It’s no surprise that the party of Iraq, Katrina, and 9/11 is worried about the coming election and has resorted to yet another attack on John Kerry to rile up the con base. What is surprising is how strong a response Sen Kerry has put out. I’m reproducing it in full, because if he had been this tough in ‘04 he would have won. And the Democratic campaign that is this tough in ‘08 will win.
Senator John Kerry issued the following statement in response to White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, assorted right wing nut-jobs, and right wing talk show hosts desperately distorting Kerry’s comments about President Bush to divert attention from their disastrous record:
“If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there, they’re crazy. This is the classic G.O.P. playbook. I’m sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did.
I’m not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today will take a break from belittling Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s disease to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq. It disgusts me that these Republican hacks, who have never worn the uniform of our country lie and distort so blatantly and carelessly about those who have.
The people who owe our troops an apology are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney who misled America into war and have given us a Katrina foreign policy that has betrayed our ideals, killed and maimed our soldiers, and widened the terrorist threat instead of defeating it. These Republicans are afraid to debate veterans who live and breathe the concerns of our troops, not the empty slogans of an Administration that sent our brave troops to war without body armor.
Bottom line, these Republicans want to debate straw men because they’re afraid to debate real men. And this time it won’t work because we’re going to stay in their face with the truth and deny them even a sliver of light for their distortions. No Democrat will be bullied by an administration that has a cut and run policy in Afghanistan and a stand still and lose strategy in Iraq.”
THESE ARE THE STAKES: You can vote for a party that gets mock outraged at twisting someone’s words, but doesn’t bat an eye at 3,000 Americans dying for no good reason – or you can vote for the Democrats.
The more focus on how our troops are dying for nothing, the better for Democrats. Fox and the GOP are really hurting if they think this will be a productive avenue.
He needs to speak these words ON TELEVISION.
Jesus, it’s 2006 and he doesn’t know that the vast majority of Americans believe:
“It aint true if it aint on T.V.”
But it is an excellent response. This is the type of spine-straightening real-talk Dems need to use on Rethugs. Bullies ALWAYS BACK DOWN when you show them that you’re not afraid of them.
I must confess, I’m glad to see Kerry had this in him. I was royally disappointed in his 2004 performance.
He must no longer be listening to the usual beltway insider fops. Good for him.
Oliver, I saw that during my lunch break and I couldn’t believe what I heard. My jaw dropped. I wish he was that hard-hitting two years ago when he was being Swift Boated.
Un-freaking-believable! Please, be man enough to put his quote right up in your post. There’s no twisting what came out of his mouth.
I agree a strong response to something like that would be appropriate…if you were RIGHT!
Kerry basically said that it is only the drop-outs who go to war…what a load of bullsh*t. The american people see that sort of thing for what it is: A blue-blooded Boston Brahmin extolling the virtues of a ruling class so you don’t end up with the hoi-polloi in the military. Yea, get on tv with a vociferous response…that’ll help.
You moron lefties are really trying to lose this one aren’t you?
Twist away, chickadees, twist away.
Pedro, you are aware that blue-blooded elitist John Kerry actually served in the military, are you not?
Christ in heaven, he mangled what he was trying to say. Get off it.
And I just watched Kerry’s presser! THAT’S what I’m talking about!
I especially liked the term “despicible Repbublicans”
Whoot!
Now let begin the waves of Bush supporters who believe mangling the delivery of a joke or a talking point is the height of evil. Oh the irony.
Kerry knows he “stepped in it.” A simple apology would have enough, but the arrogant fool couldn’t bring himself to do it.
“Kerry knows he ’stepped in it.’”
And how the fuck do you surmise that? Calling all idiot morons: What’s the most reasonable explanation?
1) That Kerry mangled the delivery of a joke about Bush’s incompetent handling of Iraq.
2) That Kerry, a Vietnam veteran, really believes that anyone who ends up in the military is there because they’re dumb.
Be honest. Oh wait, JWG, Pedro and William have already proven themselves incapable of honesty. Indeed, the entire right wing has proven that it is incapable of honesty. Oh well.
frameone,
I agree that he probably mispoke and botched a lame joke…so friggin’ what. He insulted folks and should apologize, but his royal highness isn’t man enough to apologize. He deflects and blames others instead. It’s sickening display of arrogance.
Sickening, William? Only to someone who hasn’t been paying attention to world events.
Half a million dead Iraqis. Thousands of dead Americans. Save your bile for a more worthy target, William.
I don’t know if it’s just me but I think a guy from Maine who went to Yale, never held a real job in his life, and got out of serving in Vietnam thanks to his politician father’s connections is the real “blue-blooded elitist”.
It’s not a huge stretch to conclude that Kerry was insinuating that people of lower aptitude join the armed forces.
Case in point.
What are wingnuts getting their stateside deferred knickers in a bunch over?
I thought he was saying that if you don’t learn anything in school (as in, GWB) then you make bad decisions (as in, our enormous strategic error in Iraq). What’s so hard to understand, wingnuts?
No no no no no no, George isn’t an elitist, he’s one of the boys! You can tell by the way he messes up words and says really stupid shit like “these are the results from the fiscal year starting February 30th”! He’s just a guy! LOOK OVER THERE A THREE HEADED MONKEY
Someone on the other team said something genuinely powerful against their team and it’s not fair.
Besides, how is this not an apology? He admitted he made a mistake and then tore apart the GOP pitbulls for trying to turn it into a mallet to hit him with.
“. It’s sickening display of arrogance.”
You admit that he made a mistake, that he didn’t really mean what it sounded like he said. And yet you are “sickened” by it?
Following on the good Dr.’s comments I’ve got a mistake you should be sickened by, William. It’s called Iraq. Has Bush taken any personal responsibility for the cluster fuck that he created over there? Of course not. It’s all the doing of the “generals on the ground.”
You and your right wing brethern have some pretty fucked up priorities, William.
typical left hypocrisy at it’s finest here at OW’s….
A few posts up, one of the denizen yes men say’s that Kerry mispoke. Ok, so why not just say “I mispoke”? You have oliver here with the hallelujah chorus extolling the virtures of his “comeback”. So now you are supporting the vociferous backing of a mistake? Yet GWB has to apologize personally to every american everytime he says “nuculur”?
How do you people look at yourselves in the mirror…
“How do you people look at yourselves in the mirror…”
I’d probably respond this part of your post, pedro, if any of the rest of it actualy made any sense.
Please point to the exact words that express admittance to a mistake and/or an apology.
That Kerry is repeating the same mistake he made 30 years ago when he testified to the Senate about Vietnam. He maligned the troops and then later tried to claim he was really criticizing the administration…only his actual words were very clear…as they are now.
In other words, if you truly respect the military, it’s impossible to call them losers without realizing you misspoke and correcting it right away. Why couldn’t he just explain he misspoke and apologize?
