Powered by TypePad

« The NSA Eavesdropping Briefings - Too Exclusive To Be Legal? | Main | More Legal Rationales For The NSA Program »

January 20, 2006

Comments

Rider

They also differ substantially on the degree of threat that Islamofascism represents.

We do disagree on method. The Democrats, moderate-to-liberal Republicans, Libertarians, and all Independents that I know (for whatever that's worth) all feel that Bush's version of (his approach to) the GWOT is inadequate and phony, that the Bush WH underestimates the threat of Islamofascism, that it is foolishly playing politics with it, and that Bush's incompetence has left us wide open for the next attack. Every time Bush proclaims that Iraq is "the central front in the war on terror" it sends chills up my spine, because even I know that the war in Iraq has nothing to do with keeping America safe. To the contrary, I believe it is making the next attack more likely, and Bush's focus on Iraq instead of on defense is leaving us wide open. If there is anything in there which could be construed as common cause with Islamic jihadist terrorism, I frankly don't know what it would be.

Our aversion to torture? Torture has gotten us nothing but bogus information, as I pointed out to you a couple of weeks ago. The CIA last year withdrew some crucial intelligence that had been used to get us into war. It had been coughed up while the prisoner was in Pakistan and by all accounts tortured. After he got into U.S. hands he recanted, about a year too late. If that coincides with the Islamists, so be it.

Same thing with electronic surveillance. We've beaten that horse to death. But you know my contention that it produces useless information. FBI agents said so last week. They wasted countless hours chasing down leads that weren't really leads to begin with as the NSA turned over a thousand "suspects" to them each month. In all this time, they have found no AQ cells operating in the U.S. The AQ they have found, they knew about from other sources. Was it worth checking the "leads" out? Not if they weren't really leads. Do you check each envelope in the box when you buy a new box of 500 to see if one of them might have a check in it? I mean, aren't the odds that out of 500 at least one might have a check???

Bottom line: my political friends all think Bush is doing all the wrong things and not enough of the right things about the GWOT. Call me crazy, but I am not happy with OBL out there doing God knows what and making tapes for us. Use some smart methods instead of torture and wiretap. Get some hackers working on Islamic websites looking for hidden code. Try to get some HUMINT going. Use legal methods so you can get some convictions in court. Do more; not less!

Rider

OBL was an anti-communist insurgent in Afghanistan fighting the Russians when we first provided him weapons and his Rolodex.
He's not an Afghan, so you can't claim he was in it for nationalistic reasons. He is an avowed anti-communist as well as an Islamist and fundamentalist. Quite a stretch to connect any of that with the American left, which is of course secularist to a fault. He's Ghengis Khan with a turban.

Rider

In any war, the opposition will on some points sound like the enemy. 'Twas ever thus. In the War on Kosovo, Tom DeLay, Duke Cunningham, and Newt Gingrich made statements that no doubt gave comfort to Slobodan Milosevic and the Serbs. They voted against the war right after voting for it. They made statemenst supporting the troops to explain their votes against the CinC. The opposition will always be accused of aiding, abetting, and giving comfort to the enemy...particularly by those who cherry-pick their statements for political advantage. But that is the American political system. Those are the processes that the founding fathers put in place. There will be dissent. It's patriotic. It's not treason. The CinC is the CinC of the uniformed military; not the CinC of the American people.

boris

Oh yeah right ... rider rider pants on fire, the staunch defender of BJ, claims W is doing too much of the wrong stuff and not enough of the tough stuff.

The moderate centrist that says:

Hitler & Co. are perfect examples of neoconservatives ...

and this ...

I've got more respect for the accuracy of information in OBL's tapes

OK sure. You don't really speak for anybody but moonbat leftists and pretending otherwise just looks like your clothes are stuffed with straw, dummy.

boris

Raunchy old stable straw at that.

Rider

The Black Knight! :o)

Rider

"And why the fuss, anyway? Moore bashes Bush, Osama bashes Bush - surely the rhetoric might overlap at times, and if Osama is aping Moore, why should that be an outrage to Moore?" -- Tom Maguire (above)[emphasis added, Rider]

TM seems less anxious to draw inferences about the left than some on this thread, if I take his comments correctly. An overlap of rhetoric is one thing; a union of wills, purposes, or agendas is quite another.

TM also notes that Matthews compare Osama to Moore; NOT the other way around. It seems to me that clears a lot of the nonsense about the American left out of the discussion.

Rider

clarice - Speaking of Saddam Hussein's trial, Stirling Newberry points out that Saddam is using The Bush Defense at his trial:

"Saddam Hussein's defense against his indictment by an ad hoc Iraqi tribunal is simply that has the head of the state he had unlimited power to defend the state. That enemies of the state did not have legal protection, and therefore he cannot be charged for what he did during that time."

I wonder if Ramsey Clark got that idea from the Bush Justice Department's legal brief.

Gary Maxwell

Volume over quality, it aint much but if its all you got beat it like a $10 drum.

Extraneus

Allies. In league. Unified in effort. Invested in our defeat. All the same, and yes, that's what I meant. Of course, one has to accept first that we do have enemies, and agree on who they are, which is obviously non-trivial.

I've seen no evidence that the mainstream of the "antiwar left" is motivated by patriotism, or altruism. They rarely speak of victory or express concern about the millions of innocents who would be caught up in the ensuing chaos if we were to pull out of Iraq prematurely, but continually agitate to "bring home the troops" anyway. They know the only way we can actually lose is to prematurely withdraw, so that's their rallying cry. Whatever fig leaves they try, this exposes their goal, which is our defeat, pure and simple. It's a little hard for them to pull off a convincing concern-for-the-troops argument, especially with anyone old enough to remember Vietnam, yet they apparently feel the need to try.

Rhetorical questions:

1. Why don't we see all kinds of writings from the left in support of freedom for the Iraqi people?

2. How about on the value of democracy in the Middle East?

3. If we were to be hit by a catastrophic terrorist attack tomorrow, would anyone on the left be pleased?

kim

That's quite a pretty triangle you've made there, Rider. I'd guess geometry is one of your fortes. I'm not being snide; that was a good answer to my questions.

I believe Islam will reject nihilism, and Bush is encouraging that outcome.
======================================

clarice

Why didn't the human shields show up to protect the voters? LOL

Rider

their goal...our defeat, pure and simple.

Do you seriously think this is John Murtha's goal? You may think what he proposes would lead to our defeat, but surely you don't really believe our defeat is his goal.

Do you think John Murtha visits wounded soldiers regularly to make it look like he is concerned for our the troops? He has been doing that since the time he was still supporting the war.

