Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Getting to "Yes" - Kerry Hammered From Both Sides | Main | Really Bad Advice For Kerry »

August 11, 2004

Comments

Soul

Asserting that Americans didn't have troops in Cambodia is a lie in defiance of all accepted history.
Do you have any ethics? Any morals at all?. Saying mildly misleading things is one thing, but to outright lie for political points. This doesn't evne pass the laugh test. You ASSUME he's lying, because, you know, you he's a democrat.
When you know thousands of troops were in cambodia, which you must as it's established historical fact. You not only slander Johnk Kerry, you seek to dishonor everyone who fought or died in Cambodia. Theres not likely to be a piece of paper for any damn one of them.
Asserting this is about as dibuous as asserting George Bush flew to Abu Gharaib and raped some children. It's about at that level of ethics, and it's at that level of proof.

Josh Martin

Soul, why don't you get your talking points right? Kerry has repeatedly claimed that he was in Cambodia. Had he left it at that, we could debate whether or not he was. But he now claims that he was NEVER in Cambodia (just "near" it).

Was he lying then, or is he lying now?

Try and stick to the facts, rather than changing the subject.

Ron Hardin

The suspicion to put down is not that he was lying (politicians lie, big deal), but that he's completely unhinged. Some proof is needed that Kerry himself doesn't believe it.

soul_on_ice

Perhaps after the election we can update Godwin's law to include Abu Ghraib: when someone brings up Abu Ghraib in a (non-related) political argument, you know they have lost.

The risible indignation of the previous poster ("do you have any ethics?" etc.), and the fact that the indignation has nothing to do with the matter at hand, reveals the weak position of the Kerryites.

Either the charges made in "Unfit for Command" are true or not. Kerry has made his Vietnam service the central issue of his campaign. If he lied about his role there, he deserves to taste fire.

I'd like to see something more than silly responses, obfuscation, and ad hominem attacks from the Kerryites.

Charlie (Colorado)

Today's story on Fox & Friends is now that Kerry "corrected the record" -- I didn't know "revise and extend" went back that far -- to say he really wasn't in Cambodia on Christmas, but that he was in Cambodia. Sometime. But it wasn't Christmas, he's "corrected the record". But he was in Cambodia. Really.

bill j

Hey--you have to give Kerry some credit-at least, he turned around and fished a guy out of the water--the other Mass. senator didn't even do that.

Jay Duffy

God, you fright wingers sound desperate. Do you realize what you've opened up here? Brace yourself for some scurrilous ads about your President's cocaine abuse, various alcohol related incidents and arrests, the college girlfriend whose abortion he paid for...There's even a picture circulating today from the Yale college newspaper showing him viciously sucker punching a rugby player, completely authentic.

Well, so what, right? All's fair. He opened himself up for it by stealing the last election and then running again, so he has only himself to blame, right? I mean, I think it's important that an anti abortion president paid for his girlfriends abortion. I think it speaks to his fitness to lead on moral issues. I think it speaks to his fitness that he abused drugs, that he shirked military service and got his daddy to save his ass, rather than rely on any of his own accomplishments or talents. And what's really cool is these smear boaters have shown us all you have to do is put up scurrilous rumors 35 years old, and that's as good as gold when it comes to truth or lies.

If you think Kerry and the Democrats are just going to lay down and take this without fighting back, you're kidding yourselves. This President doesn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to fitness to lead. Most of America has already seen the proof that he can't lead, the rest will have to wade through the slime and trash that your boys apparently prefer to fight in.

Hank Fenster

Someone explain to me why it's up to Kerry to release after-action reports. Aren't they the property of the federal government and public records? Why can't one just walk into the National Archives (or wherever they're being kept) and ask for them?

Dave

Because Sandy Berger accidentally used them as suppositories? *shrug*

/don't flame me, not voting for either one

Paul Zrimsek

You know, Jay, that whole "you right-wingers are desperate" line wasn't all that impressive to begin with-- and repetition isn't improving it any.

Tim

Jay Duffy,

If 220 of George Bush's contemporaries effectively testify to all you accuse him of; AND George Bush were running solely on the basis of his self and oft-stated exemplary life regarding abortion, drugs and Texas Air National Guard service, you'd have a point.

But none of those things are true, so your whine is baseless.

As to fitness to lead America, it seems to me the record shows, at a minimum, 50 million free Afghans and Iraqis that your side just as soon see still enslaved by the Taliban and Saddam. Who the hell are YOU to speak to moral fitness?

wizard61

I swore I was a warrior exploring in Cambodia on Christmas day

I’m the Yes No Maybe Man, proved to be in Vietnam, but now I’ve lost my way

Cause I was in the legal war unlike I swore on the Senate floor about Christmas Day

I swore I was a warrior exploring in Cambodia on Christmas day...

Ben

The trouble, as noted elsewhere, is that Bush admits to be no choir boy in his early days. So you come up with stories of cocain abuse. Big deal. Anything before he got his life together is still part of a consistent story.

Kerry, by contrast, has offered nothing except his months in Vietnam. Not his post war anti-Vietnam protests and testimonies in front of congress, not his career in the Senate, nor even his earlier political jobs in Ma.

Kerry does not have a consistent story. First he was a peacenik, a veteran who saw the horrors, even participated in those horrors, and who protested a wrong war. Now he is claiming to have been defending this country while in Vietnam. Which goes completely contrary to the left's narrative of that war, and makes his later actions, well, treason.

I am sure the Dems will smear Bush all they can, their bigotry has unhinged them. Will it work with the electorate is the real question. We know what Bush has done the last 4 years he has had this job. And that is what Bush is running on, and why in his case, the events of 20 or 30 years ago don't matter. Kerry, by contrast, is running almost exclusively on his actions 30 years ago, which is why they are getting the treatment they are.

Besides, we never expected you guys to play nice anyway. You never have before.

Bruce Rheinstein

Jay, you're blathering.

The question at hand is whether an experience Kerry has in recent years claimed had a great impact on him is, in fact, an invention -- you know, like his Irish heritage was.

And we've heard the discredited Move-On "stolen election" sludge before. It's time to move on.

Can't you guys come up with something new?

Earl T

Jay,

We're shakin' in our boots like a Kerry--Oops! I meant French soldier, just waitin' fer the wicked response! As soon as you get the DNC talking points memo faxed over, let us know!

aileron

Jay,

Your troops made all those baseless claims and more in 2000. The last two years have been a nonstop assault on Mr. Bush including claims that he is a liar, a traitor, a rascist, a nazi and a murderer.

Try addressing the merits of the apparent falsehoods Mr. Kerry has made on more that one occasion in regard to being in Cambodia. Is there an explanation based in fact for Mr. Kerry claiming he was in Cambodia in December of 1968? Was he on a secret mission that nobody knew about? Was he just embellishing to make a political point? Why not come clean on this?