And how many people on this very blog have argued the point Kerry made? Since frameone is the arbiter of honesty, I await his disagreement with the argument that the military is full of intellectual losers.
I’m sure I’ll be waiting for a long time.
People who support George W. Stimpy shouldn’t try to rake Kerry over the coals for his mangling of one sentence.
Nuff said.
Except the corollary is that people who rake Bush over the coals for his misstatements shouldn’t get upset when the same thing happens to Kerry. Additionally, Kerry makes it a habit to “misspeak” about US troops:
Kerry 30 years ago: US troops “reminiscent of Genghis Khan”
Kerry last year: US troops “terrorizing kids and children, you know, women”
Kerry today: US troops don’t “make the most of it…study hard…make an effort to be smart”
JWG:
Wow, I’m an observational genius or something. Since more or less your entire argument past that point is predicated on the idea that the statement in that quote doesn’t exist, nothing else you said – including the questions you asked – are relevant.
Also, get a dictionary. Look up the word “context”. Then beat yourself repeatedly on the head with it.
Make sure it’s a nice sturdy dictionary. I suggest the complete OED.
Wow, JWG.
You actually think bringing up GW’s endless record of doltish statements is sufficient argument to attack Kerry. Better, even, because you think it somehow paints some sort of equivalence between the two.
Somehow that argument is less than compelling: “See? Kerry’s a fraction of the idiot Bush is! Gotcha!”
And you might want to wait for Bush to, you know, actually support the troops with the body armor, funding, and manpower they actually require before going on about how Kerry isn’t supporting them.
Once again, good for Kerry. I hope to see him take it to Bushco more in the future. Lord knows they deserve it.
Let’s see…
1) Kerry DOESN’T say what the aide claims he meant to say
2) Kerry has a history of insults about US troops
3) Kerry, nor anyone else, corrects the obvious “mistaken” insult
4) Hours later the Kerry camp comes up with the supposed “real” quote
5) Kerry never apologizes for the wrong statement which could not be taken as anything other than an insult
6) The joke’s on Kerry:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/06/07/yale_grades_portray_kerry_as_a_lackluster_student/
Um, genius, who brought up Bush’s statements? I responded to your argument. Use logic much?
Yes, I recall Kerry saying “I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it”. Are you saying Kerry was voting against the troops? Really?
I clearly brought up his statements. And once again, since it seems to have gone over your li’l head, I’ll repeat my obvious point nice ‘n slow:
“Folks as sit at the feet of Preznit Misunderestimate shouldn’t oughtta go on about how dumb someone else sounds.”
And when I brought that up, you leapt on it, as if it would give ammunition to your argument. Shameful. Shameful and embarrassing.
And, once again, slowly, pleeeease explain how Bush’s genuine, provable, and proven lack of support for the troops is overshadowed by Kerry’s admittedly annoying nuanced little shpiel. On second thought, don’t, because it’ll only be another five paragraphs of weapons grade bullshit.
Since Oliver loves his little quote, “”Look, over here, shiny thing!!!!”, how about we play a little game called:
What Kerry is really saying, “Look, over here, shiny thing!!!!”
How many times does Kerry’s nonapology try to distract attention from his “mangled” statement?
P.S. I’m still waiting for Nimrod to explain how Kerry has apologized.
If you’re apologizing, you’re losing. If Kerry had made an apology the GOP would say the same thing they are saying now – Kerry hates the troops. That’s going to be the GOP spin, and they would make noise about it either way. Better to have a cycle where Kerry is hitting back rather than one where he’s just adding on to the GOP pile.
I can’t believe you’re so stupid that you’re continuing to try to argue your point. You said Bush lovers shouldn’t criticize Kerry’s blunder (since Bush screws up a lot). I showed you that your argument is illogical since the opposite is also true: those who think less of Bush because of his misstatements aren’t in a position to defend Kerry’s blunder without being hypocritical.
In other words, BOTH sides can make the same worthless argument (like you did). I was not making the counter argument as a way of defending Bush or attacking Kerry. I was showing you how dumb the argument was.
If you’re not embarrassed by your inability to follow that simple logic, then the shame is all yours.
Why not apologize?
Why not say, “I muffed the joke — my target was the president — I apologize to all the servicemen, all the vets and certainly all who have made the ultimate sacrifice.”
All this jazz about “real men” is nonsense. A real man apologizes when he makes a blunder like this
Shorter OW: “Look, over here, shiny thing!!!!”
Thanks for the laugh!
Don: If Kerry apologizes, you and the rest of the right say “See, Kerry just admitted he hates the troops”. You’re never going to give him the benefit of the doubt, why should he ever concede to you guys?
JWG: Yes, a stupid joke by John Kerry is exactly the same as a month where we lost the lives of 101 people in Iraq for no good reason.
“…only his actual words were very clear…as they are now.”
JWG, you just disqualified yourself from any further intelligent discussion. What an idiot hack.
John Kerry: “I won’t apologize, and hey…Rush Limbaugh is fat and made fun of that sick guy on Family Ties.”
He’s not conceding to “you guys,” he’s apologizing to the troops he honors for messing up a statement and mistakenly calling them stupid.
william said
I agree that he probably mispoke and botched a lame joke…so friggin’ what. He insulted folks and should apologize, but his royal highness isn’t man enough to apologize. He deflects and blames others instead. It’s sickening display of arrogance.
I agree with you william- when will Rush Limbaugh apologize to Michael J. Fox
Yes, I admit that Kerry’s nuanced way of attacking wartime administrations by calling the soldiers murderers, terrorists, and uneducated losers is beyond my feeble intelligence.
Look, over here, shiny thing!!!!
“Since frameone is the arbiter of honesty, I await his disagreement with the argument that the military is full of intellectual losers. I’m sure I’ll be waiting for a long time.”
Because I missed this little challenge earlier: Go FUCK yourself, asshole.
Where the hell is your disagreement with an administration that has so woefully misued its public trust to put US troops in harms way with no plan for them to succeed?
The nerve of you hacks is beyond the pale.
jwg, just stfu, you and your fellow cons are making fools of yourself. The only thing is you should know better. At least you used to know better… now you’ve reverted to being just another disguisting Bush sycophant. Unfortunately your love for your president won’t wash your hands clean of the 3000 troops that have been killed.
Look, over here, shiny “thing!!!!”
OMFinG! You are unbelievable. This whole manufactured outrage over Kerry’s mistatement is an attempt by this administration and its mushbrained supporters to distract from its horribly failed policies in Iraq. It’s simply astonishing. Kerry makes a verbal mistake and you idiots jump all over him.
Bush actually makes mistakes that get US soldiers killed and you cheer him on.
Simply pathetic.
Kerry clearly misspoke. I don’t buy the whole “history of hating the troops” crap because his 1971 comments had an important context too. The issue is: should Kerry have apologized for muffing the joke and accidentally insulting the troops? Or would that have done little good for him, as Oliver says, and resulted in only further harm? Frankly, I think it’s a toss-up. The honorable thing is to apologize. But politics isn’t honorable. Nobody ever accepts apologies in politics.