By the way, I'm old enough to remember Vietnam, and I'll be damned if I can remember disrespect for soldiers apart from reports of isolated incidents. I never heard of any reports of spitting on soldiers until years and years later, for example. I believe it is an urban legend or a canard, if you will. It may have happened, but I never heard about or read about or saw it at the time.

The right always assumes for some reason that the soldiers are not our kids, not the sons and daughters and brothers and sisters of Democrats, liberals, or antiwar Americans. I still think most of the right really cannot accept the fact that the hated Cindy Sheehan really did lose a son in Iraq, otherwise she would not have been demonized in the way she was.

How in the world is it possible that people would be driven to the streets to make fools of themselves to stop the war and stop the loss of lives if they really had no concern about the troops? The antiwar movement is all about preventing further deaths of American soldiers. Perhaps you think we are misguided, but I cannot understand how you would think we had no genuine concern for the lives of our soldiers...our kids.

Extraneus

There are reports that young daughters whom Saddam's sadistic sons found tempting were taken from their fathers at wedding parties or other public venues, and then treated to the whims of these erstwhile heirs. Wives of his wayward compatriots were handled similarly by professionals in front of their helpless husbands, or on videotapes later to be sent to them, as a disciplinary measure. Average people had their tongues surgically removed for speaking ill of the dictator or his government. Thousands were tortured. Hundreds of thousands exterminated, many with their government's own chemical weapons. Ignoring any strategic geopolitical dividend on our part, no one seriously denies that the Iraqi people were subjected to brutal horrors before our "kids" liberated them from this tyranny, in an operation which will go down in the annals of military history for its incredibly low casualty rate.

That the left limits their concern to our "kids" is a dead giveaway that that's not their concern at all. Otherwise, what they're saying is that the lives of a few thousand American volunteers exceed in value those of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of innocent Iraqis. That's not really what they're saying, is it?

Rider

If we express concern for Iraqi civilians killed - presumably in the tens of thousands now - we are branded traitors and dhimmis. I didn't mention it. Of course, we are concerned for the prevention of more deaths, period. Give me a break. Is your concern only for the Iraqis killed under Saddam in the 80's and 90's?

maryrose

Rider,
Last comment to you.
My brother served in Vietnam. He and others were harassed while wearing their uniforms home on leave. Please don't presume to know what that experience was like. Do not respond back.

Sue

OK. Tell me how to post a link and say "please" instead of calling me "aHole." [ding,ding,ding: rhetorical white flag!!! Gary Maxwell is out of ammo and down to name-calling: no facts, no quotes, no logic, no argument!]

I spewed coffee...I really did... ::grin::

Rider

If someone has first hand personal experience, then certainly it happened. It should not have happened, and I'm sorry it did. There are always a few jerks. But I never saw it, and no vet I've ever known saw it or had it happen to them. There is very little evidence that it was as widespread as talked about. Relations between protestors and soldiers were amicable and respectful. There were far more protestors who were spat upon by upset citizens. The vet-spitting stories started in the 1980's and became an urban legend apart from isolated incidents. The matter has been thoroughly researched and there's just no evidence that this happened on a wide scale.

the lives of a few thousand American volunteers exceed in value those of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of innocent Iraqis.

I am concerned for all, but as a father I'll tell you my concern is highest for my own son. I don't like your use of the word "few" there, which seems to minimize the two thousand American lives, as though it's merely two thousand compared to the thousands of Iraqis. I think all Americans are primarily concerned about our own, and one young man or woman at a time. I hope you wouldn't allow them to take your son to fight in this bullshit war to help set up a Shiite Islamic theocracy in the middle of a civil war in Iraq. There's no way in hell I'd let them draft mine to do that. An antiwar protestor is basically someone who has become convinced that too many people have died. Period.

djg

"their goal...our defeat, pure and simple."

"Do you seriously think this is John Murtha's goal? You may think what he proposes would lead to our defeat, but surely you don't really believe our defeat is his goal."

I often wonder why the Left here is so opposed to every American initiative that may further American interests abroad. When the Evil Empire was still alive, you could, with reason, say that the Left here is carrying water for their Moscow masters. Is it merely the a leftover Hydra head that is sill wriggling after its main body is dead? Will the Left then just die out naturally? I see no evidence of this, especially now that the Oppose America banner has been picked up by our erstwhile allies, whom we have so shortsightedly protected from the Evil Empire all these years.

Regarding Murtha, I can see the following rationale. US is defeated while being led by Republicans. Republicans are as a result defeated in the next election. Murtha gets a cabinet post. The question is, are Murtha and his allies willing to undermine our national interests in order to further their personal ones?

Sue

djg,

Answer: In a heart beat.

Rider

The question is, are Murtha and his allies willing to undermine our national interests in order to further their personal ones?

OH, here comes the Swiftboating of John Murtha now. This is the Rove equivalent of Saddam's cutting people's tongues out to silence them: smear the opponent at the point of his perceived greatest strength. John Murtha was just fine as long as he supported the war. His 38 years of service in the Marine Corps. including combat duty in Korea and Vietnam weren't denigrated as self-serving when the Marine Corps. Commandant awarded him the Navy DSM on his retirement. But let him disagree openly with the President, and he's a traitor and fellow-traveler.

James Webb was Reagan's SECNAV, an Annapolis graduate and a highly decorated Marine in VN. Here's an op ed he wrote last week in the Times about what's being done to Murtha and the pattern many veterans are taking note of:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/18/opinion/18webb.html?incamp=article_popular

Purple Heartbreakers


djg

Rider, you asked whether America's defeat is is really Murtha's goal. I supplied a plausible scenario under which it could in fact be so. I cannot read his mind and so do not know what is true about his motivations. But we must wonder why such a heroic personality would take a position which must to him be obviously contrary to American interests.

Rider

we must wonder

(No wondering from Sue. She's ready to write off this distinguished American hero and patriot as a traitor "in a heartbeat.")

No wondering from me either. Col. Murtha clearly believes this to be in America's best interests. He clearly does not believe it would lead to America's defeat. Now if you want to wonder about something, wonder how his proposals could ever have been described as "cut and run." Murtha did not vote for the Hunter Bill you realize, because that did not represent his position. There are not that many Representatives around whose credentials as hawks are stronger than John Murtha's. Does everybody who disagrees with you have to become suspect as anti-American and as promoting America's defeat?

Gary Maxwell

Nope only the ones who ARE anti-American and actively working to promote America defeat.

kim

Rider, I'm convinced of your sincerity, something I wasn't before.

