Democrats & Liberals: Archives

You speak of an “intentional blurring of the lines” and I am almost certain that your argument makes sense…in some alternate Orwellian Universe, you know…”Demo-speak” !! To “blur the lines” you must first know where you are and therein lies the problem, at least for us real-worlders.
Sen. Kerry has deliberately chosen to emphasize his Vietnam War record (Witness his DNC speech, for instance). All right, that’s fair ! If, however, YOU “open the door” don’t complain if the other guy walks through it as well. As Americans that is our absolute right (Except, of course, for “Swifties For Truth”, someone might get sued by the DNC).
What seems to be chapping the asses of Veterans (and rightly so), even those who support Kerry, is the fact that he came home and bad mouthed an entire generation of Americans. Many had doubts and misgivings about the war few, however, have had the absolute gall to permanently damage the reputation of millions of our nations finest and then turn around and ask for their support. What are we to believe ? That he only had our soldier’s best interests at heart ? If we are to believe that then are we also to believe that he was, in fact, in Cambodia on Xmas of ‘68 (A memory that was, “seared, seared in him” !) Are we to believe that he voted For or Against the war in Iraq ? Are we to believe that he “did not have sex with that women, Miss Lewin”….Oops, sorry, that WAS a different Democrat ! Ultimately, like so many of Kerry’s claims it simply does not matter, whatever claim of his you believe you are often right (sort of)…and wrong ! Like Clinton, the supporters of Sen. Kerry will find themselves in a continuous battle, attempting to redraw a line that he has sworn to, and that line is already very, very blurry.

You underestimate veterans (and Cubans) when you say they hold a grudge. Vietnam was a long time ago. Thirty years of veterans have come since then, and most veterans never served a day in Vietnam. Significant majorities of veterans -and currently serving military - support George Bush over Kerry not because of what either did thirty years ago, but because of what their records indicate that they may do in the next four years. The guys who actually risk their lives based on presidential performance evidently feel that Bush’s experience as commander in chief trumps Kerry’s four months as a lieutenant in Vietnam. You may disagree with their choice, but don’t trivialize it by implying that they are willing to put themselves at greater risk in revenge for what John Kerry did in 1971, before most currently serving soldiers were born.

Your one glaring omission Samaritan,

Was failing to even mention the specific issue (Stem Cell Research), with which my line ‘…an intentional blurring of the lines’ actually refers to.

But, no prob. You already had an agenda of your own, and it had nothing to do with the veracity of anything I had written.

John Kerry did not ‘bad mouthed a generation of Americans’, he merely spoke out against atrocities committed by honorable soldiers, in an unjust war that was far from honorable. If the reputations of Vietnam soldiers were damaged, it was at the hands of small minded and ignorant citizens who fail to understand what it takes to personally defend this nation.

Colin Powell is the only person in the Bush war circle who actually saw combat. He had grave misgivings about the Iraq War, but was shamed into silence by those who would not tolerate dissent.

Now, if John Kerry was Sec. of State, we have a good idea what he would have done. Because, the lives of U.S. soldiers are more important than reputations.

What would you do Samaritan?

“the Swift Boat Veterans story on Fox News” went “to one of the three top stories leading off each half hour news brief. And soon enough, the networks, MSNBC and CNN followed suit.

Where did we see that before? That’s right! When Bush’s cousin at FOX, without any data to back it up, called the Florida vote for GW. You can’t argue that it’s not better to go into a recount as the projected winner.

You’re analysis of Blitzer is right on, too. I remember him interviewing Daschele about the anthrax letter he got (Bush never got to the bottom of those bio-weapon attacks, did he?), and he asked Daschele, “Do you believe the attack was directed at you personally?” HELLO! Daschele’s name and address were on the letter! What a dummy.

And you’re right about Bushworld. I can’t believe the media isn’t making a big deal over the fact that Cordier, the Bush campaign’s Veterans Coordinator, really was coordinating the campaign with the ‘swift boat liars for Bush’!

Well, as far as “stem cell research” is concerned Pres. Bush has only banned federal money from being utilized, he has not banned the research, or didn’t you get the word ??
The reason that I said Kerry badmouthed “an entire generation” of veterans is because HE BAD MOUTHED AN ENTIRE GENERATION OF VETERANS !! There, now that it’s out in the open we can talk about it ! Even Kerry has stated unequivocally (which is unusual for him) that his comments were, “Over the top”. He knows that he screwed up, the DNC knows that he screwed up, veterans know that he screwed up, voters know that he screwed up and if Pres. Kennedy could come back to life he’d tell you that Kerry screwed up. The only people that haven’t gotten the word are the Kerry Uber-Supporters, the truly faithful. But to what and to whom are you being faithful ??
Will you give me your solemn word of honor that Kerry will not be caught, once again, with his hand in the “cookie jar of history” ? Please tell me that he won’t get nailed in the midst of “Mendacium Flagrante” (with my profound apologies to Cato).
You stated that you had a “good idea” what Kerry would do as Secretary Of State. O.K., I give up, what would he do ?? You see, I don’t think you know, I really don’t think ANYONE knows including, sadly, Sen. Kerry ! This should not be thought of as unusual for the Senator. He doesn’t know the difference between Cambodia and 50 miles from Cambodia, he even has difficulty telling the difference between, say, Christmas and NOT Christmas (despite claiming that the memory was “seared, seared in him” !).
Out here, in the real world, someone who swerves, stops, backs up and changes lanes as frequently as the good Senator couldn’t get a job running a trolley car, let alone running a country.

I find myself in the rather odd situation of defending Fox here.

I don’t generally watch Fox, but then I am a notorius channel surfer, anyway. Yes, Fox has certainly elevated the SBVT story to the top of the news, but so have the papers and the other News channels. It’s good TV. The networks did this before there was a Fox.

While Rove and company have made some good strikes to deflate Kerry’s War Hero Image, ultimately the image we will be left with is that Kerry was in the jungle on a Swift boat in a war zone, while Bush was in Alabama reading magazines in a qounset hut.

Bush was handed his political career by his dad’s cronies, while Kerry took risks and built his own political career.

Bush is relying on his usual smear tactics, while Kerry offers a different course from the clear failures of this administration. That is the image that will carry in November.

CNN called Florida for Gore before for they called it too close to call before they called it for Bush. Other networks followed. That may have caused a significant number of Bush supporters, concentrated as they were in the Florida panhandle (a different time zone than the rest of Florida) from going to the polls. Nobody can say if this was significant, but my point is that the permutations are endless when you look for conspiracy theories. The Networks, Fox and the others, call elections too soon because they are afraid of doing it too late. The need to be first drives the cable news process. I have found that the first reports on CNN or FOX about a fast breaking story is wrong MOST of the time. In an earlier journalist era they would have the option of waiting until they really knew what they were talking about. Today speed is more important than accuracy. The public forgives and forgets mistakes and the cable networks rarely mention them.

The funniest story I know about is CNN’s reporting of attacks on the Russian parliament in 1991. Tanks surrounded the building and CNN seriously intoned that there was movement and smoke was rising from the barricades. That is what they could see from the top of their building a couple miles away. Closer to the action, you could see that the soldiers in the tanks had gotten out and were drinking vodka with the protestors. This particular crisis was over. Some people had built a fire and were cooking sausages – hence greasy black smoke rising and frightening the CNN staff. But the smoky images were too good to leave behind. For weeks after that CNN commercials showed the image while a narrator said something like, when there was trouble in Moscow, CNN was there. Sure enough, they were, but not close enough.

That may have caused a significant number of Bush supporters, concentrated as they were in the Florida panhandle (a different time zone than the rest of Florida) from going to the polls.

It could have just as easily caused more conservatives to go to the polls to try to change things, and fewer liberals to go to the polls out of complacency. There’s no reason I’ve seen to suspect that the early call influenced the vote one way or another, but for some reason it’s something often brought up by conservatives without acknowledging that the opposite effect was possible.

I really don’t understand why.

Lawnboy

I agree that we don’t know the effect of the early call. My point is that the same logic applies to FOX calling the election for Bush. The networks jump to conclusions because they want to be first. When the networks finally called Florida for Bush, he had indeed won it. The later recount confirmed the first. Only then did we start to learn about dimpled chads and butterfly ballots, ironically in counties controlled by Democrats. The fact is that the election was a statistical tie. There is nothing metaphysical about an election. Despite all the fancy words, it is a way to try to determine what the people want. In a very close race, you really can’t know. Gore/Bush could have won; Gore/Bush could have won. In a close race, the important thing is to get a decision before the process becomes too corrosive. I would have accepted either as president rather than go through a court case to determine the winner.

By the way, it is not very hard to punch a little hole in a ballot. You know how you get a hanging chad or a dimpled chad? It is usually because someone is trying to push through more than one ballot. Voter fraud is the invisible man sitting in the voting booth and the more creative we get in voting and counting votes, the more scope we give smart guys to have their way with the voting process. In disputed elections, the recently deceased and the home-bound tend to vote for the party that controls the local elections, and the longer it takes to count, the more of them come out.

Samaritan-
First, he was told himself that these things went on, and he himself did some of these things. I’d like you to show me where he has stated that American soldier’s acts in Vietnam were as unforgiveable as you have indicated his testimony coming home was supposed to be. He did not direct his criticism at the grunts, the soldiers in the field. He simply stated, matter of factly that this is what he and other soldiers had been ordered and encouraged to do. The bulk of his criticism is direct at the leaders, the head honchos of his operation, the generals directing the war, and the politicians and officials back home. History has vindicated Kerry’s assignment of blame on them. And like him, it has not condemned the soldiers who did as they were ordered to, acted as they were encouraged to act.

Also, if the veterans actually did those things, it was not immoral for Kerry to point those things out. He has said that some of his language was harsher than he’d like now, but that his main points remain true.

But think on this- What are the SwiftVets doing now? They are tearing apart the record of a fellow soldier, and questioning the honesty and honor of any number of soldiers who contradict their poorly founded charges. Your people keep on talking about the facts, but all I see are opinions rendered without documentation to back them up, with only eyewitness testimony by itself to back them up. They’ve made it into a character debate about who it was who got the picture of the Vietnam war right, and anybody who claims that the atrocities actually took place ends up a target.

As far as stem cell research goes, Bush struck a fool’s bargain, in order not to inflame either side. It’s the worst of both world, preventing federal funds to be used for more stem cell lines (the number of which his administration inflated) while claiming to not get in the way of that research.

To whomever:

Kerry is trying to portray SBVT as a front group for Bush—this is really a decent strategy from a political perspective. He needs to be careful on this, as the Dems have connections to MoveOn.org as well (a lawyer for the Dem party works for MoveOn.org etc). It could end up the pot calling the kettle black.

Seriously, we all know that coordination is going on between the 527’s and the campaigns. To not think so would be similar to believing the politicians’ votes are not influence even one iota by the money given to them by lobbying organizations. I mean, lets just call the damn spade a spade.

As far as stem cell research, there is a lot of information swirling around about the use of ADULT stem cells, and that these stem cells can also become whatever we want them to be. Of course, the idea that any stem cell can be turned into something else is only theory at this point.

The main argument against fetal stem cell use is that it would lead to ending lives in order to save other lives. If one believes that life begins at conception, then abortion is in fact ending a life. And from a moral/ethical standpoint, its hard to make an argument that ending one life will save another.

For those who dont believe that life begins at conception, there is no such moral dilemma. But it still makes sense to me to investigate the claims being made about the adult stem cells.

joebags,

I will go so far as to agree there is a connection between the campaigns and the ‘527’ groups, but coordination is a bit of a stretch.

I have been a card carrying member of MoveOn.org since it’s inception in the Clinton/Lewinsky Inquisition period. Funny, CNN recently called it the ‘controversial Liberal group’, and I’ve also heard ‘radical Liberal group’.

They are one sharp and savvy group of politicos, who have been active and independent long before they could ever be charged with collusion. I believe it is their successes and strong beliefs behind their bold injection into the current political fray, and not at the behest of the Kerry campaign.

On the other hand, the Swift Boat Vet connections to the GOP is all about money. That shadowy group of money men like Bob Perry, make Tom Delay’s antic seem mere panhandling.

But, if there was a stronger connection to the Bush camp, do you really believe Karl Rove would allow such a disaster of retractions, resignations, racism and nearly total discrediting of the SBV claims to continue?

Though I AM a Vietnam Vet I do not claim to speak for all. I could not support anyman that arranged to join the Guard, to train on an aircraft being fazed out only to avoid service in ‘Nam. His move to the Alabama Guard probably had a lot to do with Texas wishing him to train on aircraft actually used in the war. This is no slam to other members of the Guard as my Brother is a 10 year Veteran of it.
When you discuss how Veterans feel about Kerry’s comments after coming home don’t include me because I saw the same things he was commenting on and I too was spat on returning home.Sometimes men do thing differently than they would have done had they felt command support,much like we now find in Abu Ghruib. I currently belong to two Veteran’s groups, the VFW and AmVets and find very little support for Pres. Bush in either of these Groups.It’s to the point the few that support him find themselves on the defensive. Maybe it has to do with sending our young troops into harms way because of lies(the Cheney/Rumsfeld/ Wofilwitz crowd have advocated invading Iraq publicly since 1998 to keep the French from the oil there) or maybe the high unemployment rate among the Vets has some bearing on it. The new jobs being created not only lacking security and benefits but at drasticly lower rates of pay.
Or maybe it’s seeing all the American ideals we thought we were defending “crapped” on by a person that cannot put an unscripted sentence together without it ending up in the monologue of the nightly talk shows.
The Clinton years spoiled us with prosperity whiped out in less than one term and I don’t want to think about how much debt 4 more years would put on my grandchildern.