My only complaint was that it serves as a distraction. Kerry has been irrelevant to the Democratic Party since November 3, 2004. Why inject himself now?
The GOP desperation is delicious. Mmm, more, please!
Wait can we play take things out of context with JWG!
“Yes, I admit that Kerry’s nuanced way of attacking wartime administrations by calling the soldiers murderers, terrorists, and uneducated losers is beyond my feeble intelligence”
becomes:
“Yes, I admit, soldiers murderers terrorists, and uneducated losers.”
Why JWG! You dispicable fool. Apologize for your smearing of the troops NOW!
“The honorable thing is to apologize.”
Ah, yes, of course. The honorable thing to do is for Kerry to apologize for a meaning he never intended, while idiot right wing hacks like JWG can continue to write shit like this:”…only his actual words were very clear…as they are now” long after Kerry has made his explanation public.
And as for Kerry injecting himself now, please. Kerry did not “inject” himself into anything. Desperate, scumbag republicans, like JWG, seized on a misstatement to distract from their party’s horrible, tragic record on foreign policy and national security.
Democrats must apologize for screwing up jokes.
Republicans can send troops to die for no reason, allow New Orleans to drown, let a terrorist attack happen on their watch, run up the deficit and cover for a pedophile with no apology required.
Fuck you right back. Try doing a search on this blog and you’ll find that I have disagreed with many Bush policies. But like so many leftists, you cling to your simplistic stereotypes and assume that to attack Kerry is to worship Bush. Kerry is hated by millions of veterens like me, and this is just another example why.
Factcheck, I will admit that you are the master of all logic if you can show me how Kerry’s words were distorted. Please tell me what words he uttered were erroneously left out of his quote.
Oops! I guess your point was stupid.
Yea Ollie, Kerry definately looks like “more of a man” by not apologizing. That is why democratic congress are wondering…”Kerry screwed up 2004, guess he is trying to screw up 2006 too”
But it is good to see the real soft underbelly of the american leftist…
Even if you MAKE a mistake, straight denials and launch a vicious attack against the other party. This is considered “honorable” amongst the leftist, win at any cost, the ends- justify- the -means democrats. Gee where did we see that before? A blue dress? I did not have sexual relations with that women, vast right wing conspiracy.
You must be so very proud…..glad to see Kerry is “keeping the dream alive..”
JWG,
Have you personally met “millions of veterans”?
(Or “veterens”, as you call them?)
If not, shut up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFsaGv6cefw
Just Google “army recruitment +lowered standards” and wonder how letting in the trash is “supporting the troops.”
Kerry summarizing testimony from vets in Vietnam:
Kerry on poor tactical decisions in Iraq:
So there you have the real Kerry quotes, absent wingnut editing. That should also put to rest any notion that any apology from Kerry would be received with anything less than absolute scorn and derision. JWG makes that pretty clear by insinuating that the statement issued after Kerry’s goof today was cobbled together to cover his ass and that Kerry just plain hates the troops, as his savagely edited quotations “prove.”
I don’t think he hates the troops. He just thinks the majority are uneducated hicks without the ability or opportunity to do anything better with their lives.
That’s a typical leftist viewpoint. Do any of you want to claim you don’t think the military is full of uneducated rubes who were forced or tricked into joining the military because they couldn’t do anything else? Why not just admit that you thought Kerry had it right the first time?
Great bill, so using the old “people said” frees one from any responsibility regarding the accuracy of the statements?
Lets try this another way…
GWB “According to reports from British Intelligence, the Iraqi’s have been attempting to buy yellow cake from Niger…”
So we are all good on that one right?
“Try doing a search on this blog and you’ll find that I have disagreed with many Bush policies.”
And your position on Iraq is …
Idiot.
Gosh, maybe those Republicans have something and Kerry said that without bungling it. He could even be right as it stands. After all, recruitment is down and they have had to lower standards in several different ways. I mean that rape/murder guy Green got in because they lowered the psycho guy standards and admitted him.
On the plus side, this is the first time in 4 years that Bush has made any indication that he gives a goddamn about the troops.
I want us to win. What does that have to do with Bush other than Bush wants us to win as well? Is it possible to have the same goal but disagree on how to achieve that goal? I know the terrorists want us to leave Iraq. Since you do as well, should I assume you support the terrorists? Of course not. The real “idiot” is the one who depends on simplified stereotypes rather than evidence and logic.
I don’t need to: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Veterans%20Vote.htm
So you “shut up.” Nyah Nyah.
JWG.
The link you mentioned only asked about voting. It didn’t say that the military voters “hated Kerry”.
Therefore, you are a liar, and unless you repent, you will lose your eternal soul.
JWG: you want us to win! Hooray! I want my Enron stock to be worth something again, too! We should start a club!
“I want us to win.”
Gee, and I want us to have a plan to win. See the difference?
Of course not.
“The real “idiot” is the one who depends on simplified stereotypes rather than evidence and logic.”
Oh that’s too rich. Aren’t the moron who just spent a whole thread arguing that Kerry hates the troops even after you knew that he misspoke?
Kerry made a few good points. The GOP ‘Katrina foreign policy’ was a good label.
Don’t forget to reward incompetence and vote Republican next week, Marty.
Lets try this another way…
GWB “According to reports from British Intelligence, the Iraqi’s have been attempting to buy yellow cake from Niger…”
The reason why his speechwriters had bush say ‘from Africa’ and not ‘from Niger’ was because they feared how he would mispronounce Niger.
To jwg, whose wishes are ponies:
You’re not just repeating this week’s GOP talking point, right?
Let’s start with your definition of winning, in the context of our occupation of Iraq. Go ahead and list the major accomplishments that would constitute a win there. We could then see how [well] [poorly] our GOP leadership has done thus far in achieving those goals, and thus gauge the [likelihood] [remoteness] of ultimate victory.
Where did I endorse any sort of a “people said” position?
The YouTube video is a collection of personal anecdotes and actual, verifiable statistics.
The plummeting standards (and ethics) involved in meeting recruitment goals has been an ongoing farce for the past several years. A simple Google search will bury you in source material.
Plenty of veterans gave sworn testimony on the atrocities committed in Vietnam, and history has proven much of it to be tragically accurate. That wasn’t the point, however, in putting up the quote. Earlier JWG had made it seem that Kerry had compared the troops to Ghengis Khan when in fact he was referring to the testimony of other veterans. If you read his Vietnam testimony in full, it is clear Kerry is mainly concerned with placing blame on those who started and perpetuated the conflict and not the soldiers.