1. Disrespect of Vietnam era soldiers was palpable. I'm glad you didn't feel it.

2. Cindy Sheehan's son is a hero who may grace an Iraqi coin someday, or at least get a statue in Baghdad. He died helping the young Sadr's minions realize that he and us were fighting for an ideal as inspiring as the Koran.

3.The random horror is gone from Iraq, except by the remnants of Saddam's resistance and by the alien elements of a nihilistic and self-destructive force, al Qaeda.

4. You mention that an anti-war protester is someone who believes that too many have died. Well, what a revelation. Centuries ago, anabaptists recognized that eventually humans must graduate from slaughtering each other, and they were right. But unilaterally adopting that policy is suicide. What do you do when they are at your door?

5. And what about the Swifties? Has Kerry answered them yet?
=============================

Rider

Thank you. I have seen evidences of genuine civility on this thread lately. I appreciate your efforts to engage respectfully to discuss honest disagreements.

What I've said about the antiwar movement, which includes not just the left, was in response to remarks by others.

We never had an honest debate in this country about whether the American people wanted to carry out regime change in Iraq in 2003 because the issue was presented as something that had to be done at once because of WMD which Saddam was going to put in the hands of AQ. So, everything you say about bringing liberty to the captives and ending Saddam's slaughter of his own people is really an afterthought. The point is that "they" [Iraq] were not at our door. Osama was at our door and still is.

Now that we are there, I am not - nor is Murtha - proposing an immediate and precipitous complete withdrawal. I don't think it's too far out to have expected that we would have had an exit strategy when we went in (Powell Doctrine). I think we have attempted to conduct the campaign as an "economy of force" operation. I think Bremer screwed the situation totally from the beginning (Read, The Assassin's Gate). If we expect to get out with our credibility intact (= victory) we need to begin to do what we should have been doing all along which is recognize that the diplomatic aspect is as important as the military. The State Dept. had a twelve volume plan for the reconstruction of Iraq ready to go from before invasion. The Pentagon has run the whole show and screwed it up. We can't win unilaterally. The solution is not going to be military but political.

I wish Republicans would all listen to our Texas Congressman Ron Paul, a Republican with the right stuff, the way Republicans are spozed to be. the way Republicans are spozed to be, the kind of Republican who has respect for the American Constitution and civil liberties. I urge you to read this in its entirety:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012306Y.shtml

"If we're inclined to improve conditions, we should give serious consideration to the following policy reforms, reforms the American people who cherish liberty would enthusiastically support:

1. No more "No Child Left Behind" legislation;

2. No more prescription drug programs;

3. No more undeclared wars;

4. No more nation building;

5. No more acting as the world policemen;

6. No more deficits;

7. Cut spending-everywhere;

8. No more political and partisan resolutions designed to embarrass those who may well have legitimate and honest disagreements with current policy;

9. No inferences that disagreeing with policy is unpatriotic or disloyal to the country;

10. No more pretense of budget reform while ignoring off-budget spending and the ever-growing fourteen appropriations bills;

11. Cut funding for corporate welfare, foreign aid, international NGOs, defense contractors, the military industrial complex, and rich corporate farmers before cutting welfare for the poor at home;

12. No more unconstitutional intrusions into the privacy of law-abiding American citizens;

13. Reconsider the hysterical demands for security over liberty by curtailing the ever-expanding and oppressive wars on drugs, tax violators, and gun ownership."

Sue

Rider,

Murtha posing for the camera with Code Pink was about all it took for me to stop wondering.

Murtha absolutely wanted the Hunter Bill to pass. His comments the week before were clear. We've lost. Get out now. It's Vietnam all over again. Code word...Vietnam...failure. I would have more respect for him had he stood in front of us with his convictions and voted his rhetoric. The vote was to put up or shut up. He did neither.

Sue

Kim,

I believe Kerry's response was Cambodia...Christmas...searing memory. You have to wonder about those lying Swift Boaters.

Respect for Murtha/Kerry is a given. No one, and I mean no one, should question their motives. But other veterans are not afforded that same privilege...their message isn't the one they want to hear.

Cecil Turner

Now that we are there, I am not - nor is Murtha - proposing an immediate and precipitous complete withdrawal.

That's funny, because the first bullet of his plan is:

  • To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.
I admit he didn't use the word "precipitous" . . . but that's about all the distinction between what he says his plan is; and you say it isn't. I'm also somewhat amused by recent stories he's been padding his resume, which appears to remove the last reason to take him seriously.

If we expect to get out with our credibility intact (= victory) we need to begin to do what we should have been doing all along which is recognize that the diplomatic aspect is as important as the military.

The reason we haven't had a debate on this is because the Dems can't come up with a strategy. You can't argue in a vacuum (and as subsequent elections have shown, you can beat something with nothing). "Recognizing that the diplomatic aspect . . ." is typical feel-good nothingness. Murtha's pablum: "I believe we must have a 'Strategy for Victory Against Global Terrorism'” is another. At this point, four plus years into the war, it'd be nice to see an actual proposal, or an admission the left has no idea how to fight it. Dissent is not a plan.

Rider

Sue and Cecil - The truth is that the WH only respects veterans (and current troops) as long as they agree with Bush's policies. It sends out Smirchboat Vets for Bush to trash and bash the service and honor of decorated veterans who dare oppose Bush, so that no one will take them seriously, so that others will think twice about speaking out.

As James Webb, Secretary of the Navy under Reagan and himself a highly decorated Marine combat veteran of Vietnam, said,

"The casting of suspicion and doubt about the actions of veterans who have run against President Bush or opposed his policies has been a constant theme of his career. This pattern of denigrating the service of those with whom they disagree risks cheapening the public's appreciation of what it means to serve, and in the long term may hurt the Republicans themselves...It may be one reason that a preponderance of the Iraq war veterans who thus far have decided to run for office are doing so as Democrats."

Cecil, the very article you referenced besmirching Murtha's combat decorations was the one discussed by James Webb in his op ed:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/18/opinion/18webb.html?incamp=article_popular

It was written by Republican political operatives, one of them a former staff writer for Rush Limbaugh.

No doubt, the piece was written by commission. And why? The purpose of these lies against highly decorated military veterans (Senators John McCain, Max Cleland, John Kerry, and Rep. John Murtha)is to silence opposition and suppress dissent, the tactics of a man who avoided combat and wears no decorations himself. The purpose is, in your words, to amuse the believers and to convince them there is no reason to take seriously the words of the opposition.

Rider

Dissent is not a plan.