Buddy Larsen

I sympathize with Jay Duffy. As he points out, the Democrats now feel that their campaign needs to sink even lower, and the problem is, their campaign began as low as it could go, and now it's simply plastered to the bottom. Time to dust off the Hitler ads! Jay, your problem started with Howard Dean. Next time somebody starts throwing nonsense at you, before you get overstimulated, take a moment and think about how numerous are the actual adults in this country. There's millions of them, trust me. When you get to the co-op this morning, you ought to pass that
along to the rest of the freshmen.

Dave in Texas

I took my swift boat sailing in
Cambodia,
Cambodia,
I took my swift boat sailing in,
On Christmas Day in the morn-ing!

capt joe

Oh my god Duffster, listen to yourself. I may have to be vacinated for rabies jsut reading your post. ;)

Every completely wild ass rumor. You forget the ones about the trifecta, and the Illuminati

Cocaine abuse? The sole source of that was in a now completely discredited book. It has NO validity.

With regards to the supposed punch picture. Read my analysis here in the comments

http://www.balloon-juice.com/archives/004222.html

With regards tothe election "stealing", read this

http://www.davekopel.org/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm#2000_Election_Night

After posting all those scurrilous rumors, I must say that you have a tremendous amount of gall to post, "the rest will have to wade through the slime and trash that your boys apparently prefer to fight in".

Pot, meet black hole

Jay Duffy

So paying for a girlfriend's abortion in 1972 when abortion was illegal in the US...that's cool with you guys. Wonder how the Evangelistas will feel about that. Something tells me this won't sit quite so easily with them. And brace yourselves, because it's next.

The thing you frighties aren't admitting is this: You know Bush is unfit to lead. You know in fact that he doesn't lead, but is led by the men behind him, who have the actual credentials, training and education to do what Georgie most certainly could not.

You know this. But you don't care. Because you approve of his policies and want to see them enacted. So you swallow the fact that the guy is a talentless, mediocre brat of an entitled family.

It's no different for the Democrats. Kerry isn't perfect, but he will promote the policies we believe are best for America. We hate what Bush's neo cons have done to our country. We fear for the future. We will do whatever it takes, like you guys will, to try and win the election. So far, we're looking good, damn good in fact. Bush has done a lot of damage to a lot of poor and middle class people in this country and the time has come to face his constituents. On HIS record, not John Kerry's.

syn

Personally, I get the sense that Kerry was the "Michael Moore" of Vietnam, perpetuator of fabricated lies in order in influence public opinion. Kerry even went so far as to 'film' (cut and paste) his Vietnam experiences.

Kerry spent the past two decades claiming his time in Cambodia Christmas 1968 was 'seared....seared' in his memory then, when disputed, he changed his story to 'NEAR Cambodia'

To me, this sounds a little like Michael Moore proclaiming his 'documentaries' are op-ed pieces.

acebb

"Do you realize what you've opened up here? Brace yourself for some scurrilous ads about your President's cocaine abuse, various alcohol related incidents and arrests, the college girlfriend whose abortion he paid for"


ads?
like are they going to have the girl in them?

man, are you off the deep end.

Bill

John Kerry: He fought for this country, before he fought against it...

All I need to know.

Jerseylaw

Hard to get away from that filmed-reenactment point. Natch his interviewers don't ask him about it. But I imagine he thought he was the Audie Murphy of the Vietnam War and wanted to make sure he got his film done before the premature demise.

acebb

"So paying for a girlfriend's abortion in 1972 when abortion was illegal in the US...that's cool with you guys"

-your proof of this is??

TOT

You whine about him punching someone in a rugby match. Dude, you have obviously never played the game if you think that is out of the norm in a college / school / friendly game

Bruce Hayden

Hank - at least some of the stuff that Bush has released and Kerry hasn't is because only the person affected can authorize such, and apparently Kerry has been somewhat circumspect about it. This is similar to some extent to the IRS, where you can't do FOIA to get tax records for indivuals - rather only they can get them, and Kerry's wife, the source of the money that has bailed out his political career twice now, has refused to release her tax returns.

The problem as I see it for Kerry right now is that he is still being defined in the public mind. Many see him as a straddler and a waffler. He was for the war in Iraq before he was against it before he would have done just like Bush did, only better. Others see this as nuance. I am betting that straddling and waffling wins, as it is easier to understand - but we will see by November.

Al Gore was type cast as being an exagerator, like when he supposedly claimed to have invented the Internet, etc. His actual statements were actually more accurate. But this stuck with him, and maybe helped him lose the election.

I think that Kerry is an exagerator too, only maybe worse. Personally, it doesn't bother me that much, as my mother was one too. But there is a fine line between exageration and lying, and I think that there are things that Kerry has said, such as being in Cambodia on Christmas, 1968, or that he had witnessed and participated in multiple attrocities in Vietnam, etc., that could end up helping define him as a lier, even though he is really an exagerator.

To see the difference, look to Clinton. He stated under oath that he had not had a sexual affair with that woman, then was found by a federal court to have perjured himself by saying that. This was not an exageration. This was a lie.

So, I think that if I were running Kerry's campaign, I would push that Cambodia was exageration or puffing to make a point. Yes, Kerry wasn't there that night, but was fairly close, and anyway, it was to make a point (the testimony I saw in the Congressional Record seemed to be about Nicuragua / El Salvador). Flat denying that he wasn't there then won't work, because he wasn't, and denying that he didn't say that won't work because he did - in the Congressional Record.

Richard Cook

It seems that Kerry has made the choice to run almost only on the fact he was in Vietnam for four months. Why can't he give us some specifics about current events and issues? Its that simple. Can it be that he really has nothing to offer? Its time for Kerry to get his discharge and rotate out of 'nam.

Tim

JohnKerry, American Hero.

Really? Why would any active duty officer go back and restage his combat for film? What kind of person would do that? It's war - people are dying - and Kerry goes back to recreate his combat experiences. Did he have NOTHING better to do? This suggests something important about Kerry's character, and it is not good. Along the lines of a Nixon and Clinton. Finally, why won't Kerry release all of his military records? He can clear up this confusion post-haste by simply doing that.

Al Maviva

Hey, Duffmeister,

So Bush punched somebody in a rugby game, huh?

In my experience, roughly 20 years playing the game, that would make him an A-side player, at least if the punch was well deserved.

Looking at the photo, it's not clear to me that it was a punch - it looks to me like the ball carrier juked and cut back, and Bush tried to get a tackle on the man, and just wound up in a goofy, off-balance position. Fact is, very few people jump into the air to try and punch someone. It's really, really hard to lay a good hit if your feet aren't planted. That's why there are no dive-tackle punches in boxing.

But then, I guess if we are debating the qualities of Bush's rugby game to determine if he is fit for the presidency, you have already won the argument over whether Kerry has steadfastly lied about being present in Cambodia, his own supposedly superhuman heroism, etc. etc.