The same problem arises with JWG’s attempt to frame a Kerry statement as being offensive to the troops by labeling them as terrorists (terrorizing kids). In fact, Kerry was talking about the questionable policy of continuing to have U.S. troops conducting searches in Iraqi homes when a supposed force of trained Iraqis (a White House and Pentagon fiction) would have been better suited to the task. His point about a bunch of U.S. servicemen bursting in and tearing up the place as being terrifying to children and disrespectful of Iraqi cultural norms (and hence fuel for anti-American sentiment) was entirely correct. More to the point, it hardly rises to the level of calling the troops terrorists or of being disdainful of our armed forces. Again, though, the main thrust of his argument was that the current administration and its tactical decisions in Iraq are the problem, not the troops.
So where in all of that are the “people said” arguments?
But Bill, JWG wants us to win. That’s all that’s needed for the conservative brain to feel all warm and happy. Actually thinking through the strategy of how we’re going to win, well, the conservative brain isn’t so big on that. We’ll stand down as they stand up, they say, never stopping to think for one second that in the process we might be arming one side in a long festering sectarian dispute that has no interest in “standing up” for our sakes. Today we found out that’s exactly what we’ve been doing as the Iraqi prime minister is telling us when and where we can set up roadblocks because he doesn’t want to upset the most prominent sectarian militia leader in the country. Today turned out to be “We stand down, when they say so.” I’m sure that will only lead to good things in the future.
Of course, no one on the right wants to talk about the fact that the democratically elected government of Iraq might not be our greatest ally over there. The conservative brain would rather talk about what Kerry said, rather than think about what Bush should do about actual real news. Which is typical of the modern conservative movement. They like to pick the easy wedge issues that require little more than hot air to get the job done: “He attacked our troops,” “He hates America.”
They aren’t interested in actually doing anything, let alone leading.
That’s why Bush is going on Rush’s show tomorrow. You couldn’t have a better suited pair: A couple of do nothing blowhards desperately trying to rub the stink of manure off themselves. They deserve each other. If only they weren’t getting people killed as a result.
You just have a blind spot for being proved wrong, don’t you?
I’m getting pretty tired of the Seinfeld strategy, you know. Kudos to Kerry for refusing to engage in the latest outrage about nothing.
So you take back your earlier statement that he apologized, right? I’m too much of a simpleminded idiot to understand how I got “proved wrong,” so explain to me how you just flipped from
Oops! How many Dems are canceling their appearances with Kerry? I’m sure glad everyone here proved me wrong about Kerry! He’s swell.
a) You’re starting from the position that the two are mutually exclusive, which is what is known in Foundation Logic class as a faulty first premise
b) I didn’t say you were a simple-minded idiot (although since you brought it up I wouldn’t rule it out), I said you had a blind spot for being wrong, or at least for sound arguments against you and your side. You seem happy enough reinforcing that image about yourself
60% of veterans favored Bush to 33% favoring Kerry. That’s an overwhelming margin well beyond any other group. Why do you think that is? After all, Kerry served in Vietnam, you know. Oh, yeah, and Bush was AWOL. You’d think the percentages would’ve been reversed.
You can’t discern intentions from numbers, for crying out loud. Face it, you’re reaching.
Well, one thing is for sure. Kerry crapped in his messkit big time. He’s definitely out in 2008 and this is a further blow to the left wing of the Democratic party wherein Kerry resided. With Lieberman crushing media and progressive darling Lamont, the party apparatus will move to the center. The stars of the party are clearly the adults – Democratic centrists (not the same as a ‘centrist’) like Obama and Hillsy.
I would say this enhances his chances in 2008, which previously were approximately zero. Also stop with the “far-left” bullshit. No-one in the front rank of the Democratic party is as far left as, say, me. Ned Lamont is a centrist. John Kerry is a centrist. Not “Democratic centrists”, actual centre centrists. You can try as hard as you like to characterise the Dems as an extremist left-wing movement, but all one has to do to prove that wrong is look these people up on the Internet.
good observation nimrod. Note that whenever I ask what “far left” views these candidates hold they come up with they come up with views shared with about 75% of the country.
Center, far-left, progressive, whatever. As long as the GOP’s menagerie of magical thinkers, idiots, liars, and lunatics are driven from power, our country will be infinitely better off.
That must explain why there are so many Democrats in office, right?
jWG, What “far left” views does Ned Lamont have? Hillary Clinton? John Kerry?
The reason cons are in office for now is because your party is good at making America focus on unimportant things like this controversy rather than the things that really matter. Too bad you’re not intelligent enough to see through all of their rhetoric.
Yep…just like Kerry said…us dumb sheeple just end up serving in the military and voting for the wrong people. It must drive you nuts!
Answer the goddamn question. Name a far-left policy espoused by Kerry, Lamont, Rodham-Clinton, or anyone else in the front ranks of the Democratic party.
A half-million deaths on our conscience, and this is what conservatives care about. It really says it all about our nation, doesn’t it?
The party is to the far left. ADA median between Republican and Democrat is 55%. Mike Dewine R and Sen Nelson D of Neb, for instance, are true moderates – close to that standard. Smokin Joe is 80% as is Sen Nelson Fla. – Liberal/moderates. Senate leaders Kerry, Schumer, Durbin, Reid are all 100% – far left. Pelosi 95%. So unless you think the ADA is controlled by Karl Rove (or maybe you are simply cognitively impaired), you must admit the party leadership is to the far left.
usual Dugger non-answer. Thank you for proving my point.
You never answered my question. Do you agree with the statement originally made by Kerry about education and the troops?
Sorry I’m late to this party, but
“GWB has to apologize personally to every american everytime he says “nuculur”?”
Yes, goddammit, yes he does.
When did you ask me that question? The one you did ask, I did answer. Twice.
Dugger, are you genuinely stupid, or do you just think we are? Telling us “must admit” something just because you said so isn’t going to work.
Nancy Pelosi privatised a national park and voted for the USA PATRIOT Act. That’s not far-left. I endorse nationalisation of most of my country’s public utilities. Even that’s not especially far left, historically, but its further than most.
“Do you agree with the statement originally made by Kerry about education and the troops?”
Yup, they’d rather talk about what Kerry said than what Bush is actually doing in Iraq. They’re idiots.
Still waiting for an answer. I won’t hold my breath, I’m not going to get one apparently.
You know, before any of you right wing dipshits says one more thing about Kerry I’d like a response to
this, you know, something that also happened yesterday but which actually fucking matters:
And it’s Kerry who thinks our troops are dumb …
I’ve never refered to a politician as “far left” or any variation thereof. Therefore I don’t know how I would characterize a position as such.
So JWG admits that Dems are mainstream. Next con-
BAGHDAD, Oct. 31 —
And when rumsfeld was asked about it, he had no idea what the reporter was talking about.
Olbermann summed it up ;ast night. Kerry was calling bush stupid, and bush is too stupid to realize Kerry was calling him stupid.
Some are. However, your claim that their “views [are] shared with about 75% of the country” is waaaay off.
So Kerry didn’t botch his joke? It was clear all along? Wow…we’re all over the map here, aren’t we?
jwg aren’t you embarrassed to be talking about John Kerry’s supposed gaffe when there are soldiers dying in Iraq? Shouldn’t we focus attention on that?
The Democratic Party leadership is composed of rich, very rich, old white left wing extremists. ADA ratings say they are extreme. And ADA is a left wing organization. You tell them they are wrong. they your own. In most of your worlds Andrew Mickel is a moderate.
All of it? Every last breath? Hey, if you want OW to stop posting on anything but Iraq, I’m all for it. I was under the impression that this thread was about Kerry. Again, I guess I’m just a simple-minded former soldier who doesn’t understand much.
So it wasn’t a gaffe? He meant what he said? Are you calling Kerry a liar since he claims it was a botched joke? Get your story straight, man!
“Gaffe” is objective. No-one is all over the map except you, in your increasingly dadaist attempts to characterise consistency as desperation, GOP talking points as matters of life and death, a party mostly made up of fiscal and\or social conservatives as the fucking Fourth International, and perfectly reasonable discourse as lunacy.
Go cold turkey on the talking points, for Christ’s sake.
If we played this game we’d be demanding an apology from Bush for the statements his BFF and radio interview go-to guy Rush said about Michael J. Fox.
But we don’t.
And the trolls know it.
Um, Limbaugh did apologize:
Good. So did Kerry.
Why all the bitching then?
“Why all the bitching then?”
Because they don’t want to talk about Back Hawk Down: When Muqtada al-Sadr, through prime minister Maliki, whose government he is propping up, ordered US troops to stand down in their search for both a missing US soldier and the most wanted death squad leader in Iraq (a Sadr loyalist).
And personally I find this article to be particularly accurate on the whole issue:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/james_crabtree/2006/11/john_kerry_08_rip.html
“there is something uniquely unfortunate about Kerry – his caution, his pratfalls, his pusillanimity – that invite this sort of attack. And somehow, the ways he overcompensates for his weaknesses (”reporting for duty”, duck hunting, saying yesterday he had nothing to apologise for) only make it worse.
…journalists Mark Halperin and John Harris lay out what they call the “freak show” – the motley gang of White House hatchet men, fake-tanned talk show hosts, and partisan hack bloggers who today run the Republican machine. In their equally excellent book, The Plan, democratic operatives Bruce Reed and Rahm Emmanuel lay out a Washington delicately balanced between “hacks and wonks”. They argue persuasively that the problem for Bush, Rove and the rest is that the normal balance of power has broken down – the hacks now run the town. And yesterday you saw it happen, in real time. Kerry boobed. The Republicans attack machine licked their chops, and dropped everything to attack him.”
It goes on. Informative stuff, that.
Indeed, Frame. As Kerry said in his otherwise fantastic speech:
“Bottom line, [they] want to debate straw men because they’re afraid to debate real men.”
Indeed. Let’s debate what will happen to the Franco family of Miramar, California. While Jwg and his ilk feigned fake outrage at a botched joke, Jason Franco he was killed in Iraq. His parents had dreams for him, probably dreams of him getting married, having kids, everything. Now his mother is going to get a box with the remains of her son back from Iraq.
Awesome. You cons have a lot to be proud of.
Actually “fact”check, we republicans grieve for our war dead, our brethern in arms (you weren’t actually IN the military were you “fact”?), we don’t use them as a political cudgel
Awesome job Fact, Awesome.
Troy Nealey from Eaton Rapids, Michigan dreamed of being an electrician when he got out of the Marines. But he will never achieve that dream because he is dead. Another young person’s life snuffed out in Iraq.
“He told me he was scared, and I told him, ‘But, Troy, I want you to be scared. Be smart, be brave, but don’t be a hero,’ ” his mother said.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061101/NEWS06/611010444
Let’s debate! You cons wanted to talk about Iraq, let’s talk about Troy’s Mom. Do you think she will be able to hold herself together for her son’s funeral November 11?
Let’s debate about Ricky McGinnis of Hamilton Ohio. His four daughters are going to grow up without a father because he died in Iraq last week. And his nephew who joined him in Iraq won’t have his uncle looking out for him anymore.
“Joey looked up to my brother. He was his hero. Ricky was going to make sure nothing happened to Joey,” Isaacs said.
Mchttp://www.journal-news.com/hp/content/oh/story/news/local/2006/10/29/hjn103006soldier.html
“we don’t use them as a political cudgel”
Are you fucking kidding me? What then is this whole flap about Kerry’s botched joke?
If you guys weren’t into using troops for political cudgel’s wouldn’t you have said, “Well, Kerry’s gaffe was misfortunate but we understand he didn’t really mean what he said. It was an honest mistake, let’s move on and deal with the important issues facing the nation.” But you didn’t sat that, you said “Kerry’s statement proves that liberals hate our troops.”
If you were truly interested in treating your soldiers well, you’d be interested in figuring out how we can actually get them the armor/money/troops they need.
If you’re genuinely interested in ‘grieving for your brothers in arms’, since you obviously feel no liberal has ever served in uniform, and we’re all signing up for Al Qaeda, you might want to encourage your preznit to actually attend a funeral.
If you were interested in HONORING them, you might want to find out how we waged a war of choice and based it on a lie.
But no, you’d rather get worked into a lather of this.
It really demonstrates what’s going on in those churlish little brains of yours.
“Why all the bitching then?’
Because Limabugh is a private sector radio personality and Kerry is a very rich, very powerful US senator who was almost president and may try to run again. Because Limbaugh speculated about a single individual who was making a partisan political ad and Kerry insulted the entire armed forces of the US – those folks who volunteeered to risk their lives so the elites like Kerry can wind surf off Nantucket.
And if Limbaugh has apologized, I’m waiting for left wing CNN’s Malveux (sp) to apologize for publicly hoping the Kerry thing goes away at once.
Any more questions?
Next.
“And if Limbaugh has apologized, I’m waiting for left wing CNN’s Malveux (sp) to apologize for publicly hoping the Kerry thing goes away at once.”
Ya, Dugger, I heard Limbaugh spin that little bit of bullshit this morning too. I guess we know why your brain is such mush.
Here’s the real difference between Limbaugh and Kerry:
Limbaugh meant what he said. Kerry didn’t.
Your attempt to suggest that Kerry actually meant what he said is the height of dishonesty.
dugger, what words of wisdom do you have for Mrs. Ricky McGinnis as she contemplates a life of raising her four daughters alone, because her husband died in Iraq? Maybe she can take comfort from Rush Limbaugh’s attacks on Michael J. Fox, or the presidents attacks on John Kerry’s patriotism as she looks next to her in her bed at night where her husband used to be.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/01/kerry-msnbc-apologize/
Will you shut up now?
“Limbaugh meant what he said. Kerry didn’t.”
I’ma use that one.
No jody, I don’t feel that “no liberal has served in the armed forces” I just know that YOU and Paul, and Factcheck, three of the biggest loudmouths here have never served.
And “fact”check, the words of wisdom I have for the families of our fallen soldiers: Your loved ones chose a dangerous and honorable profession. They chose to help protect those who could not protect themselves. The country thanks you and mourns your loss. Please let your children know what heroes their fathers, mothers, brothers or sisters were. Explain that there are things worth dying for. Explain that these were people who made their own decisions honor them for their ultimate sacrifice
Should we also explain that none of the three thousand dead Coalition soldiers didn’t, in fact, die for any of those things?
Pedro: I just know that YOU and Paul, and Factcheck, three of the biggest loudmouths here have never served.
Does not serving in the military mean we’re not allowed to comment on the war? I don’t know if you’ve been keeping up on current events, braniac, but last time I checked, your president and vice president didn’t serve in the military either.
We’re commenting on an unjust war, they’re sending people to die for nothing. But we’re the real monsters here, right? Way to have perspective.
Yea well check again numbnuts….
I never said a word about commenting about the war if you haven’t served.
Why do you lefties just make shit up like this? Do you think I’m just not paying attention?
Since you write in anonymity pedro, there’s no reason I, or anybody else, should ever believe a single fucking thing you say about your personal biography.
Pedro, seriously, are you insane? Are you reading what you’re typing or are you just typing it?
I never said a word about commenting about the war if you haven’t served.
Then why the hell do you bring it up? What relevance does my service, or fact’s, or yours have to do with the issue at hand, which is that Americans are dying in Iraq for NOTHING?
Also, if I misinterpreted this: three of the biggest loudmouths here have never served Please explain what you meant. And use small words, because after all, I’m a numbnuts who doesn’t understand people talking out their ass.
Huh?
You shouldn’t be tossing around slurs about brains.
JWG,
I could take a picture of myself in a uniform, too. Doesn’t mean I ever showed up for duty.
You shouldn’t be tossing around slurs about brains.
Perhaps. I am a numbnuts, after all.
You sure proved it.
George was in the forces alright. But because his daddy was George senior, he actually didn’t do anything except take cocaine and pose for that photo and take cocaine. That was what your friendly neighbourhood numbnuts meant.
And like Kerry, you’re unable to say what you actually mean the first time. Instead, you say something completely wrong.
And like Bush, you’re a dick.
What? Like I’m going to bust out my A material for Captain Consitency there.
Come on JWG, don’t we all know how it went down?:
George, jr: “Dad I don’t think I should have to to Vietnam.”
George, sr: “I don’t you should either but I have political ambitions and I can’t have it said that my son shirked his duty”
Jr.: “But dad, I don’t want to go.”
Sr.: “You won’t have to, son. I’ll pull some strings and get you a job guarding the skies over Texas for the duration.”
Jr.: “Yippee.”
And then he shirked even that duty.
Typical. Change the original point. I pointed out that Bush DID serve in the military, whether he finished his duty or not.
The fact that all three of you are attacking that undeniable truth speaks volumes about your honesty. Pathetic, but typical. Thanks for once again proving your lack of intellectual integrity.
JWG,
Okay, you’re right. Bush served in the military. He showed up, got a haircut and a flight suit, and even went to the dentist once. He’s a real hero.
…speaks volumes about your honesty.
I can’t speak for the others, but it actually says more about my saying something that’s not literally true to make a point. For example, if I were to say that Cheney gets wood whenever he thinks about torture, is that literally true? Maybe. Maybe not. Regardless, it is useful in making a point (that Cheney likes torture.)
Thanks for once again proving your lack of intellectual integrity.
You’re welcome. Thanks for once again proving your lack of reading comprehension skills.
God God, man. I read what you wrote. There was no allegory or metaphor involved. You can’t put a man’s name in a list of people that didn’t serve in the military if he actually did serve, then claim I can’t take the list literally.
You are either desperate or helplessly stupid.
Please point out which parts of your paragraph should not be taken literally:
I’m not attacking the fact that George “served” in the classical sense (ie he joined the military), I’m just saying, he didn’t do anything in the military, which is also an undeniable fact and which you are completely ignoring, for some reason.
He learned to fly fighter jets. The charge against him was that he didn’t finish the last several months of his duty that didn’t involve flying. Whether or not that is true, he did serve for many years. Therefore, he DID serve.
Since you began the statement by attacking the silly notion that people can’t comment on war policy unless they were in the military, and then followed that with the comment that Bush and Cheney didn’t “serve,” your point HAD to be taken literally.
“The fact that all three of you are attacking that undeniable truth speaks volumes about your honesty. Pathetic, but typical. Thanks for once again proving your lack of intellectual integrity.”
This from someone who argued that a botched joke proves that John Kerry hates the troops. Seriously, do you have any shame? Jackass.
Please give me my quote where I claim Kerry hates the troop, Lying Jackass.
How many times are you going to demonstrate your stupidity?
For those like factcheck you have trouble with reading comprehension:
http://www.oliverwillis.com/2006/10/john_kerry_resp.html#comment-24661671
jwg blurted
“That Kerry is repeating the same mistake he made 30 years ago when he testified to the Senate about Vietnam. He maligned the troops and then later tried to claim he was really criticizing the administration…only his actual words were very clear…as they are now.
In other words, if you truly respect the military, it’s impossible to call them losers without realizing you misspoke and correcting it right away. Why couldn’t he just explain he misspoke and apologize?”
Jackass.
“I pointed out that Bush DID serve in the military, whether he finished his duty or not.”
And thus we establish what conservative accountability really means: As long as you pledge to make a commitment, it doesn’t really matter if you actually follow through on it.
Bush is still a great leader because he invaded Iraq, whether or not he had a plan for afterwards.
Ya, that sounds exactly right.
Jwg sputtered:
“I don’t think [Kerry] hates the troops. He just thinks the majority are uneducated hicks without the ability or opportunity to do anything better with their lives.”
Let’s parse the way JWG does.
I don’t hate JWG. I just think he’s an ignorant con jackass.
You’ve got it frame, since JWG and his ilk want us to win, it doesn’t matter whether anyone has a plan, or even that they fight against winning. They want to win, see. That’s enough for them. Great.
And why they are jackasses.
Oh wow, JWG, this is what you linked to: :
And you say this knowing full well that Kerry is a decorated Vietnam veteran and after the fact that Kerry explained that his words were the result of a botched joke?
How “intellectually honest” of you.
I stand by ever word I wrote. It was all accurate. The only ones backtracking are you guys. I never claimed Kerry hates the troops. I never claimed Bush was a hero. I never claimed Bush has done a good job with Iraq.
But please, continue making stuff up. It’s what you guys do best.
Does Kerry, or for that matter, do you think that those serving in the military choose to be there even though they have other and more profitable opportunities elsewhere? Or do you think the military is full of people who have no other options?
Shorter Jwg: My words mean nothing. What I can spin for my party is more important than the truth. You guys are big poopy heads for calling me out.
I didn’t realize that someone who served in Vietnam couldn’t also be an asshole. I guess we learn something every day.
I mean exactly what they say, unlike the commenters here who have had to correct their points (and Kerry). Please point out any inaccuracies.
Again, you’re making stuff up. I am a libertarian. We likely agree on many political issues. Unlike you, I don’t have to make stuff up about other people. Where I come from, we call that lying.
“Please point out any inaccuracies …”
Um, dipshit, you stated emphatically that Kerry believes “the majority [of our troops] are uneducated hicks without the ability or opportunity to do anything better with their lives.”
Kerry believes no such thing and he has stated it repeatedly. He misspoke. He did not mean what he said. He does not mean what he said.
You knew, or should have known, his explanation of the event because the explanation was readily available in a link in Oliver’s post.
Now either you read the story and sailed on with your idiotic understanding of what you think Kerry believes or you failed to read the story and attacked Kerry without access to all the available facts.
Either way you’re a moron who prefers smears and lies to the facts.
A “libertarian”, huh. Where I come from that’s a self-hating Republican.
Where I come from, lying is trumpeting someone’s words while ignoring the context. But I’m not a “libertarian”.
“I don’t have to make stuff up about other people. Where I come from, we call that lying.”
Oh, then I guess we can now officially call you a liar. Thanks.
I stated my OPINION by using the words “I think”. It’s that whole reading comprehension problem, again, isn’t it?
I provided his own words over the years. Additionally, I can provide more quotes from other prominent people on the Left who believe the military is where people go who have no other opportunities.
I notice neither of you will answer the question: Do you think the military is full of people who have no other options because they are poorly educated or were tricked?
Are you seriously going to argue that is not a common belief on the Left?
Go flog that strawman somewhere else jackass.
So you admit that the actual words that he spoke were not twisted. They were just the wrong words.
You obviously don’t know what a strawman is.
“A straw man argument is a logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. To “set up a straw man” or “set up a straw-man argument” is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact misleading, because the opponent’s actual argument has not been refuted.”
The question is, do YOU know what a strawman is?
Yep…how many times have you claimed I am a republican? How many times have you said I claimed Kerry hates the troops? How many times have I been told I think Bush is great or a hero?
Yep…I have been arguing about whether Kerry, who is a prominent liberal, thinks the military is where the uneducated masses go. Asking if that is a common belief among liberals, or more specifically a belief of yours, is NOT a strawman.
Since both of you have repeatedly refused to answer it (earlier in the thread and now), I am starting to think that it is an accurate belief. If it is not accurate, let me know by answering the question.
Since you have failed to respond to the charge that you’re a jackass, I am thinking it’s an accurate belief.
It hasn’t been an uncommon charge in my life.
Keep dodging.
“I stated my OPINION by using the words “I think”.”
No you didn’t. You wrote:
No where do I see you saying “I think” or “My opinion is.” I do, however, see you making at least two declarative statements of fact re: what Kerry and liberals think.
“Do you think the military is full of people who have no other options because they are poorly educated or were tricked?”
Tricked doesn’t enter into it does it because not even an idiot such as yourself could claim Kerry said people are tricked into joining the military.
At the same time, JWG, there are indeed people who join the military out of economic necessity. I’m sure some people join the military because it represents the best possibility of a career in an otherwise impoverished area or else it represents the chance to pay for their college education so that they could then go get a better job when they get out. All of them probably join because they want to serve their country, as well. But how many of them do it purely for that reason?
The Army even advertises itself as a stepping stone to a better life: Join the Army to pay for college while learning the life skills and discipline you need to succeed. Have you ever seen one of those ads in which a guy in a business suit thinks back to the day he helped set up a radio listening post or whatever on the top of a mountain and then tells his boss, “Ya, I can handle it.” You get the gist.
Don’t pretend that the army is not the first best option for some people because of their education or previous job skills. Because in some number of cases I’m sure it is. And as such the armed forces have always served as more than simply a way to defend the nation. They also serve a valuable social function by providing opportunities to people who might not otherwise be able to avail themselves of a college education or a career instead of just a job.
The Armed Forces are the best option for financial, education and career enhancement/advancement for many people. That’s a simple fact.
It’s patently dishonest to distort this fact by suggesting that liberals believe only dumb people join the military.
I started the statement by saying “I don’t think he hates the troops.” That is my OPINION (hence the use of “I…think”). What followed was obviously also my opinion since I was still talking about Kerry’s mindset, continuing the original thought.
Now if you want me to turn the comment about liberals into an evidence based fact, just say the word and I’ll point you to any number of liberal sites discussing the uneducated troops. In fact, I’ll show you a whole bunch of liberal sites claiming Kerry spoke the truth the first time he spoke.
“What followed was obviously also my opinion …”
It isn’t obvious at all. You wrote “He thinks …” Not
“I think he thinks.”
Now there are a couple of questions at hand. Should I hold you to the same standard that you are holding Kerry? Which is to take your first words literally regardless of any subsequent clarification or should I accept your clarification and move on? I don’t know, JWG, what do you think I should do?
It’s also a nice dodge to point to some other liberals and hold them out as representative of all liberal thought (you have afterall made a universal claim) especially when you have liberals here at this site, such as myself, who hold no such view of the people who join the military.
I think it’s telling that after my answer to your ridiculous question you chose this tactic.
The facts of the military’s social function as a source of education, training and career advancement for people who might not otherwise get those options/opportunities is self-evident. So to is the fact that people do indeed join the military because it represents the best viable option for a better life for themselves and their families.
Anytime you dispute this fact, you just let me know.
A person doesn’t have to keep writing “I think” before EACH sentence in a paragraph that continues the point of the first sentence. It’s that “reading comprehension” thing again.
Yes, because the paragraph is constructed properly according to standard English protocol.
You have a serious problem understanding English. Is it your first language? “Typical” has never meant “all”. As factcheck found out, that whole strawman concept keeps getting applied by you and others. Apply what *I* write to my views rather than your imaginary stereotypes.
BTW, I’m glad to learn that you don’t follow the Michael Moore school of thought when it comes to who joins the military.
“Apply what *I* write to my views rather than your imaginary stereotypes.”
Isn’t this what the John Kerry mock-controversy all about? That you people won’t apply John Kerry’s views, only your imaginary stereotypes of his views?
Jackass.
“Standard English protocol”?
Really? What style guide do you use? You said “He thinks …” There is no reason for me accept your explanations after the fact just as you have clearly dismissed Kerry’s explanations after the fact. Your words are clear: “He thinks …”
Which brings us to the larger point. If you were just stating your opinion about what Kerry really thinks, on what grounds are basing that opinion?
Kerry had totally repudiated the thinking you ascribed to him and typical leftists? I agtehr you are using previous statements of his.
But wait, when else has Kerry ever said anything to even remotely suggest that he believes what you say he believes?
And don’t give me that “‘Typical’ has never meant ‘all’” bullshit. That’s a pretty smarmy fucking out, JWG. Typical means “(exhibiting the qualities or characteristics that identify a group or kind or category).” Well considering US troops dumb or tricked is not characteristic of liberals as a group. You’re fucking idiot for suggesting that it is.
“Apply what *I* write to my views rather than your imaginary stereotypes.”
And yet a comments on some othe rblog or website are representative of “typical” liberals. Geez, JWG, what a typical idiot.
At this point I’m hoping you’re being stupid on purpose, but in case you’re not I’ll try one more time to bring you above your second grade reading level.
Since I started the first sentence with “I don’t think…” it makes perfect sense for the reader to mentally ask, “Then what DO you think?” Therefore, the next statement logically answers that question which means it’s redundant to restate “I think”. Now, if you want to write “I think” before each opinionated sentence you write, go for it. But standard English dictates that within a paragraph each sentence should logically be connected to the preceding sentences.
I can supply you with my numerous teaching credentials if that will help you stop embarrassing yourself with your remedial reading problems.
And you’re a fucking idiot for claiming it’s not. I’ve dealt with the comments all my life first growing up as an Army brat, then in college after I served myself (when people didn’t know my past), as a teacher hearing other teachers make these types of comments, and reading comments about the kinds of people who join the military during the Michael Moore F9/11 hype.
As I said, I’m glad you don’t fall into that group, but it oozes throughout the Left. “Typical” is a good word choice.
“I’ve dealt with the comments all my life first growing up as an Army brat …”
And here come the anecdotes … Some liberal once made you feel bad and now it’s “typical” of liberals in general? Grow the fuck up. I have lots of anecdotes about liberals who have nothing but the highest respect for those who serve and who recognize the great social value of the military as an institution of economic, educational and self improvement.
BTW, did you even see Farenheit 9-11, JWG? Can you tell me the scenes in the movie that support your claim about Michael Moore’s take on the military?
And as to your continued qualifications of what you say you really meant to say, I’ve decided to apply the Kerry Standard to your comments. Simply reading what you wrote:
It’s clear that you were asserting something factual about Kerry’s beliefs and the beliefs of all liberals. Now you if you have any evidence to back up this assertion, please present it. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
Oh, and JWG here’s another one of your stellar comments:
I don’t see you asserting any of that as merely your humble opinion. Oh and so to last bit, it’s clear that you wanted to put words in my mouth just like you did with Kerry.
You really are an idiot.
But I didn’t, did I? Since I didn’t have any information available about your views on the military, I asked and waited for your comment (and I did wait a long time…I had to ask several times). Suspecting and declaring are different, but I know that you have problems with English so I’m not surprised at your confusion.
As for Kerry, I used HIS words. As I demonstrated, he’s made a habit of insulting the troops and going back later to re-explain what he really meant.
If having command of English grammar and sentence structure and using a person’s actual words makes me an idiot in your eyes, then so be it.
Nice to see the JWG/Frame war is still on. You two seem to be single handedly generating over half the posts in this thread.
JWG, you have never demonstrated that Kerry has a habit of insulting the troops. That bubble was burst way back in this very thread when I printed the full quotes you butchered earlier.
Much like the “Bush never lied” fiction peddled by Dugger, you seem intent on clinging to the idea that since you never actually used the word “hate” regarding Kerry’s opinion of the troops it is unreasonable to characterize your opinion of him in such a manner. That, of course, requires ignoring your consistent Kerry bashing and use of words like “malign” and “insult” to frame his relationship with the troops, not to mention your hacked quotes and insistence that Kerry thinks the troops are murderers, terrorists, and uneducated dolts.
Pedro leans on the same crutch when he rails that he never said liberals couldn’t comment on the war if they never served, yet he can’t help but raise his service as some sort of evidence of his keen insight in virtually every thread he comments in. All while making it clear that lefties just don’t know what they are talking about because they never joined up, of course. Oh, and it goes without saying that when he comments on the troops it’s out of deep reverence and respect, but lefties only use them as a “political cudgel.”
Now THAT’S funny.
Nothing was butchered. Kerry believed everything he was relaying during his testimony. Or are you going to argue that Kerry was passing along testimony that he didn’t believe was accurate?
Yes, I bash Kerry. I admitted that a long time ago. It’s possible to bash a person because you find them consistently insulting without also thinking that person is doing it out of hatefulness.
There’s a reason why the military preferred Bush (with all his inconsistent military baggage) over Kerry (a decorated Vietnam vet) by a much larger margin than any other demographic group. Either we really are stupid, or we can tell when someone repeatedly insults us.
Bill L
You accuse me of a position I have never taken. I suspect and believe in all probablity Bush has lied. He’s mortal and flawed – as weall are. I take issue with progressives citing Bush as a proven liar and catagorizing certain things as proven lies when they are merely their own (biased) opinions.
So if you accuse me of peddling, at least get it right as to what I’m peddling.
I never said Kerry didn’t believe the testimony he was relaying, merely that your cutting up of the original quotation made those words not only Kerry’s, but expanded their meaning to encompass all troops and not simply those engaged in committing atrocities against the Vietnamese. Or are you going to argue that no atrocities were committed in Vietnam? Or is it the case that any wrongdoing by Americans in Vietnam is above reproach because American troops, by simple virtue of being American, are heroic and superior to all others and to fault one is to fault them all, no matter how horrific the crime?
If so, then how is it that this administration so routinely gets away with blaming them for its failures in Iraq? Who blamed the troops for Abu Ghraib, or Haditha? What about the failure to secure the HMX explosives back in 2004? Even something as ridiculous as taking responsibility for the laughably premature “Mission Accomplished” banner was blamed on the troops (though in that case it was blown off as over enthusiasm and not the work of “a few bad apples”).
As for why the military supported Bush over Kerry, I would imagine that inherently authoritarian groups like the military tend to favor Republicans. Heap onto that the persistent meme that Dems are weak on defense and the swift boating of Kerry, and it is even less of a surprise. When a huge proportion of the troops still believe that Iraq had a hand in 9/11 and that Saddam had ties to al-Qaeda, you have to accept the fact that reality may not be enough to sway votes. Still, you have to be encouraged by the rising number of troops that think we should “cut and run” (72%).
Dugger,
Are arguing that you are simply playing Devil’s advocate when you insist that no lies can be proven, but that such a position shouldn’t be construed as arguing that Bush has never lied?
I can’t recall a single instance of you ever taking this administration to task for its dishonesty. As I recall, you even tried to hold up the “no proven lies” defense when Bush claimed his administration had never been “stay the course.”
I’ll tell you what, I’ll support your contention that you don’t think Bush never lied if you can provide an example of when you think he did (supported by evidence, naturally, and not a generalization about humanity’s inherent flaws).