Neither is "staying the course." It's an empty slogan. It is the Bush administration which has no plan. In contrast, a number of Democrats have put specific plans forward, so you are quite wrong about that accusation.

John Murtha's plan, if you actually read it instead of cherry-picking his words and dismissing it, calls for immediate redeployment to an over-the-horizon staging area; not for immediate withdrawal from theater. And the speed at which this deployment is conducted is to be consistent with the safety of the remaining troops. "Precipitous" means "steep." What Murtha proposes is only as steep as conditions permit.

John Kerry has also put forward a specific plan which he presented last month at the Council on Foreign Relations. It is virtually identical to one which Gen. Casey outlined about two weeks later. http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/12/9/24138/6256

I like best the specific proposals put forward by four star Gen. Wesley Clark (ret.) in various places but most recently in a NYT op ed, December 6, 2005:
http://securingamerica.com/oped/nyt/2005-12-06

It is not good enough to pronounce your opponent's words "feelgood nothingness" and walk away. You said "the Democrats can't come up with a strategy." You were wrong; they have come up with a number of specific strategies. It's the President who can't come up with a specific plan on Iraq, which he also claims as his centerpiece for the GWOT. As you said, "four plus years into the war, it'd be nice to see an actual proposal."

No one who knows anything about counterterrorism believes for half a second that the war in Iraq counts for a war against terrorism or that it has anything whatever to do with protecting America. The central battle against Al Qaeda is on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, an area that is slipping hopelessly out of control of the Pakistani army. So, yes, let's see a specific plan from Mr. Bush. High time.

The reason we did not have an honest debate on regime change in Iraq is that the President ignored all intelligence to the contrary and flim-flammed Congress into believing that Saddam Hussein had WMD and was in league with Al Qaeda. Had WMD not been part of the debate, it is doubtful the American people would have committed themselves to a 2-3 trillion dollar price tag plus the lives and limbs of their sons and daughters for an unnecessary war.

Sue

If Bush was seen walking on water the democrats would say 'see, he can't even swim'. (I stole that, can't remember where, but whoever said it first, kudos.)

Cecil Turner

It sends out Smirchboat Vets for Bush to trash and bash the service and honor of decorated veterans who dare oppose Bush . . .

Yeah, and they used the supersecret time machine to have O'Neill start way back in 1971.

Cecil, the very article you referenced besmirching Murtha's combat decorations was the one discussed by James Webb in his op ed . . .

When I first heard Murtha's bio, I thought it was funny that a Regimental S-2 would have two purple hearts. And though there are lots of negative stories about that article (all citing the authors' bias, but failing to correct the record), it appears to be undisputed that he mailed in a request for the medals after the fact. At best, there's something a bit odd there, and if he's going to be using his record to bolster his case, he ought to expect it to be examined.

The purpose of these lies against highly decorated military veterans (Senators John McCain, Max Cleland, John Kerry, and Rep. John Murtha) . . .

Lies? How about if it's the truth? Seriously, these guys are not good examples.

John Murtha's plan, if you actually read it instead of cherry-picking his words and dismissing it, calls for immediate redeployment to an over-the-horizon staging area . . .

I just picked his first bullet. And I'm guessing, Rider, that you have no military experience, or you'd recognize this as a crock. How many battalions of Marines do you think we can maintain in an "over-the-horizon staging area"? I actually read it, but mostly for entertainment value.

As for your other "plans," see if you can get a couple Democrats to adopt one and propose it as an alternative. Then we can all have a vote on it. Until then, we'll keep implementing this one.

No one who knows anything about counterterrorism believes for half a second that the war in Iraq counts for a war against terrorism or that it has anything whatever to do with protecting America.

Now this, I've heard before. Lots of times. Seems to me it was a centerpiece of the last election. Based on the exit polls I'd say a slim majority (55%) of Americans felt Iraq was part of the War on Terror . . . and they voted overwhelmingly for GWB (81% to 18%). Better luck next time.

Rider

I'm guessing you have no military experience, or you'd recognize this as a crock.

I'm guessing you don't have 37 years in the Marine Corps.

Here's what James Webb had to say about the controversy over Murtha's medals:

"The accusations against Mr. Murtha were very old news, principally coming from defeated political rivals. Aligned against their charges are an official letter from Marine Corps Headquarters written nearly 40 years ago affirming Mr. Murtha's eligibility for his Purple Hearts - "you are entitled to the Purple Heart and a Gold Star in lieu of a second Purple Heart for wounds received in action" - and the strict tradition of the Marine Corps regarding awards. While in other services lower-level commanders have frequently had authority to issue prestigious awards, in the Marines Mr. Murtha's Vietnam Bronze Star would have required the approval of four different awards boards."

Don't try moving the goal posts. You charged the Democrats with having no plans. They've got several. You were wrong. Bush is the one with no plan. "Staying the course," is a slogan; not a plan.

Bush's plan for the GWOT as outlined in the AF Academy speech is fundamentally flawed. Its principal thrust, "the forward strategy of freedom," i.e., the concept that creating democracies [a word our founders avoided, btw.]in the ME will prevent tomorrow's terroists is simply wrong. Here's why. The majority opposition in most non-democratic Arab regimes are the Islamist fundamentalists, such as are now poised to take power in Iraq, such as are in power in Iran. Creating a Sunni version of one of those is the centerpiece of Osama's jihad. And Bush is going to help him? There is no way to project the American military into a ME country without stirring the hostility of the people, which is the mother of terrorists. This is partly due to our one-sided policy toward Israel, and partly due to the fact that our troops are not predominately Muslim. Bush says that the 9/11 terrorists were not attacking our policies; but our existence. This is patently false. That he should so completely fail to understand the enemy and why they are attacking us does not inspire confidence. They attacked us and will attack us again precisely because of our policies, about six of them in particular. Bush's emphasis on outlaw regimes is bogus and a relic of Cold War counterterrorism. In Afghanistan, the Taliban were more clients of Al Qaeda than vice versa. If you want to find out why Bush's strategy for the GWOT is a failed strategy and what is needed to win, read: The Next Attack by Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon:

As for your 2004 exit polls, I'm sure they will totally impress Al Qaeda when they come to a town near you and you say, "But, but, but...Iraq is the central front in the war on terror!" The polls and the vote are an index of how seriously the President had managed to bamboozle the American people by November '04. Recent polls show they are now starting to wake up.

Sue

Rider,

First...the flack over Murtha's medals matters about as much as the flack over Kerry's did. No one really cares. It is used by the left to give them standing to say anything they want. To me, it means they went, they served, I salute them, but they have no more standing as an expert on military matters than my next door neighbor does, who also happens to have a purple heart.

Second...Bush has always had a plan for Iraq. The left doesn't like the plan, but there is and has been a plan. If you would like to discuss Iran, where I don't think anyone has a plan, we might be on to something.

Third...the Shiites in Iraq are having to form a coalition. They did not get a majority.

Fourth...why have elections at all? Let's just have a monthly poll to see who is on top and what idea is the winner of the moment?

Rider

Here's why "staying the course" is just a slogan; not a strategy, and why Bush had finally better come up with an exit strategy:


Yahoo News

"Stretched by frequent troop rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has become a "thin green line" that could snap unless relief comes soon, according to a study for the Pentagon.

Andrew Krepinevich, a retired Army officer who wrote the report under a Pentagon contract, concluded that the Army cannot sustain the pace of troop deployments to Iraq long enough to break the back of the insurgency. He also suggested that the Pentagon's decision, announced in December, to begin reducing the force in Iraq this year was driven in part by a realization that the Army was overextended."

Rider

the Shiites in Iraq are having to form a coalition.

The Sunnis aren't. Just because they voted does not mean they are going purely political now. They will continue pursuing with bullets what they couldn't get with ballots.

Here's James Webb on the significance of the flap over Murtha's medals:

"...in recent years extremist Republican operatives have inverted a longstanding princple: that our combat veterans be accorded a place of honor in political circles. This trend began with the ugly insinuations leveled at Senator John McCain during the 2000 Republican primaries and continued with the slurs agains Senators Max Cleland and John Kerry, and now Mr. Murtha."

"No one really cares."

Guess again. Military veterans are taking notice. The administration ballyhoos "our brave troops" while they are on the battlefield, but when they return as decorated combat veterans their honor and service is smeared if they oppose George Bush. Read Webb's op ed.

Your silliness of that winner-of-the-month theory is exactly the reason majoritarian democracy is an unworkable idea, the reason you cannot govern in our system with a winner take all philosophy. In order to create legitimate policy, you have to govern from the middle and work the differences out in civil discourse. We are a long way from that right now.

Rider

That was supposed to read THE silliness; not YOUR silliness. Sorry.

Gary Maxwell

In order to create legitimate policy, you have to govern from the middle and work the differences out in civil discourse. We are a long way from that right now.

And to whom do you attribute this current state of affairs? The guys who filibustered 10 judges or the ones who allowed filibusters to continue knowing full well that the Senate rules may be changed by majority rule but not wanting to further agitate the situation? I am not expecting even a balanced and well aportioned blame answer but what the hell, go ahead and surprise me.

Cecil Turner

I'm guessing you don't have 37 years in the Marine Corps.

No, but I have more than 20. (As a regular, not a reservist . . . and as an operator, not an intel analyst.) I've also been trying pretty hard to avoid arguments from authority, and I'm not going to accept one from someone else, especially if they have less effective experience (which, IMHO, applies to Rep Murtha).

Here's what James Webb had to say about the controversy over Murtha's medals:

I respect Mr Webb, but on this subject he's gone a bit off the deep end. He is consistent, despising Kerry but complaining Bush got a pass, and that the choice was a hard one, and all that based on disagreeing with the strategy. He's a good guy to have on your side, but in this case he's wrong.

Don't try moving the goal posts. You charged the Democrats with having no plans. They've got several. You were wrong.

"They" have none. Some individuals have things they call a plan, but they don't appear to be able to convince enough of their compatriots to be able to proffer one as an alternative. And the reason is fairly obvious: they have to triangulate between the utter pacifists and the semi-hawks. How many voted for Murtha's proposal?

Bush's plan for the GWOT as outlined in the AF Academy speech is fundamentally flawed.

Again, I've heard this before. The Administration is (correctly in my opinion) focusing on terror sponsors. The obvious center of gravity amongst those was Iran/Iraq/Syria. It appears the war will be over before we get a Democrat alternative . . . and it ain't a short war.

As for your 2004 exit polls, I'm sure they will totally impress Al Qaeda when they come to a town near you . . .

Like it or not, that's the way we decide things in a democratic republic. Proffer an alternative, and we'll all vote on it. (And if Al Qaeda has even a rudimentary sense of self-preservation, they'll avoid that confrontation.)

Sue

No problem. I'm not easily offended. You missed the point. Being a medal recipient matters. But the wrong message and being a recipient doesn't. Ask John Kerry. He, better than Webb, can explain why reporting for duty without anything to back it up didn't help him. The silliness began by citing poll numbers as a part of your argument. I just carried it to the next level of silliness.

Gary Maxwell

Before we get too wrapped up and agog in James Webb lets also make sure we understand where the man is coming from.

I found this form an interview with the San deigo newspaper dater October 30, 2005.

"I have been talking to people about running for the Senate next year against George Allen, as a Democrat from Virginia. I have a very good life. I'm not sure that I'm going to do that or not but I have been talking to people. Thinking about it."

He also has been on the record since the very start of the war, and he was vocally against it.

Just so we know who we are dealing with. My recollection is that his name surfaced at several points in the S&L scandal of the late 80s but I cant find that yet. My memory is pretty good on this stuff but without a site it will have to remain simply my dim recollection.

Sue

Gary,

It really doesn't matter. I can go out and find someone saying exactly the opposite of Webb with more military honors and more experience. Their mind is made up that Bush is just wrong. And anyone who backs that up is the expert to go to. That was driven home during the Swift Boat saga. 250 veterans were all partisan hacks. And John Kerry stood tall and proud.

Sue

If Murtha were backing Bush...does anyone really think he would be listened to by the left?

Gary Maxwell

No that is why no one with even acknowlege the existence of the senior Senator from Connecticut Joe Lieberman.

Watch and see. the Democrats have been scurrying around looking in every nook and cranny with anyone that does not have a dishonerable discharge to run for office. They have convinced themselves that Paul Hackett look alikes are the ticket to the promise land. Forget that Hackett lost to a very drab candidate in a special election. Its a winning ticket they are convinced.

Sue

The last I looked it was 2006. Dean promised a 'plan' in 2006. Wonder when it will be coming down the pike?

Rider

250 veterans were all partisan hacks

SBV weren't just partisan hacks. They were outright liars. Errors of memory are one thing. Deliberate and malicious lying is quite another. SBV have been thoroughly debunked. I am surprised you would even mention those scum and their boatload of lies.

Gee, I don't know when Howard Dean will have a plan. He'd better hurry or President Bush may beat him to it.

"The political tactic of playing up the soldiers on the battlefield while tearing down the reputations of veterans who oppose them could eventually cost the Republicans dearly."

You just can't quit, can you? It's just too much fun. Now you're even toying with Swiftboating James Webb, planting the suspicion that maybe he was connected with the S&L Scandal. After all, he disagrees with the President, so he can't be a decent man. (Are you sure you weren't thinking of Neil Bush, Gary?)

I hope you'll post an apology if it turns out that you were mistaken.

clarice

Christmas in Cambodia/ribbon medals over the White House fence/someone elses ribbons over the WH fence/medals in Senate office/etc etc/

kim

By whom have the Swifties been debunked? Surely not by Kerry?

Your world view is a mess.

1. If you dump NCLB, how are you going to get public school teachers to be accountable. How are you going to educate poor people? How about charter schools?

2. I agree the Meedicare Drug bill is a disaster.

3. How 19th century. Assymetric warriors don't declare war. Are we not to respond?

4. Nation building, now there's a laudable goal; better than nation destruction.

5. Civil order will be maintained or not. The UN has not. Do you have a candidate for world's policeman other than us? Thank God we're honest cops.

6. Deficits Schmeficits. Do you have any understanding of economics?

7-14. You degenerated into boilerplate, and demonstrated why the defense of this built nation is not entrusted to people with your cast of mind.

Seriously, you can't just give the Swifties a kick in the butt here. Who debunked what?
===============================================
================================================

kim

Those boilerplates are creaking; rivets popping soon.

7. Yes, decrease Fed spending.

8 & 9. Yes, even lefties can be patriots. I recognize your sincerity. Even righties need not be Ubu.

10. We could change the manner in which our federal government collects and dispenses revenue. Start with the SS or IRS, continue with Medicare. All drastically in need of reform. All options frought with huge policy change.

11. To what policy effect?

12. Hard to believe we share the same Constitution, sometimes.

13 Sunni tribesmen are joining the nation. There is a rift with al Qaeda.

14. I'd follow John O'Neill into combat, but not John O'Kerry.
==========================================

Rider

kim - Let's face it. You all are big government Republicans. Ron Paul is a small government Republican.

Kerry's version of events has been independently corroborated by multiple sources. The SBV have been caught in multiple lies. Malice; not errors of memory.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1195149/posts

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/print?id=166434

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/swiftboat.htm

http://www.factcheck.org/article231.html

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/082004Z.shtml

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13267-2004Aug18.html

http://mediamatters.org/items/200408050001

Some repetition inevitable there.

This was the most despicable attack campaign in recent American political history. A new low. Anything goes, apparently. The Bush crowd will stop at nothing to savage the record and honor of any vet who stands up to oppose or even disagree with George Bush. It doesn't matter how highly decorated or sterling their record, they are great heroes as long as they support Bush and they instantly become whores, traitors, and liars as soon as they speak out in disagreement. Just look at the "career" of James Webb on this thread. No doubt the besmirching of Webb will continue with the help the fax-clone pundits and other WH flying monkeys.

If you are still clinging to these vicious lies and circulating them, you must be as lost as the freepers who responded to the first article.

kim

So, in your own words, what was debunked, and by whom?

You may have noticed that I don't link, and only occasionally read them. They are future moth holes in conversations.
=======================================

kim

Better than 'moth holes' I'd say that the topology is repulsive.
=======================================

kim

Where in what I wrote is 'big government Republican'? I'm bewildered? Club for Growth, Yea, Team. But I wish that instead of defunding public schools, they'd push charter schools. Not, by the way, public support for private schools. I don't see the need for vouchers, except as bandaids.
========================================

kim

You gotta 180? You gotta 214 that doesn't look built by thug CIA elements?
============================================

kim

You can produce a tuba wide brass band of opinion, and I'll balance it with a couple of hundred of pages of military bureaucratic shufflework, and we'll see what the evidence shows. Kerry could, can, and will be able to produce those few pages. Why didn't, doesn't, or won't he produce them?
===========================================

Cecil Turner

The Bush crowd will stop at nothing to savage the record and honor of any vet who stands up to oppose or even disagree with George Bush.

Rider, this crap is just silly. O'Neill and other Vietnam Vets have been rather understandably annoyed with Kerry's antics since "Winter Warrior" days, more than 30 years ago. Pretending the "Bush crowd" started this is obviously, and demonstrably, incorrect.

Further, your own source, lamenting the attacks, admits they have a case:

The Swifties have made their point, and after thirty years of bitterness John Kerry has earned the karma that they brought him. But most veterans, like most other Americans, are ready to digest this piece of information and move on.
I'm also not too sure what you're trying to prove with those links, but this sort of thing does not impress:
After weeks of taking fire over veterans' accusations that he had lied about his Vietnam service record to win medals and build a political career, Senator John Kerry shot back yesterday, calling those statements categorically false and branding the people behind them tools of the Bush campaign.
Senator Kerry called 'em liars, eh. Good enough for me! But under "categorically false" I think I could add a couple things, like "Christmas in Cambodia" and his taking credit for his predecessor's exploits. His first and third Purple Hearts also don't appear to be able to withstand a lot of scrutiny (all of which have been beaten to death in prior threads, but if you want to refight that war as well, have at it).

Sue

Rider,

If the book hadn't been written that portrayed Kerry the hero and his fellow veterans as morons, most of the Swift Boat Vets would have continued to let everyone believe that Christmas in Cambodia was a memory seared in Kerry's mind. He brought it upon himself, just as he did everything else in his attempt to win the presidency.

As for myself, the medal controversy was noise in the background. I really didn't care. I have already told you my neighbor has a purple heart. And he is nuttier than a fruitcake. The purple heart didn't change that aspect about him. And having 3 didn't change that aspect about Kerry.

kim

To successfully pull of being both a War Hero and an Anti-War Hero, you have to truly be so, and he simply wasn't both. Maybe he was neither, just a traitor, but I'm not sure that is demonstrated. Running down the river after the mine went off is enough for me. "Running like gazelles" is frosting.
==========================================

kim

And what about David Alston, the Man of God?

Hey this was less than a coupla years ago.
============================================

Gary Maxwell

I was on the inside of the investigation of the S & L scandal. I know more than you do about every sleazy detail. If I find what I looking for I will post it. Even unindicted does not necessarily make your hands clean.

John Kerry was a loser before he became a loser. The Swift Boat Veterans are just ordinary Joes. Maybe we should be talking about how you ( and the Democrats ) smeared them and tried hard to deny them their constitutional right to speak out when you did not like what they are saying.

I also see you totally ignored my question posed at 7:01 PM. In convenient to your meme and damaging to your karma? Tough to go thru life with such a burden that requires flitering out so much information to keep your own narrow biased views without turbulence.

maryrose

When Kerry reported for duty at the Democratic Convention. he left himself open to critical review by his fellow officers and soldiers. If he had staked out a definitive position on Iraq perhaps he would have done better. Coming to Ohio and pretending to go duck hunting was seen as a joke and a sign of weakness. By not releasing all his records supposedly having signed a 180 he further diminishes himself. I think like his grades from Yale he is not going to look that impressive which is why he did not release them in the first place.

Sue

Kim,

Just out of curiosity, have you noticed you are posting in the future? ::grin:: I couldn't figure out why your post kept appearing as the most recent...over and over. Tell us please, which lottery numbers to pick.

Sue

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2006/01/the_osama_tape_.html#comment-13303838>Marvel at my ability to post to someone in the future

What pisses me off is that 'Winter Soldier' is a reference to the warriors at Agincourt. What a travesty!
=====================================

Posted by: kim | January 25, 2006 at 03:07 PM

Sorry, sometimes I am easily amused. ::grin::

kim

Maybe silent spears are longbow arrows. Bring back catapults. And read 'Animal Farm' to your children.
================================================

kim

Sue, I count it among my greatest blessings, to be easily amused.

As I said on another thread I can understand the appeal of Typepad. It seems to want to have a relationship.
=======================================

maryrose

Ah Kim, You are still posting in the future and when I noticed it earlier I just thought you had extra-special powers that we mere mortals seem to lack.

maryrose

Can you believe on Hardball they are STILL talking about prisoner abuse and trying to connect it higher up than it was. Supposedly military intelligence orders. Thenupon direct questionning "were you told exactly what to do inthe actual torture the soldier answered "well no" Then Matthews said " Why are they all pleading Guilty? Chris is convinced the soldiers were forced into plea deals. At this point I consider this officially BEATING A DEAD HORSE. Next topic
, Did the Govt. know the levees would break ahead of time and after handing over thousands of Katrina related documents, where are the other ones: they must be trying to stall our investigation.

Rider

This Christmas in Cambodia crap is the lamest piece of nonsense yet. What a silly-ass cheapshot.

The facts have borne out Kerry's memory of his missions into Cambodia:

1)He did go into Cambodia in January-February as ferry-master to drop off Seals, Green Berets, and CIA spooks.

2)On Christmas eve he was 50 miles from Cambodia, i.e., about 13,000 miles closer than Lt. Bush got.

So he got the date wrong. He was mistaken. He was there two weeks after he said. Big deal. After 35 years his memory was off by 50 miles / two weeks. That's the unpardonable sin, the reason he's "not the kind of man we want as our president"? An inaccurate memory? Get serious.

This is beneath chickenshit. You are trying to frag the man by flicking a snotwad on him. WTF? I am embarrassed for you.

Sue

Rider,

Then maybe he should have left the searing to his steaks...

::grin::

Rider

The guys who filibustered 10 judges or the ones who allowed filibusters to continue knowing full well that the Senate rules may be changed by majority rule but not wanting to further agitate the situation?

I didn't answer your dumb question because it showed that you don't have a clue what the issue is. My point was that you cannot govern from the middle if you adopt majoritarian rules or procedures, i.e. winner takes all. But for the filibuster the minority would have no power in shaping policy.

I notice that you've now dropped the word "sleazý" into the S & L innuendo pool you are trying to dump James Webb into. Right out of Joe McCarthy's playbook.

I agree with you John Kerry is a loser. He wasn't my candidate.

The SBV's have the constitutional right to speak. They don't have the right to be listened to for long if they are lying out their backsides which is what they were doing. You've been duped.

boris

An inaccurate memory?

But it was seared, seared in his memory.

Also Kerry lied about the mine incident. There are conflicting recollections about taking fire, guys in the water saying yes and guys laying down suppression fire saying no.

But WP determined that Kerry did in fact take off down river like a bat out of hell and only came back when the shooting stopped.

Rider

"searing"

Like a lot of people our age, he sometimes speaks beyond his memory. And like other politicians, he bloviates. But he wasn't lying and I do respect his military service. I think the Democrats could've done better, but I still think he'd have been better than Bush. All the criticism and smears have been stewing for years among people who absolutely hate his guts for his actions after he came back from VN. That and money is what SBV was all about. Swiftbuck Vets for Bush.

Sue

Ahh Rider, you saw a page right out of McCarthy's playbook when Kennedy read pages from a magazine and asked Alito had he read them. Over and over. And over and over. Even though Judge Alito said no, he hadn't read them. That was McCarthyism. Read your history and jump on the right person.

Sue

Rider,

He made the Cambodia comment before he was your age.

Drats...foiled again

Rider

boris - Take it up with the Dept. of the Navy.

boris

SBV has better reasons for despising Kerry than rider rider pants on fire has for despising them.

Rider

He first talked about it ten years after it happened. He was mistaken. Get a life.

kim

What pisses me off is that 'Winter Soldier' is a reference to the warriors at Agincourt. What a travesty!
=====================================

Harry Arthur

Rider,

Not that it's all that important, but I can remember the first time I landed in Cambodia and what I was doing on Christmas eve, 1971. Even as a pilot I knew the difference between being in Cambodia and being 50 miles away. In a boat, the difference is some magnitude larger.

But you're right, what Kerry did in Viet Nam is really immaterial. It's what he did when he got back that sticks in my craw and that persistently bothers many of us who were systematically libeled by him in his testimony before congress.

Secondly, Right out of Joe McCarthy's playbook is an excellent point. I presume this applies to judge Alito's confirmation hearings as well. If so, then I applaud your consistency.

At some unknown point in the future no one, from either side of the isle, who is worthy of the public trust will assume that mantle simply because it's not worth enduring the expected "politics of personal destruction". Unfortunately, the rhetoric has ratcheted up, while the self-discipline and mutual respect has ratcheted down.

I am ashamed for our country that both sides are adept at this nefarious game. When at some point in the future we are again blessed with a democrat president who choses to nominate judges in agreement with his or her judicial philosophy, what then? Would it be possible, given Schumer's, Kennedy's, Biden's and Leahy's demands for "mainstream" judges to approve a Ruth Bader Ginsberg then? Surely not. We reap the wind and shall surely sow the whirlwind.

Cecil Turner

The facts have borne out Kerry's memory of his missions into Cambodia:

The fact is that Kerry was never in Cambodia (ask his crewmembers, or check his diary). And in fact, he told a stupid lie about an engagement that did take place, several miles from the border, to make a political point:

"I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the president of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared -- seared -- in me."
Unfortunately for that silly story, Nixon wasn't president yet, Kerry wasn't in Cambodia, and his entire premise was false. As the right-wing conspiracists at the Washington Post put it:
But the point of Kerry's 1986 speech was that he personally had taken part in a secret and illegal war in a neutral country. That was only true if he was "in Cambodia," as he had often said he was. If he was merely "near," then his deliberate misstatement falsified the entire speech.
This is beneath chickenshit. You are trying to frag the man by flicking a snotwad on him. WTF? I am embarrassed for you.

You apparently picked the most favorable of those four episodes (1st/3rd PH, Cambodian sugarplums, and stealing Peck's glory), and still fail miserably. As to fragging Kerry, he's apparently done that twice . . . not sure he needs my help. Your continued claims that 250 other vets are lying, despite voluminous evidence to support their claims, whilst simultaneously pretending to be standing up for veterans' reputations, is, well, embarrassing. At least you feel it, though you apparently confuse the source.

BTW, I think "Winter Soldier" is a play on "Sunshine Patriot." "Band of Brothers" is from the Henry V Agincourt speech.

Rider

Hah! This really is the National Enquirer set. OK. John Kerry was a member of the Viet Cong. Have it your way. You believe it all and won't hear otherwise. You're past trying to reason with.

Rider

right-wing conspiracists at the Washington Post

That was an op-ed, Cecil, written indeed by a card-carrying rightwinger, a scholar from American Enterprise Institute no less. It was an opinion piece; not reporting and not written by WP staff.

boris

You're past trying to reason with

Self parody on drugs !!!

Extraneus

Imagine being an ex-military Democrat with combat experience these days? Of all the thousands of heroes from any number of wars, including Gulf War I and of course the present Iraqi one, they try to build up the two or three veterans that claim to agree with them, regardless of how questionable the motivations, experience, or honesty of these guys. They feel a need to have some credibility, and are willing to do what they have to do to get it. Vulnerable as Bush was, they actually nominated a geek like Kerry for no other reason. Wesley Clark, an inexperienced relative nobody, almost made a real run for it, and is still a possibility for 2008. Murtha, a guy actually advocating surrender and the abandonment of millions of innocents under our protection, is a rock star!

The temptation must be intense.

Harry Arthur

Rider, John Kerry was a member of the Viet Cong now we're getting somewhere.

Rider

John Kerry and Hillary Clinton are the best-known examples of what we call Vichy Democrats. Bill, too. The DLC Democrats are yours to play with. DINO's. They've somehow found their niche as professional losers. Invertebrata washingtoniae. The beta-wolves. How big a loser do you have to be to lose to a loser like Bush?

Sue

Rider,

My goodness, I thought Ann Richards had joined the forum. She said almost those same words, right before she lost to him.

Rider

Texas turned solid red right under her feet. The Republicans could've run the village idiot and he'd have won. Come to think of it...

kim

You're right, CT, Band of Brothers is the reference to Agincourt.

Rider, Kerry was clearly caught by the Swifties in 3 lies, with a number of others suggested but not proven or disproven. Kerry has the power to clear a lot of that up. If there is nothing damaging, why did he not release the info in Aug, '04, and refute the Swifties? His numbers dropped in August from leading Bush to trailing, and he never recovered. The Swifties radicalized me. 800,000 copies of that book sold. Lots of veterans confronted data about Vietnam they had either not known or chosen to not think about. The Swifties tale makes sense to veterans; Kerry's is nonsense fron the 3 medals, the Winter Soldier baloney, the parlez vous in Paree, the reporting for duty, and all the rest of the whole disgraceful nine yards. Kerry is a coward, an egomaniac, and probably a borderline personality. The Navy disposed of him, and it may have driven him into the arms of the enemy. He wouldn't be the first one to follow that path.

Integrity, integrity, integrity.
===================================

Sue

LOL. That cost her the election. Assuming he was the village idiot. I live here, Rider. She didn't take him serious.

Cecil Turner

It was an opinion piece; not reporting and not written by WP staff.

And of course the facts must've been incorrect, eh? Then perhaps you can provide statements from Kerry's crewmembers to support the fact of his missions into Cambodia? Or explain why an incident "seared" into his memory is false on more than one point? (I don't think you can.)

You believe it all and won't hear otherwise.

This is hilarious. Kerry's story is nonsense, when challenged he changes to other nonsense, and even his supporters won't back it up. And you're trying to sell his incredible "faulty memory" as if it's somebody else's fault. And here's the truly funny thing: Kerry's Vietnam service was perfectly honorable. But his subsequent actions and lies sank SS Kerry . . . not the SwiftVets who pointed them out.

Rider

Give it a rest, kim. I'm done with the Swiftbuck Vets. You were bought and paid for. You're past the point of return.

kim

And Rider, it is foolish to continue to misunderestimate George Bush. That schtick has stood him in good stead ever since he sobered up. He's CEO of the world and adding value daily for stakeholders, even the sullen and ungrateful ones, like you.
===========================================

kim

And Rider, it is foolish to continue to misunderestimate George Bush. That schtick has stood him in good stead ever since he sobered up. He's CEO of the world and adding value daily for stakeholders, even the sullen and ungrateful ones, like you.
===========================================

Rider

Or explain why an incident "seared" into his memory is false on more than one point? (I don't think you can.)

Are you old enough to remember Maurice Chevalier in Gigi singing, "I remember it well"?

If your memory is perfect, I'm happy for you. Kerry's isn't. He's a bloviating politician, so he's apt to keep speaking when other men have the decency to sit down and shut up. But he's no liar in my book. I can't stand him, but I do honor his military service. As to the SBV, they've been caught in way too many lies for my comfort. It's pretty obvious what was going on if you follow the money trail. As I said, there were vets who hated his guts from way back. Perhaps time played with their memories, too. I'll go with the Dept. of the Navy. Let's move on.

kim

Nope, not bought and paid for. The huge bulk of the money the Swifties collected came from small donations. Probably readers of the book and their 5-10 people with whom they discuss politics. That's populist mojo, something sadly lacking among Democrats, lately.
============================================

Rider

You can't say anything bad about the Democrats that is going to make me mad. I'm already way ahead of you, as I've tried to point out.

Sue

How about the SBVs, Rider? Do you also honor their service?

kim

What lies, and who caught them? The Swifties have not been debunked, quite the contrary.
============================

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame