another official said privately: "There's a feeling that it's time to deal with this thoroughly, once and for all

link

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
How long did Japan take?

They, and Germany embraced democracy. Algeria and Vietnam did not. See the difference?

[Aloha Mr. Learned Hand]

Originally posted by Gattigap
US forces were there for 7 years.
Compare the US forces in Japan on a per-capita basis after WWII to those in Iraq today, and it becomes clear why the Pentagon acknowledges that large swaths of the country are being effectively held by Terrorist Fucks.

Not that I advocate this as part of our modern foreign policy, but to be fair we also nuked Japan twice. It's safe to say they were a lot more passive as a result, not to mention the cultural stigma they felt having "lost face" as a society for supporting the aggression of their former military leadership.