Quit your damned whining. If John Kerry claims his patriotism has been questioned one more time, I am going to lose it. And like the DNC pet that he is- Oliver laps it up every time.
The Republican comments and commercials about Kerry that are starting this week are not questioning his patriotism. They are questioning his honesty, his willingness to make the right choices, and they are highlighting his past votes. And that is fair game, and you guys need to quit whining.
I find it absurd that Terry McAuliffe can even make statements like this with a straight face:
“George Bush has sent Dick Cheney to kick off a misleading ad campaign attacking John Kerry’s commitments to defending America. And Dick Cheney is still able to stand by with a straight face and watch these attacks unfold,” McAuliffe said during a news conference.
“It’s time for Dick Cheney to call off the Republican attack dogs. The American people have better things to do with their time than listen to more misleading attacks from a man who has been misleading them from the day he took office,” McAuliffe said.
Hehe. Do I have to start putting up vile anti-Bush McAwful quotes, or can I trust you to google for yourself?
Did McAuliffe say this before or after he wiped his feet on the doormat with Bush’s face on it?
Anyway, we don’t question Kerrys patriotism, because you can’t question what wasn’t there in the first place
Gosh, John, you’re right; it’s all over. We should just vote for Nader, stop our bitchin’ and moanin’, and manfully handle this devastating insight into our candidate’s honesty, decision-making & voting record.
For myself, I refer to your own fine example set in the Bush/AWOL flap. I pledge, henceforth, never to read any blog that would engage in such scurrilous slander of such a heroic figure as Mr. Kerry. I mean he got his honorable discharge, didn’t he? What a dishonest hack you are, John (and your commenters are worse!) Hey, how was that? Just the right combination of huff & obliviousness, I’d say.
As for the Cheney assault, doesn’t the fact that he’s criticizing Kerry for opposing weapons systems he himself opposed at the time, and highlighting votes made during a period of time when there was general consensus to reduce defense in light of swollen budget deficits and the subsequent peace dividend, say something about this administration’s honesty? (I know better measures, of course, for the administration’s decision-making ability, and it’s fine record of success and competence.)
Oh, and Shark, I agree: that’s why I’ve never questioned your intelligence.
Umm- I defended Kerry numerous times qabout a number of things- the simple fact here is he got caught in a lie, and he should just move on.
I don;t think for any reason that you should give up- hell, I might offer a defense for you-
The reason he lied is he realizes now how offensive the behavior was.
I am just amazed that politicians of both parties continuously act as if they can get away with these lies.
And, btw- if I am such a dishonest hack, don’t let the door hit you in the ass.
Sorry, John, I was just engaging in a little mimicry (the sincerest form of flattery, after all). I actually rather enjoy your site, and truly regard you as a fine fellow. I was attacking your worldview and all that you hold dear, not you.
Let’s see: the record says, and everyone knows that John Kerry was a bonafide hero when he served in combat. But the GOP just can’t deal with a Democrat in fatigues, so we’re subject to all sorts of insinuations about how much of a patriot he really is. But we should just shut up about it, right? I guess that’s what the GOP lap dogs believe anyhow.
Real “patriots” don’t go to a foreign capital to meet with leaders of a govt. we’re at war with…..or attend a meeting of an organization that debates which Senators to kill to advance their anti-war agenda…..or vote against funding troops during wartime……or lie before the Senate in order to advance his Vietnam agenda…..or think the United Nations should trump American foreign policy initiatives….should I go on?
And the idea of Oliver calling anyone a “lap dog” is hysterical….
Real patriots don’t screw our soldiers over and send them to die simply because he believes the crap the vice president tells him to do.
Way to go, Shark!
The major media have recently documented numerous outright lies, and, at their best, disingenuous statements that Kerry has made over the past year. Perhaps the most damning were his responses and comments about a possible vote against the $87 billion appropriation request related to Iraq, an action he labeled as unworthy of a responsible US Senator and a dishonor to our troops in Iraq…a month later he voted against that very bill that he had assured the TV audience he would not do.
He’s not only unworthy of the office of President, he is a disgrace to his fellow Senators and to the many members of our military.
And when is Oliver going to revise his site’s logo to: “LIKE FLYPAPER TO STUPID?”
Wow, nice freakout John. Kinda sad to see you disolve into a sniveling little mess. “Quit whining! err.. only I can whine! Shutup or I am going to lose it!”
We’re gonna keep on defending our big-doofus candidate, you defend yours.
Give Oliver a big old hamburger and tell him to shut up.
“Real patriots don’t screw our soldiers over and send them to die simply because he believes the crap the vice president tells him to do”
And neither do real patriots in testimony and public statements screw our soldiers over and make their job much much harder by calling them “war criminals” and accusing them of atrocities and crimes….
This, of course, is part of the DNC attack machine targeting Cheney.
“Real patriots don’t screw our soldiers over and send them to die simply because he believes the crap the vice president tells him to do.”
Haven’t read your Woodward have you… “The crap” came from the head of the CIA calling it a slam dunk. And as we all know, just a few, what was it, weeks ago, the CIA were the people Bush should have listened to on these matters…
And again, we have a politician caught in a lie, not a politician whose patriotism is being questioned… the only people raising it as a question are the left.
“Let’s see: the record says, and everyone knows that John Kerry was a bonafide hero when he served in combat.”
Not according to one John Kerry, circa 1971. He made the blanket assertion that Vietnam vets were insane war criminals (and then slimed them in his book THE NEW SOLDIER before trying to have his own text censored later on!), Jolly Ollie. The irony here is that we are attacking KERRY’S OWN ATTACKS ON HIS WAR RECORD. God, you’re willfully stupid aren’t you, Mr. DNC Hack?
Nice of the GOP to tell the Democratic Party they shouldn’t “defend their candidate.”
Let me reciprocate:
“Stop pretending George Bush is a fiscal conservative. If a Democrat ran up the national debt the way the Bush League has, y’all would be foaming at the mouth and looking for tar, feathers, and rope.”
There, see? Both sides can play this game, although all it accomplishes is an increase in sales of antihypertensive medication.
John, buddy…it’s politics. Both sides in this campaign are going to throw as much mud, pig slop, and bat guano as they can get their hands on, and they’ll throw it with reckless abandon and glee. We more principled folk on either side of the aisle can bitch about it forever, and it ain’t gonna change. To paraphrase Kurt Vonnegut, we might as well be anti-glacier.
You’ll have to go with the official party line folks (elected Republicans or their staffers/minions) to find people who’ll defend Bush’s spending.
Mainstream bloggers have been on his case about it from the get-go.
Do let us know when folks do anything other than strap on the DNC kneepads whenever something new comes across the wire (last time I checked, Kerry’s conflicting statments were being redefined as “does the GOP really want to talk about Kerry’s heroic war medals?”
That’s slurpy kneepadding, at it’s best.
TAPPED, Political Aims, and Drum have all criticized Kerry in the past, and I suspect they’ll do so in the future. Kos, too, was not exactly kind to Kerry, especially when Howard Dean appeared to be a viable candidate. But now that Kerry is the presumptive nominee, I don’t expect any Democrats to supply ammunition to the enemy, so to speak.
Nor do I expect Republicans to do the same vis-a-vis George Bush. It’s politics as usual.
BTW… what’s up with the oral sex fixation? ;)
From E.J. Dionne:
“The decorated combat veteran was transformed from a hero to “Hanoi John,” in the phrase of Rep. Sam Johnson, a Texas Republican. Johnson deserves our gratitude for his seven years as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam. But his agenda last week had election-year politics stamped all over it. Johnson declared that in speaking out against the war, Kerry showed “his true colors, and they are not red, white and blue.” Kerry, Johnson said, was engaged in “nothing short of aiding and abetting the enemy.””
You’re right about the Republican commercials, but Johnson is clearly insulting Kerry’s patriotism. That was just last week.
Ah, I guess I was sorta grumpy when I posted that comment. Sorry, everyone. :)
I need some time away….
Ivor the Engine Driver
My, my, my, but you wingnuts hate it when you get a taste of your own medicine. Well, get used to it, cuz you ain’t seen nothin, yet. We liberals are taking back our country and by golly if we have to telling the truth about wingnut tactics to do it, so be it.
Ivor the Engine Driver
BTW — when is your boy going to actually cough up his military records? You know, the records that explain where he was and why he wasn’t on flight status.
*cough, cough* Here’s some of Bush’s military records for you, courtesy of FactCheck.org (if links don’t work, cut and paste the links into your browser):
Memo from retired Texas Air National Guard personnel officer saying records prove Bush “completed his military obligation in a satisfactory manner.”
Bush’s AF Reserve Personnel Record Card showing 56 total points for 12-month period ending May 26, 1973, exceeding the 50-point requirement for satisfactory service during the period, though barely.
Air Force Reserve “Statement of Points Earned” 1972-73
Air Force Reserve “Statement of Points Earned” 1973
Air Force Reserve summary payroll records for 1st Lt. George W. Bush, 1972-1973
Dental examination record showing Bush was at Alabama air base.
Also, check out the article from FactCheck.org dated 2/11/2004. Pay close attention to the section entitled “What the records show.”
FactCheck.org is a self-described non-partisan, non-profit, consumer advocate for voters and a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.
Now, Chris, you’re playing dirty again! What do you mean, actually quoting FACTS to a liberal??? Don’t you know their motto (which lame Oliver ‘jacked for this weak blog) – “Facts – Like poison to the liberal mind!”
Republicans take Kerry’s OWN WORDS, on issues which HE has been making a centerpiece of his campaign, and show the lies, contradictions, flips and flops, and it’s “dirty politics.”
The Democrats keep recycling the SAME TIRED, OLD TRASH – “Bush didn’t show up!!” “Bush LIED!” – long after even their OWN water carriers (Woodward isn’t exactly a Bush supporter) have proven them false, and that’s totally OK.
Fortunately, I think the average voter is MORE than smart enough to see through it.
Flagwaver, seriously. Go out, buy a drink, play softball with your neighbors, something. Because this political debate thing isn’t working out for you.
From the site Chris posted:
“That tends to support Bush’s statement that he did perform duty in Alabama, though it falls short of conclusive proof.”
“How could Bush be paid and credited for drills and still not be
I mean, seriously. Softball. A lot of guys have a really good time with that. Exercise, fresh air, time with the neighbors. Think about it.
You are, of course, right in that this isn’t a closed issue. I was merely responding to Ivor’s implication that Bush made NO military records available. It’s true these records don’t prove Bush’s story once and for all, but the evidence for its veracity is pretty strong. And I also agree with you that Bush probably did the absolute minimum required of him, as the 56 point total testifies. But the point is, he still did it.
As for falsification of these records, that falls under the realm of conspiracy theory. Until there is ample evidence at least equal in legitimacy to what I’ve presented here (i.e. put out by a non-partisan, non-profit public advocacy group) I will give the President the benefit of the doubt.
I agree with you on one other point. Softball is great fun! :)
The biggest unanswered question is, “why did Bush stop flying?” He had a moral obligation to fly, and he shirked it. Why?
[Trying to follow Chris’ advice – but it’s HARD!]
Be honest. NO amount of evidence would be sufficient for you to agree that W satisfied his obligations. The evidence isn’t conclusive? THe documents Bush released clearly show that he achieved (in some cases barely, but still achieved), the necessary number of “points” to fulfill his obligation.
The records could be falsified? Are you KIDDING?????? Indulge me in this mental exercise: Bush releases falsified records, showing he met the minimum standards to complete his service. A whistle-blower (pissed off DoD file clerk, paid informant, member of the media, you-name-it) gets hold of and releases it to the press. Fertlizer promptly hits ventilation equipment. Scandal runs for MONTHS. Kerry beats Bush by a landslide. You may not have much respect for W’s intellect, but you can’t believe Rove is even HALF that stupid.
As far as the “Bush lied” meme, do you contend that Woodward’s book didn’t put that to rest? ‘Cause the rest of us pretty much read his description of the meeting with Tenet and McLaughlin as conclusively showing that he (i) questioned them sharply on the strength of their case, and (ii) ultimately relied on their assurances that the case for WMD was a “slam dunk.”
Now, how does that NOT prove that these attacks against Bush haven’t been disproven???
Softball?? I’m more a skiing, mountain-biking, camping kinda guy. But you feel free to go play softball.
‘as conclusively showing that he (i) questioned them sharply on the strength of their case, and (ii) ultimately relied on their assurances that the case for WMD was a “slam dunk.”‘
Bush lied outright about Saddam’s capacity to deliver WMDs to Israel or the US. In addition, while not yet fully exposed, it is obvious that Bush’s “uranium from West Africa” line from the SOTU was, simply, a falsehood. He meant Nigeria, the Brits meant Nigeria, and once Blair loses the Prime Minister (through, likely, old age), that, too, will come out.
Here’s where we fundamentally disagree. I believe Bush acted on what he thought…at the time… was reliable information given to him by the intelligence community. The reliability of this information is what should be called into question. Given this, if he truly believed the information he was given was reliable, then what he did was his job as laid out by the Constitution, namely to protect the American citizens from all enemies both foreign and domestic.
You seem to believe that every time he opens his mouth, another lie comes rolling out. Listening to you, you’d think Bush hasn’t spoken a single word of truth since he took office, maybe in his entire life.
Now, I can’t say for sure whether my belief is true or not because I can’t look into the man’s soul. Again, I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt until the facts…the FACTS…prove otherwise. Nor can you say for sure whether your belief is true or not.
By the way, I’m also partial to mountain-biking and camping, but I’m more of a snowboarding guy than a skiing guy. I figure the fewer planks strapped to my feet, the better off I am.
I believe that Bush simply has no moral qualms about lying under any circumstances — that he has no credibility. Bush did not act based on the intelligence he received; Bush demanded that we find something on Iraq, and the OSP was created by like-minded people to solve that problem. It really is that simple.
Sorta like how Richard Mellon Scaife thought of Billy Zipperpants, eh?
Kimmitt, I don’t doubt the ability of ANY politician to stretch the truth beyond recognition – and that ability is practiced as widely on my side of the aisle as it is on yours. However, your sweeping statements about Bush reflect nothing more than a visceral dislike of the man. Hate him all you want, but if you expect us to take your arguments against him at face value, you’ll have to have something better than that. The intelligence that led him to say that WMD could be deployed within 45 minutes existed – W did NOT make it up.
Perhaps you have a layperson’s view of “intelligence.” I have friends in the business, and “intelligence” is NEVER a smoking gun, or a Rodney King videotape. It is rumor, inference, small clues, “chatter,” deductions from observed activities, etc. Even sigint is usually ambiguous – few people are stupid enough to say over a telephone line “Hey, Achmed, bring the truck over and load up this VX and take it to Saddam’s palace in Tikrit, okay?”
Now, if your premise is that George chose to believe the intelligence that supported his pre-existing desire to take Saddam out, I’d be inclined to agree with you. However, as Woodward’s book makes clear, it WAS NOT just George. Tenet, McLaughlin, Rice and others (including the Brits, and the National Security Council under Clinton) all believed Saddam had WMD.
By the way, so do I. Some of it may have just turned up in Jordan, if you’ve been following the papers.
I don’t expect you to agree with Bush (or me), just come up with something better than “he’s a liar because I don’t like him, and I don’t like him because he’s a liar.”
“Perhaps you have a layperson’s view of “intelligence.” I have friends in the business, and “intelligence” is NEVER a smoking gun, or a Rodney King videotape. It is rumor, inference, small clues, “chatter,” deductions from observed activities, etc. Even sigint is usually ambiguous – few people are stupid enough to say over a telephone line “Hey, Achmed, bring the truck over and load up this VX and take it to Saddam’s palace in Tikrit, okay?””
That is precisely why Bush’s pressure on the CIA and creation of the OSP is so very pernicious.