You know, in a way, I kinda hope you morons take over the country for a few years. Nothing is more satisfying to mean-spirited folk like me than watching the horrible return of the gods of the copybook headings. Of course, as New York and LA burn, I'm sure you can chalk that up to Bush being offside at a scrum in '68...

Jay Duffy

acebb, Proof? What proof? I thought all you needed was a sworn affidavit from a doctor who "remembers" it 35 years after the fact. That's good enough here in our great land, isn't it, to besmirch a man's character and attempt to destroy his career? Maybe he's even a veteran, which means no one's allowed to question his veracity.

Seriously, I don't know what proof they have. I just know it's coming out soon. The woman now lives in a gated penthouse in Florida, having previously been employed only as a waitress in Texas all her life. Seems when the rumors emerged during the last election, she magically became very rich and very incommunicado, and was transported to the Land of Jeb. But supposedly they've uncovered the evidence. Sworn affidavits no doubt. A notary stamp only costs about $1.50.

Brainster

Tom, I put up a big warning at KH and amended my post on the Hat Story. You're 100% correct; we can't let Kerry divert us into a side issue that he may be able to finesse and thereby elude answering the Christmas Story.

Jim Durbin

Christmas does come earlier every year, doesn;t it?

I took my Swift Boat sailing in... It will be a travesty if this is not recorded and sent out as a Kerry ad over the internet.

Frank IBC

"Soul":

"Asserting that Americans didn't have troops in Cambodia is a lie in defiance of all accepted history.".

Your Straw Man ("Person of Straw") is pathetic. No one said there were "no troops, ever" in Cambodia. But the fact that you don't want to face is that there were no troops in Cambodia in December 1968, WHEN KERRY CLAIMED TO BE THERE.

Jay Duffy -

"Scurillous rumors 35 years old"

Sorry, it's not a rumor, and it's not 35 years old - Kerry LIED to Congress in 1986. It's in the Congressional Record.

"shirked military service"

Sorry, serving in the National Guard IS "military service". I'd like to see you say that to a roomful of National Guard troops. I'm surprised you didn't say "Bush was AWOL", too.

"Bush has done a lot of damage to a lot of poor and middle class people"

What "damage", exactly? The economy's doing pretty good right now.

"Kerry isn't perfect, but he will promote the policies we believe are best for America"

Unfortunately, no one actually knows what "Kerry's policies" are, since he changes his positions every 6 months, and usually doesn't bother to show up to vote in the Senate at all.

Kerry Is Unelectable

You know what's really sad? The abortion rumor was started by Moby. It's not true, never has been, and there's tape of Moby suggesting it in an interview with the clear indication he just pulled it off the top of his head. Later the pros came through and filled in some details like names and dates, but the whole thing is a fabrication and a widely discredited one. What has happened to the Democratic Party? Who are these lunatics filling out the ranks? Why do they think it's they who are using John Kerry and not the other way around? Do these people think Howard Dean is ever going to be confirmed for a cabinet post? Or Nader? Do they understand advice and consent? Don't they know both their candidates have backed the administration on Iraq and the Pat. Act because it would be political suicide if they didn't? Don't they see what that says about the electorate at large? These people are Nucking Futs.

capt joe@eat.com

abortion? I thought you guys were pro choice. another flip flop I guess

ed

Hmmm.

"So paying for a girlfriend's abortion in 1972 when abortion was illegal in the US...that's cool with you guys. "

Ok this is wierd. I thought you liberals were in favor of abortion?

Just trying to keep up with you Kerryites is starting to give me political whiplash. Man he must be your idol.

Jay Duffy

You know what's really sad about this campaign. Whoever wins will begin their term crippled. Bush already couldn't get anything through Congress the last year, and they will be all the more hostile if he gets reelected. Plus the reports alleging White House collusion in lying us into war will be released after the election. A good half of the country, equal citizens all, loathes Bush with the fire of a thousand burning suns and will want to pursue him with every means necessary. His foreign and domestic policy will be crippled and rebelled against on every front.

And the fright wing will I assume do the same if Kerry gets elected. Although, with all their guns and assault weapons, they might actually pull a Civil War on us, who knows?

Our country has really been damaged. How much different it would have been if Bush had seen he did not have the mandate to push through a hard core right wing agenda and had been truthful with the American people before sending the underprivileged youth of our country off to die.

BTW, how many of you even know any kids over there? I know three - two twenty year olds and one a 30yr old father of two. All feel betrayed by Bush. None will reenlist. That's if they ever get a chance to come home.

Frank IBC

The Dems are now for the Vietnam War except when it was waged by the Nixon administraton, and now they're saying real abortions are good, but imaginary Republican abortions are bad.

Par for the course...

Jay Duffy -

"I don't know what proof they have. I just know it's coming out soon. The woman now lives in a gated penthouse... having previously been employed only as a waitress in Texas all her life. Seems when the rumors emerged during the last election, she magically became very rich and very incommunicado... But supposedly they've uncovered the evidence. Sworn affidavits no doubt. A notary stamp only costs about $1.50."

Yes, and I heard from a friend who heard it from a friend about this poor girl who had this hot date. She wanted to get an extra-deep tan, so she went to several tanning salons in one afternoon. A few days later, she noticed a funny smell coming from her body. She went to the doctor, who told her that all the tanning rays had microwaved her internal organs, and that she only had a few days to live. Mus' be true...

Jay Duffy

I'm not bothered by Bush paying for an illegal abortion. I think abortion should be legal. The salient point is that Bush DOESN'T. And neither do his Evangelista base. Kinda looks like Bush is flip flopping for personal convenience, wouldn't ya say?

Frank IBC

Duffy -

"Bush already couldn't get anything through Congress the last year...A good half of the country, equal citizens all, loathes Bush with the fire of a thousand burning suns..."

I guess that explains why the Republicans re-captured the Senate in 2002, and increased their majority in the House?

Reid

So, the testimony of 250 Swift Boat Veterans, in Jay's world, is equally as credible as... Larry Flynt.

Something tells me Jay has the complete Oliver Stone oeuvre on DVD.

Jay Duffy

True,but they couldn't pass any legislation. The Democrats will fight Bush tooth and nail if he's reelected. Plus the Dems look in position to retake the Senate, and will almost certainly increase their size in the House. It will be harder for Bush, not impossible, just a lot harder.

No more cake walks starting wars and handing our environment and health care over to corporations. That ship has sailed.

Plus you can expect investigations, calls for resignation and even impeachment. Powell will resign, maybe other moderates, and will probably have quite a bit to say. (Not even attending the convention, did you notice?) DeLay is almost certain to be indicted, along with other Repugs. Cheney will come under a lot more fire when the rest of the Iraq report comes out in December. Dems and Repugs already can't be in the same room. It will be outright warfare.

Good job, wouldn't you say, this uniter has done on our country? Many,many Americans, who have as much right to their opinions as you do, loathe and despise this man. That won't change if he manages to squeak out a win.

Frank IBC

Jay Duffy -

Sure, post your urban legend for the thousandth time. Posting it another thousand times won't make it any truer. As opposed to Kerry's lies, which are IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.

"The salient point is that Bush DOESN'T...think abortion should be legal."

Sorry, but Bush has not made any attempt to outlaw abortion, nor will he ever, nor has he even given the slightest hint that he will do so.

(BTW, Ronald Reagan signed the bill that decriminalized abortion in California, 40 years ago.)

JImbo

"So, I think that if I were running Kerry's campaign, I would push that Cambodia was exageration or puffing to make a point. Yes, Kerry wasn't there that night, but was fairly close, and anyway, it was to make a point (the testimony I saw in the Congressional Record seemed to be about Nicuragua / El Salvador)."

I know you're not actually endorsing this point of view, but if this is the tack they take, I think it's a mistake. After all, the fact that the lie was used to make a point about Central America is what makes it so reprehensible. Kerry, as I understand, was trying to point out that American support of democracy in Cent Amer was equivalent to his supposedly illegal presence in Cambodia. Except that it never happened. And he knew it never happened. That seems like a really crappy way to debate something.

Frank IBC

Jay Duffy -

"The Dems look in position to retake the Senate, and will almost certainly increase their size in the House."

That's what your crowd said in 2002.

"No more cake walks starting wars..."

So you're saying we should wait for the bad guys to attack us next time?

"handing... health care over to corporations."

Not sure what you're trying to say here. Health care has been "handed over to corporations", ever since the very first employer-sponsored insurance policy was written. Do you want to abolish health insurance? Do you want to turn it all over to the government, with its famous reputation for efficiency, cost control, responsiveness, and customer service?

"Powell will resign, maybe other moderates..."

Faster, please...

"Many,many Americans, who have as much right to their opinions as you do, loathe and despise this man."

So far, your evidence of this has been limited to anecdotes.

Reid

"The thing you frighties aren't admitting is this: You know Bush is unfit to lead. You know in fact that he doesn't lead, but is led by the men behind him, who have the actual credentials, training and education to do what Georgie most certainly could not."

For the record Jay, this is completely false, at least as far as this Bush supporter is concerned. I believe that President Bush is a fine and decent man. I believe he is a highly intelligent man who, though he may not be the most articulate public speaker, is a keen reader of men's hearts, a man who understands the wider context of the current struggle we are in and, who does not waver or take his eyes from the prize to mollify the shallow and fickle, emotionally driven segment of the population, of which you appear to be a proud member.

That's leadership my boy, not holding your wetted finger aloft and changing your opinions to align with the prevailing winds, like John Kerry. One day, when you are older and the Middle East has become a fully integrated partner in the world community, I hope you will take a moment to thank George W. Bush, and muse upon your misguided youth (as do we most of us).

Jay Duffy

That's interesting Frank IBC, since I know a few Catholics, including my MOM, who despise Bush, but plan to vote for him on the basis of his opposition to abortion alone.

I'll let them know.

Chris

And the Dems wouldn't oppose the Reps if there was a different Rep running for President? Whatever you're smoking Jay...it must be good. Hope your Novemeber 3rd morning will be as good as mine...somehow I doubt it.

Uray Doosh

Duffy,

The Bush abortion story is as bogus as the Kerry rape story. And again, a 527 group brought this whole issue up. Bush distanced himself immediately, unlike Kerry who take a "wait and see" position on the Bush-National Guard nonsense. And might I remind you that Terry McAwful was the one *publically* calling Bush a deserter? Duffy, you're a douche. That is all.

Frank IBC

Let's see if I follow this -

1) Duffy thinks abortion is good.

2) Duffy thinks Bush is bad because Moby claims he was involved in an abortion.

3) Duffy claims Bush is against all abortions and wants to ban them. Duffy thinks this is bad.

4) Duffy's says his Mom "despise[s] Bush, but plan to vote for him on the basis of his opposition to abortion alone." He claims 2 or 3 other Catholics he knows, feel the same way.

5) Duffy thinks it is good that his mom is able to keep her despising of Bush separate from her opposition to abortion.

Jay Duffy

I've asked you this before, Reid. You didn't answer. Do you believe Bush has a mandate to sacrifice our children and our national treasure to nation build in the Mideast, even if this is not the will of the American people? What extent do you believe he is permitted under our Constitution to subvert the instruments of democracy to his will? Do you favor a new kind of Imperial Dictatorship for our country?

I assume most of you live in red states where Bush is worshipped. But surely you can understand, just looking at a poll or two, that you do not represent the whole of the American people? Yes, a great many good Americans LOATHE Bush, and are terrified by the thought of neo cons like Reid who want to flush all moderation, checks, balances and rational debate out of our government in the pursuit of world domination.

This is exactly what I mean when I say Democrats represent the ideals of our founding fathers, great geniuses who understood that the decisions of a nation could never be let rest solely in the hands of one man, but that rationality was obtained through toleration of multiple points of view.

Buddy Larsen

Go ahead, Jay, tell us about your mom. Don't be afraid, we want to help you. First, though, does she know you're at her computer?

Frank IBC

Duffy -

Just curious, what was your opinion on the War in the Former Yugoslavia?

huud'huu guru

Jay Duffy,
am enjoying reading your point of view; it's truly a window into the Deaniac/fringe's mindset. But I'm bothered by your pedantic and idiotic invocation of "frighties" and "Repug's"; are you really so insecure or immature in your outlook that you either (a) need these childishly derogatory nicknames to make yourself feel better, or (b) lack the confidence in your own arguments to make them without resorting to blanket ad hominem attacks of, as you might say, "50% of Americans who, like you, have a right to their opinions"?

Shoot yourself in the foot, why don't you?

But I was really intrigued by your comments about how Bush shouldn't have governed like he had a mandate (unlike Clinton in '93, who had less votes and a lower percentage of the electorate (43% was it?) but still gave the gusto for the National Healthcare initiative). In particular, you state that Bush governed and implemented a "hard rightwing agenda" or something to that effect. Please, provide examples of this "hard right" governance in action - I think you're imagining things. From my perch, I see an Eisenhoweresque big spender ("the era of big government is back/ long live big government conservatism") who favored and passed gargantuan increases in federal spending on health care (Medicare), education, and a host of other non-defense "priorities" and doesn't really care about/would rather not get into the unpleasantness of the abortion debate, etc.

Further to the above, you must be against Clinton's record, too, since his administration curtailed welfare spending, granted massive corporate/investment tax cuts, declared the "regime change" policy for Iraq to be official US policy, initiated the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the military, signed with overwhelming bipartisan support the "Defense of Marriage Act", and a bunch of other things that constitute governance and make Bush's term look too much like continuity to make looking at Clinton in that light comfortable for many Bush haters who loved Clinton.

But then again, at least Clinton didn't lie, right?

RandMan

All politicians have political enemies as people have opposing views over a wide range of topics. Kerry has a different type of enemy of his own making.

The problem with candidate Kerry is that his anti-war slanders in the 1970's made him the enemy of many vets and others of that era. They are not his enemies because they oppose his positions, then or now. They are his enemies because they believed he lied about Viet Nam and them. They see him as a scoundrel and political opportunist. This is something many vets just can't "get over".

IMO, it was inevitable that Kerry's Viet Nam years would come in to play if he became the nominee. He actions were just too controversial, even 34 years later, for those who feel slandered by Kerry. While the wounds of that era are healed for many, nominating a guy that many believe inflicted the wounds (or made them worse than need be) re-opens those wounds.

It's the Dems fault for nominating a guy with this type of baggage. If they would ever come out of their echo chamber, they might of seen this before hitching their wagon to the Kerry horse.

Frank IBC

Let's see...

John Kerry voted FOR

1) Iraq War
2) Patriot Act
3) Defense of Marriage Act

These frightwingers are out of control...

Bob O

Jay Duffy,

Aside from your time worn arguments, when is your man, Kerry, going to release HIS military records?

jj

In any case, Jay, abortion wasn't 'illegal in the US' in 1972. It was legal in some places, illegal in others. Where did this abortion take place? And what, really, is the relevence of it, anyway? If he did something he now regrets when he was young, so what? Did he lie about it in the congressional record 15 years later?

rocat

Let me get this straight...
Bush managed to win votes when he was just a cheerleader, but now he's toast because he's a tough rugby player?
Not to mention vanquishing both the Taliban and Saddam.
Yo, Duff!
do the words: Bring. It. On. mean anything to you anymore?

Jay Duffy

My mom does vote straight line Catholic, against her own instincts. She's a walking advertisement for the sanity of separating church and state.

My father is a different case. Always voted Republican, including Bush in 2000. But won't this year because of the war. He feels deceived.

That's the reason for my question to Reid, which is very legitimate (despite being in this hairpulling contest) and which I'd love to have him answer. I actually had not believed others who explained to me that neo cons seek a policy of endless war, which is what the Mideast conflict will be for us. This endless war, and the fear it engenders, gives them cover to assume absolute power. Today I read an AP article estimating that Al Queda has quadrupled in size in just the past year. We are talking about fighting an avalanche with a snowblower.

Reid, do you believe the American people have the will to fight a war, "converting" the primitive Arabs to our way of life? Do we even have the means to do it? I'm asking you again, if the American people oppose this policy en masse, which they will the minute you start drafting their children, how will the neo cons be able to advance it?

Pouncer

"So, I think that if I were running Kerry's campaign, I would push that Cambodia was exageration or puffing to make a point. "

Were I running Kerry's campaign, I'd push home the notion that the same point is in question today -- should a president be allowed to run the military across national borders (say, from Afghanistan into Tajikistan , or from Iraq into Iran or Syria) without approval from Congress, and -- if doing so -- lying about it to Congress and the voters?

Were I Kerry, I'd go on the offensive and claim that Shrub was doing exactly that -- conducting an undeclared war inside the sovereign borders of neutral and innocent countries, escalating the limited war as approved into a bloody mess that will engage us for decades and decimate a generation.

Such a charge might not be true -- but it would be (a) consistant with Kerry's deeply held beliefs, (b) plausible among his constituency, (c) a valid concern even for those who SUPPORT the current war, and (d) a way to take the heat off his own lies.

Bob O

Jay,

Hmm. Your friends not going to re-up huh? That's a surprise. Personally, the man that introduced my future wife to me just came back from the ME. He's doing fine thank you. Another friend was called out of civilian life to go to Afghanistan for a year. He's delayed retirement to stay on to serve his country when needed. BTW what's your veteran status?

BarCodeKing

Jay Duffy, you need to up your Thorazine dosage, buddy.

Pouncer

The Dallas Morning News had a story yesterday about three reservists who were so upset that their Texas-based reserve unit was NOT going to return to Iraq, that they moved to Oklahoma, and transferred their enlistments to an Oklahoma Guard unit that WAS deploying.

Of course, you know, everybody is Texas is plumb crazy...

Frank IBC

Duffy -

"Do you believe Bush has a mandate to sacrifice our children and our national treasure to nation build in the Mideast"

Since this is such an incredibly leading/loaded question, I'm going to re-format it -

"Do you believe Bush has the obligation to risk the deaths of hundreds of our citizens in war, to replace those governments which are directly threatening to the interests of the United States and all the citizens therein, in order that thousands if not millions of citizens will be saved in the long run by doing so?

My answer? HELL YES!!!

paul

One possible way for Kerry to flip flop on Christmas in Cambodia could be simple--his "memory failed him." Notice how his speeches began with "I remember..." He doesn't seem to have stated "I was in Cambodia..."

Seems like he used that as a rhetorical technique that functions as a legalistic way out. As in, Kerry's memory may have been clouded in the fog of, um, speech making on the Senate floor. Even a "seared memory" can be foggy.

Then make it a soundbite: "I remember spending Christmas in Cambodia before I remembered spending Christmas 50 miles from Cambodia."

TM

Re the abortion "story", one wonders how the Religious Right might view that - it would be perfectly possible view it as a story of Christ's forgiveness and redemption, since Bush "came to Jesus" at 40.

Whichis a seriously as I can take Duffy's droolings.

Now, off-topic, but I have one idele minute here - what did Roberto Duran say when he got to Najaf? No mosque.

Oh, we're having fun now - someone tell me what the Swift vets are so angry about - they are pissed at the way Kerry got his medals, they are pissed at the way he threw them away - can't they make up their minds?

Is anybody here from Jersey...

Bob O

Jay Duffy,

Jay?...

Jay?...

(crickets)

Frank IBC

"My father is a different case. Always voted Republican, including Bush in 2000. But won't this year because of the war. He feels deceived."

Hello, Moby...

Well hello, Moby...

Jay Duffy

So, Frank, I assume you're volunteering to be one of the hundreds of citizens killed? As a matter of fact, why aren't ALL of you guys in Iraq right now?????

BarCodeKing, Thorazine sounds pretty grim. Rush knows the good drugs, you should ask him. I think him and Ozzy's kids are both hooked on the same stuff.

Fright Wing Conspirator

Jay Duffy -

"The Democrats will fight Bush tooth and nail if he's reelected."


and then


"Good job, wouldn't you say, this uniter has done on our country?"


He can only go so far in tempering the hatred from the left. Sorry Jay, all of the rantings about Bush - cocaine, alcohol, abortion, etc... have been worn down to nothing. The left has no ammunition in their stockpile anymore.

Reid

Jay - At the risk of sounding tautological, the President is the president, until he no longer is. I think that should answer your question.

Frank IBC

Jay Duffy -

"My mom does vote straight line Catholic, against her own instincts."

Well, her instinct is to "vote straight line Catholic", so how is she voting "against her own instincts"?

"This endless war..."

A year and a half in Iraq, coming up on three years in Afghanistan. Hardly "endless". By contrast, the Vietnam War, which the Democrats escalated and botched, lasted 20 years, and was ended by that warmongering Republican fascist, Richard Nixon.

"the fear it engenders, gives them cover to assume absolute power."

Add yet another fallacy to Jay Duffy's long list - this one is "wishful thinking". Showing that something is theoretically possible is not the same as proving that it is actually happening in the real world.

"Today I read an AP article estimating that Al Queda has quadrupled in size in just the past year..."

I don't suppose you'd have a link to said article, do you?

{crickets}

"fight a war, 'converting' the primitive Arabs to our way of life?"

Once again, you've totally distorted the reason for going to war. The objective is to remove governments which are a clear and present danger to the United States and all its citizens. Also I find it interesting that you did not put the word "primitive" in quotes, and also that you feel that instituting democracy is somehow an imposition to those who have suffered so grieviously under tyrants.

AL from MI

Jay:

A guy from my class in high school didn't go to college. He signed up for the Marines instead. He was one of the first--first--to go into Iraq. He just came home, and you know, he was damn proud to have gone. From what I remember he was rather neutral, not necessarily a "fright winger." He doesn't feel deceived. I guess that's an odd concept, huh? That our current President has more support than you might think?

Dave in Texas

We dropped a CIA spook at
Cambodia,
Cambodia,
he gave me this little moldy hat
on Christmas Day in the morn-ing!

huu'dhuu guru

Mr. Duffy,

"if the American people oppose this policy en masse, which they will the minute you start drafting their children, how will the neo cons be able to advance it?"

They'd probably rip a page or two out of the playbook of those idyllic peace-mongering friendship-inspiring vitriol-free Democrats from the last "endless war", namely, the Cold War against the Soviets, which was started by, and heated up in each major instance by Democrats (Korea, Viet Nam).

So much for endless wars, eh?

Using the Soviet/cold war experience as a guide, do you believe that, even if it takes 50 years to eradicate militant politico-Islamic fascism in order to bring comparable results to those achieved after the fall of the USSR empire, that it wouldn't be worth doing?

How many millions of people were liberated from Soviet tyranny at the end of the 80's/beginning of the 90's and given a choice in their destinies? How many have already been liberated from this new "-ism" we're fighting against? Tens of millions, by every count.

I guess when "Shrub" (there you go again) says "We're making progress", he's lying, right?

blah

Not too long ago the Democrats were railing Bush on his own military days with his questionable absence from actual duty. The Pentagon first declared that a portion of Bush's record was missing, then reversed its position. Negative campaigns in many cases do work, and all of this did affect Bush's ratings.

I guess the current buzz/doubts about Kerry's service is pay back from the frustrated Right. Personally I think Vietnam service is one of the themes of Kerry's campaign but not the most crucial. The academics from the right think that proving Kerry's own exaggeration in Vietnam will deal devastating blows to Kerry's campaign. The left made the same mistakes when they were whining about Bush's military record, thinking that people would actually care about the Candidates' military service. Look, we all know that politicians exaggerate and lie. We all know that Kerry flip flops. This additional "discovery" might reinforce the die hard right's hatred for Kerry, but it won't do much for center.

Most polls show that Americans care the most about the economy and security. Bush being the incumbent has a record which people can relate to. Throughout the campaign Kerry pretty much allowed Bush to destroy himself with all of this talk about the economy, security, and progress in Iraq. So far Kerry has laid out the foundations for some of his plans (On economy repeal tax-cuts for the top 2% while increase tax-cuts for small businesses. On fighting terrorism use education and captialism to boost the influence of Arab moderates, and to involve our allies more). I think how people receive Kerry's plans, especially during the national debates, will make or break Kerry.

Patrick R. Sullivan

According to instapundit, Kerry told the Boston Globe:

"On more than one occasion, I, like Martin Sheen in 'Apocalypse Now,' took my patrol boat into Cambodia"

That precedes the, Christmas in Cambodia because of the bastard Nixon, tale. Remember when Reagan used to get criticized for not being able to tell the difference between real life and the movies?

Dan

Well, the Kerry spin machine has finally coughed up the 'official' response: Kerry might have confused Christmas eve with another mission into Cambodia. It's true that he wasn't in Cambodia on Christmas eve, but the story itself is true because he was in Cambodia on other occasions - he just can't remember the dates.

You see the one thing this has going for it - it's unfalsifiable. As long as he sticks to, "It was a secret mission, and I can't remember the date", then anyone who says he wasn't there can be told, "No, not while YOU were there. It must have been another mission. I just can't remember."

The story is so full of holes you could use it to strain Kraft Dinner. But understand that the level of plausibility Kerry has to aim for is simply to answer the questions of liberal media bosss everywhere: "Can we go with that?" If the answer is yes, then they'll bury it as being an unknowable question and shame on anyone who dares question an honest-to-god hero. That'll give them what they need to stonewall their end, and in the meantime the Kerry slime machine will keep hitting the vets with accusations until the media stories all turn into sordid tales of just how horrible the people making these accusations are.

Frank IBC

"Not too long ago the Democrats were railing Bush on his own military days with his questionable absence from actual duty...I guess the current buzz/doubts about Kerry's service is pay back from the frustrated Right."

Not "payback", but rather "blowback".

He who sows the wind, reaps the whirlwind.

"Kerry pretty much allowed Bush to destroy himself with all of this talk about the economy"

Yeah, the economy's really in the hole, isn't it? People starving in the streets...Hoovervilles everywhere...

"tax-cuts for the top 2%"

Don't you ever get tired of repeating these mindless shibboleths?

Can you or Mr. Kerry list some "Arab moderates" who we need to be influencing, but are not?

"involve our allies more".

The US has more allies in the Iraq War, than it did in WWII. Or is there an alternative definition of "allies" as "France and Germany", in Merriam-Webster, of which I'm not aware? This whole "unilateral" crap spewed by the Left is just so lame and tiresome.

kelly

Blah,(Blah, Blah...)

Your understanding of econ 101 is, ahem, a bit lacking. While I appreciate your civil tone regarding Bush v Kerry, if you think that Kerry's tax plan is viable, you need some remedial economics lessons. Just who do you think ARE the top 2% of wage-earners? Huh? A whole bunch of them are...wait for it: small business owners! Let me see...repealing tax cuts on one group and giving tax breaks to the majority of the SAME group. Yeah, that'll work.

As to fighting terrorists, I prefer a prez that isn't squeamish about disrupting their organizations and the states sponsoring them and above all, killing them. Bush has demonstrated his willingness to do all of these. QED

blah

"Yeah, the economy's really in the hole, isn't it? People starving in the streets...Hoovervilles everywhere..."

LOL, who has suggested that people are starving in the streets? The economy is ok but certainly not as good as I hope (2003 was a great year, but Nasdaq and S&P are down 10% from last summer). If the economy were THAT great Bush would not need to worry about Kerry today.

""tax-cuts for the top 2%"

Don't you ever get tired of repeating these mindless shibboleths?"

Huh? Like most people, I happen to think that national debt is a bigger deal than about what people did 30 years ago. Kerry's focus on his Vietnam experience was merely one piece of his campaign, whereas his proposals to address various national issues are much more important. Kerry suggested a plan to bring in an additional 100B or so in tax revenues while putting himself at the odds of the top few. He is taking a political risk over this. The right has been talking about "cutting costs" but is too afraid to implement anything because of the political costs associated. Such irresponsibility along with the bad economy are the reasons for this year's projected 400+ national deficit.

"Can you or Mr. Kerry list some "Arab moderates" who we need to be influencing, but are not?"

Duh. The "Arab moderates" do not need to be influenced. Most of them are already pro-West (if you want names just look at the US' Arab allies). Its the brainwashed Anti-American Arabs who need to be brought into the Moderate camp, and there are plenty of them around.

"The US has more allies in the Iraq War, than it did in WWII. This whole "unilateral" crap spewed by the Left is just so lame and tiresome."

I did not know that Bush Sr, Powell, and rest of the military generals who spewed this "unilateral crap" were part of the "Left". As for allies, I meant USEFUL allies. During WWII the US spent less resources than its allies. What is the point of having "allies" if all they could hardly contribute?

GarnetGirl

"Cambodia" is listed in Kerry's meta tags. Hmmmm
[TITLE]John Kerry for President - John Kerry in Vietnam[/TITLE]
[meta name=target content="military record, cambodia, vietnam, military service"]

blah

'Your understanding of econ 101 is, ahem, a bit lacking. While I appreciate your civil tone regarding Bush v Kerry, if you think that Kerry's tax plan is viable, you need some remedial economics lessons. Just who do you think ARE the top 2% of wage-earners? Huh? A whole bunch of them are...wait for it: small business owners! Let me see...repealing tax cuts on one group and giving tax breaks to the majority of the SAME group. Yeah, that'll work."

I don't think Kerry's tax plan is viable to bring the entire deficit to a halt, but I do think it will help. At the very least it's plan unlike Bush's pledge to reduce the Deficit by 50% with no sound plan other than to hope that the economy will improve. The top 2% wage-earners are those who make $250k+ I believe. Some of them are certainly small business owners, but most small business owners are not in the top 2%. If the purpose of the tax-cuts is to simulate the economy then I do happen to think that this is a good idea because small businesses tend to hire locals.

ed

Hmmmm.

1. "Is anybody here from Jersey..."

Yo!

2. France as an ally in WWII.

Actually Vichy France wasn't anywhere near being an ally. We had to right the Vichy French in North Africa and the Free French units were largely useless.

huu'dhuu guru

Blah,

"Its the brainwashed Anti-American Arabs who need to be brought into the Moderate camp, and there are plenty of them around."

Pray tell, how might a Kerry administration reach these people. Specifically, what would he do differently than has been done, attempted or debated and dismissed as impractical in no less than 50 years of western/middle-east diplomacy? Note, "specifically".

Give the Bush administration credit for recognizing *and acting on* the fact that the situation was not going to get any better in the status quo relationship the west has maintained with these governments. That status quo, which Kerry & Co., through his/their alignment with "realpolitik" traditionalists, represents, won't change anything on the ground over there that would benefit us. And if you think we can get our textbooks/worldview into any but the most elite schools over there (many of whose graduates already come to the west for college and grad school anywhere, and so aren't really the issue), I remain skeptical, but would love to hear what your/Kerry's plan to do so is.

ahem, *specifically*.

Just as the Bush cabinet is largely drawn from the last few Republican administrations (and their understudies), and the Clinton administration was as well drawn from Dem administrations past (Warren Christopher, anyone?) Kerry would likely reinstate the "September 10" crowd. For better or worse. And judging from the ongoing comments of Ms. Albright and others from those heady days, Kerry has serious work to do to convince us "September 12 Americans" that these leopards have changed their spots -- Albright doesn't seem to have, with regard to the conduct of foreign policy in the new world theater. And that could become a real problem for all of us down the road, if not for Kerry sooner.

Responding by merely battering around a canard about "having a plan" but "not [being] willing to negotiate it on television or in the newspapers" isn't good enough. If this guy gets elected showing no more leg than that, that may benefit the Dems or Kerry alone in the short term, but it's bound to have negative consequences. Remember Clinton's moderation in '92, followed by his blast leftwards in '93 that cost him both houses of Congress in '94? Wouldn't you at least like to know what you're paying for before you pull the lever in support of it, or is it all just about holding power?

I know what I'd like to see. Bush made his positions clear well in advance of the election of 2000. He needs to do so again for the second term - what's the next 4 years' agenda going to be? Likewise, Kerry's so far been all about Viet Nam with little substance and no specificity; he's trying to run out the clock (it might work).

He's boxed himself in regarding specifics of any legislative agenda, since as soon as he says one thing, someone will find a cue from his "lost" 20 years of time spent in Congress/Senate that refutes his new position. Unfair, perhaps, but not really, in light of his remarkable reluctance to embrace his legislative record. Kerry seems like he's hiding something, on that basis alone.

4 months, 35 years ago, no matter how heroic, do not and cannot compare with the past 20 years' record of achievement in government. What is he waiting for?

oh, and regarding the hike on the richest 2% in exchange for cuts on self-employed: that's a clever way for Kerry to achieve a form over substance "populist" result that wouldn't actually change much in actual fact. He might actually preserve cuts for small businesses, but much of his tax rhetoric has been so hostile that I doubt he would. Plus, if this really is just a bait 'n switch that would essentially preserve the aforementioned revenue status quo while being rhetorically pleasing to the red-meat portion of the base that'll otherwise be unaffected by the hike/cut, the revenue estimates are probably woefully ambitious, which means that the more likely scenario is that after his election, his team would "reassess" the data and hike taxes across the board.

Remember, Clinton promised a middle-class tax cut in 1992, only to follow the promise with one of the largest tax increases in history in 1993. What Clinton did is instructive of what Kerry might do. Especially if his team consists largely of Clinton-era carryovers.


Warmongering Lunatic

Well, Mr. Duffy, I'm not in Iraq because when I volunteered for the Army in September of 2001, I failed the physical.

If the Presidential election is won by Bush, the most likely scenario in the Congress is the Republicans picking up seats in both houses. The Senate seats where the incumbent is retiring are disproportionately Democrat-held seats in states that went for Bush in 2000. The House will almost certainly become more Republican because of the Texas redistricting, even in case of a Kerry landslide.

Bush cocaine and abortion claims are so far completely baseless, and in any case occured before Bush was "born again". The whole point to the "Evangelistas" is that being born-again wipes the slate clean, leaving you as sinless as a newborn. Since Bush classifies his actions before then as mistakes, rather than as qualifications to office, they're in the past and should stay there.

Kerry, on the other hand, just spent an entire convention telling people that should vote for him because he was a war hero in 1968. His past is therefore relevant now because he has chosen to bring it up now.

And, yeah, Bush had a mandate to invade Iraq. Kerry was one of those that voted to give him it in a Democrat-majority Senate. Then the American people followed up by increasing the Republican margin in the House and electing a Republican majority in the Senate. The American people -- and Kerry -- may have reconsidered since then, but Bush's invasion was as ratified in advance by the American people as wars come.

Boomer

Mr. Duffy: "As a matter of fact, why aren't ALL of you guys in Iraq right now?????"

Some of us in the US Navy are currently on "shore duty" recruiting. Others are in training/instructor billets. Still others are filling technical/support roles at CONUS air stations and naval bases. Why would you posit that ALL (your stress) be in Iraq?

You are obviously young enough to enlist. Why not stop by your local recruiting station? I am sure they would be happy to answer why they are not currently in Iraq. Face to face.

Paul Zrimsek

Why aren't we all in Iraq right now? It's simple: We're all secretly in Iran, and President Nixon's lies about how we're not in Iran are being seared into our memories even as I speak.

TexasToast

This is all very interesting. Where was he on Christmas Day in 1968? Oh, the drama! We have a politician who might have exaggerated things! He must have been quite an operator to get all those medals! It must be a deep character flaw! Lets vote for the other guy who is a born-again towering beacon of virtue and a real war hero.

Get Real.

It’s the war and the economy. Neither is a “winner” for this president. The best thing Kerry can do is ignore this BS.

PS I’m a “small business owner.” Business is waaay down. I’m surviving on the work people have to do – not work people choose to do. It wasn’t that way 4 years ago. The tax cut didn’t work – and people are beginning to realize it. The real questions are will the predicted AQ attack happen and how will the President, Senator Kerry and the voters react to it? I’m sure both sides have thrown away all their copies of “My Pet Goat".

jcrue

Jay,

Do the words "little yellow footprints" mean anything to you?

I would be surprised if they do. I would not be surprised, however, if that understanding came from someone else's experience.

TomCom

Guys

Is this a border which I see before me,... or art thou but
A border of the mind, a false creation,
Proceeding from the heat-oppressed brain?

Anyway, it kinda depends on your definition of "Border", "Cambodia" & "Christmas", doesn't it?

Now, the middle of Eldert Ln. is the border of Queens & Brooklyn, but some years back, the guys who put up the Brooklyn signs put them on the east side of the street as well as on the west side as they were supposed to & who knew? So there.

And Christmas is not on December 25 if you still use the Julian calendar, or if you're an orthodox Christian is it? So there, again.

And who can say where Cambodia ends & Viet Nam begins. Does the word "irredentism" mean anything to you, huh? So there, triple.

Leave Kerry alone you members of the VRWC.

And leave Jay D's parents alone too, for goodness sakes.

TomCom

Dave in Texas

I got a piece of shrapnel in
Cambodia,
Cambodia,
They put a band-aid on my skin,
on Christmas Day in the morn-ing!

Phobos

I think that the media is beginning to be very unfair to the Kerry run for the presidency. They are beginning to quote him.

Frank IBC

Blah:

> "If the economy were THAT great Bush would not need to worry about Kerry today."

I'm sure Bush is quaking in his boots. (sarcasm)

Blah's statement above:

>"tax-cuts for the top 2%"

My reply above:

> Don't you ever get tired of repeating these mindless shibboleths?"

Blah's subsequent reply:

> "Huh? Like most people, I happen to think that national debt is a bigger deal than about what people did 30 years ago...Such irresponsibility along with the bad economy are the reasons for this year's projected 400+ national deficit."

I'm not thrilled with the deficit either, but you missed the entire point of my of my earlier statement, which was pointing out that the notion that Bush's tax cuts are restricted to "the top 2%", is utter hogwash, which has been repeated mindlessly by the anti-Bush crowd. And at any rate, the deficit does NOT have a one-to-one relationship to cuts in MARGINAL tax rates.

[Note to Mr. Maguire - I just discovered your blog over the weekend, and I LOOOVE it, but is there any chance you might add italics and blockquotes for posts? As well as post #'s? It would make distinguising who is saying what to whom, a LOT easier.]

> "Its the brainwashed Anti-American Arabs who need to be brought into the Moderate camp, and there are plenty of them around."

And what does Kerry propose to do in this regard, that Bush has not already tried?

> "I did not know that Bush Sr, Powell, and rest of the military generals who spewed this 'unilateral crap' were part of the 'Left'."

Er, some actual quotes might help prove your point.

> As for allies, I meant USEFUL allies. During WWII the US spent less resources than its allies. What is the point of having "allies" if all they could hardly contribute?

Well, given that in WWII, our allies were the ones actually invaded, wouldn't you expect that they would have a greater expenditure of resources than we would?

Frank IBC

TomCom:

>> Julian calendar

Heh. :)

Julian calendar-Christmas is January 13 on the Gregorian calendar - unfortunately that still leaves us a week short.

Maybe he was talking about sometime between January 1/Julian and January 5/Julian, which is the 8th through 12th Days of Christmas? That brings us all the way up to the first 5 days of the Nixon Administration.

Kerry's from Boston - there are a lot of Greek Orthodox in Boston, and they celebrate Christmas on its Julian date...

Patrick R. Sullivan

I think I have the perfect solution. Kerry resigns his nomination, and W nominates him to replace Porter Goss as CIA Director--we'll even allow him to wear his lucky hat.

Then John O'Neill can vote for a Democrat for President.

Frank IBC

Sorry folks, I made a mistake in my previous post - Julian calendar-Christmas is January 7 (NOT January 13) on the Gregorian calendar - unfortunately that still leaves us a 13 days short.

But remember, there are "12 days of Christmas", the 12th day of Christmas/Julian would have been January 18.

Still 2 days short...

Maybe Kerry had too much to drink with those drunken Greek Orthodox Vietnamese soldiers, and did the arithmetic wrong, and counted January 7 as the 0th day of Julian Christmas, and added 12 when he should have added 11, bringing him to January 19...

Still 1 day short...

Factoring in the International Date Line, that brings us to January 20, the day of Nixon's Inauguration!

Captain America

If I am Kerry, it's not to late to claim Cambodian heritage to go along with last year's jewish and previous Bostonian Irish geneology.

All's then forgiven, right?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame