Dole Questions Kerry's Vietnam Wounds

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by Bingo@Aug 24 2004, 02:24 PM
I think in the end Bush will actually win this thing because more independents or undecided voters will, in the end, not want to rock the boat when it comes to the war on terror and risk a back pedal that brings the war back to U.S. soil.

I disagree. I think the election maybe won on who the public thinks can be the better statesman and get the US out of Iraq efficiently while saving face, and projecting a plan of dealing with al-Qeada that does not require the US invading anymore countries. I also believe that with North Korea rattling its sabre that the time for a strong diplomat is going to be a sticker in the election. I don't think Bush is a diplomat in any shape or form and is not the man for the time. I believe Kerry would carry a little more credibility at the negotiation table than Bush would. The US needs a guy that can reign in the runaway foreign policy with some dignity and get the focus back on the homeland.

[Bingo]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald+Aug 24 2004, 08:49 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lanny_MacDonald @ Aug 24 2004, 08:49 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Bingo@Aug 24 2004, 02:24 PM
I think in the end Bush will actually win this thing because more independents or undecided voters will, in the end, not want to rock the boat when it comes to the war on terror and risk a back pedal that brings the war back to U.S. soil.

I disagree. I think the election maybe won on who the public thinks can be the better statesman and get the US out of Iraq efficiently while saving face, and projecting a plan of dealing with al-Qeada that does not require the US invading anymore countries. I also believe that with North Korea rattling its sabre that the time for a strong diplomat is going to be a sticker in the election. I don't think Bush is a diplomat in any shape or form and is not the man for the time. I believe Kerry would carry a little more credibility at the negotiation table than Bush would. The US needs a guy that can reign in the runaway foreign policy with some dignity and get the focus back on the homeland. [/b][/quote]
Fair enough ...

but are you telling me what Americans think, or what you think? That may be the difference.

Hey ... if I had my way I'd put a different guy in the chair with the same plan (stay in Iraq and get it done right). If Kerry is that guy ... great! I just fear he won't be, that he'll pull out of Iraq and take the US (and Canada with it) back to a "ignore the problem and hopefully it will go away" diplomacy angle.

Clearly I could be wrong.

[Bingo]

This could add to the dicussion ...

O'Reilly looks at smear tactics by media source ... why the Times was upset with the Kerry bashing but took little exception to say Moore or Soros.

O'Reilly by the way ... hammered both sides in this one.

O'Reilly

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by Bingo@Aug 24 2004, 03:03 PM
Fair enough ...

but are you telling me what Americans think, or what you think?

What I think the American public thinks. But I think that by thinking about what they think has made me rethink what I think in regards to the think that I thunk earlier in the year. Clearly that think has been effected by the thinking of those around me. I think.

[Cowperson]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald+Aug 24 2004, 06:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lanny_MacDonald @ Aug 24 2004, 06:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Bingo@Aug 24 2004, 03:03 PM
Fair enough ...

but are you telling me what Americans think, or what you think?

What I think the American public thinks. But I think that by thinking about what they think has made me rethink what I think in regards to the think that I thunk earlier in the year. Clearly that think has been effected by the thinking of those around me. I think.

[/b][/quote]
I think we should think about what people in general are thinking when they view these attack ads because clearly they work when perhaps they should be merely offensive to the senses.

It's not really about the content of the attack ads its the wonderment that people, far from being turned off by them, seem to incorporate the message into their voting decisions.

What does it say about the average American - or average Canadian for that matter - when we can only conclude that attack ads actually work?

Cowperson

[Displaced Flames fan]

So, the Bush=Hitler TV ads sponsored and funded by liberal 527 group move-on.org have been posted in this thread for everyone to view for nearly 24 hours and not a single comment?

and there's NOT a double standard in this forum?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@Aug 24 2004, 04:41 PM
So, the Bush=Hitler TV ads sponsored and funded by liberal 527 group move-on.org have been posted in this thread for everyone to view for nearly 24 hours and not a single comment?

and there's NOT a double standard in this forum?

Holy Crap those are awful. I hadn't seen or even heard of them before.

I don't know about a double-standard though. The Swift-boat-guys ad made a much bigger splash in the mainstream media and we all saw them so the reaction was bigger. Those ads you linked to I'm sure didn't even make it to television. I pay attention to this stuff and I've even been to the move-on website but I had no idea they even existed. Too fringe to be taken seriously maybe?

Also -- it isn't exactly a "left-wing" crowd that you usually find in these discussions on this board. The proprietors of the site and two of it's originalmembers (including you) are not exactly left-wing biased. The "double-standard" wouldn't work with this crowd, I don't think.

[TheCommodoreAfro]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@Aug 25 2004, 07:41 AM
So, the Bush=Hitler TV ads sponsored and funded by liberal 527 group move-on.org have been posted in this thread for everyone to view for nearly 24 hours and not a single comment?

and there's NOT a double standard in this forum?

You see the difference is that MoveOn.org shortly thereafter removed them from their competition. Bush only mildly rebuked the Swiftees after their ads had stopped their run.

But it sorta messes up your argument, doesn't it?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by TheCommodoreAfro+Aug 25 2004, 12:22 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (TheCommodoreAfro @ Aug 25 2004, 12:22 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Displaced Flames fan@Aug 25 2004, 07:41 AM
So, the Bush=Hitler TV ads sponsored and funded by liberal 527 group move-on.org have been posted in this thread for everyone to view for nearly 24 hours and not a single comment?

and there's NOT a double standard in this forum?

You see the difference is that MoveOn.org shortly thereafter removed them from their competition. Bush only mildly rebuked the Swiftees after their ads had stopped their run.

But it sorta messes up your argument, doesn't it? [/b][/quote]
Messes up my argument how?

They ran on TV in swing states in January 'Roos. These ads went out on FCC controlled airwaves. Fact.

Fro...your idea of mildly rebuked is warped IMO. Bush did everything he should have done and early.

Again (and no one has answered this question STILL) what exactly is it that you folks expected him to do? What action would have satisfied you?

Hmmm...I wonder how many bigtime Kerry supporters donated to move-on.org?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan+Aug 24 2004, 07:34 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Displaced Flames fan @ Aug 24 2004, 07:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

You see the difference is that MoveOn.org shortly thereafter removed them from their competition. Bush only mildly rebuked the Swiftees after their ads had stopped their run.

But it sorta messes up your argument, doesn't it?

Messes up my argument how?

They ran on TV in swing states in January 'Roos. These ads went out on FCC controlled airwaves. Fact.

Fro...your idea of mildly rebuked is warped IMO. Bush did everything he should have done and early.

Again (and no one has answered this question STILL) what exactly is it that you folks expected him to do? What action would have satisfied you?

Hmmm...I wonder how many bigtime Kerry supporters donated to move-on.org? [/b][/quote]
Well if that's true that they did run on TV then that is just plain bad. Offensive even to people that actually had to deal with Hitler.

What's a "527 group"?

I knew they were playing dirty pool down there but those ads never even got mentioned up here. The "Swiftie" (that word makes me think of cleaning the floor) were all over the news though and not in a "look at the awful thing they said" way but in a "look what these guys say".

I watch American news all the time and they didn't get mentioned there, that I noticed. I still think they might have been too "out there" to bother commenting on, and people recognized that. I hope they did. Kerry cannot have himself connected to that kind of thing -- it would do a lot more harm than good. It's obvious that a lot of Americans don't like Bush, but I imagine most Americans would still be offended at the insinuation that they are being led by Hitler, and their country is acting like the Nazis.

[Displaced Flames fan]

527 groups are what both move-on.org and the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" are. The 527 is a classification of the organization. They have become the recipients of all the 'soft' money donations that the McCain/Feingold campaign reform bill was supposed to eliminate from the process. Can you say loophole?

There is a radical liberal element who thinks those ads are appropriate (and I don't mean on this board). The website hosting the links I posted says that move-on.org 'wimped out' in removing them from their own website. Obviously move-on got some negative feeback on them.

I wouldn't argue a bit that the Swifties (that's becoming quite fun to say and type!) ad would be much more effective than that crap....but there's simply no excuse for comparing George W. Bush (or anyone else for that matter) to Hitler....although I've seen some drive by posters come close here.

The thing that kills me is that to date, you are the ONLY poster who has commented on the ads in a negative way. Kudos to you and I have no idea why it's not disturbing enough for anyone else to be concerned with.

Damn...I meant to include this part and forgot....

It should be noted that John Kerry himself denounced the Hitler ads, but it took a public prodding by John McCain for him to do so.

[RougeUnderoos]

You see the thing is I am the only non-biased person on the board. I am sure you agree with that, right? :P

Wanna hear something funny, and I swear this is the truth... my mom just walked into the room about I am in and she had the "Books Section" of Saturday's Globe and Mail in her hand. She showed me an ad for several anti-Bush books including Maureen Dowd's "Bushworld" and she said "this looks like a good book, have you heard of it"? Literally walked into the room as I was typing that first sentence.

[Displaced Flames fan]

:P Lower class and unbiased!

Was your Mom serious asking YOU if you'd heard of an anti-Bush book? I mean, doesn't she know that book is reasearch material for the one you're writing?

"Dubya and The Forum Curse: How the American President Stole the Stanley Cup from Calgary"

I'd be willing to bet that'd be a New York Times bestseller!

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@Aug 24 2004, 08:28 PM
:P Lower class and unbiased!

Was your Mom serious asking YOU if you'd heard of an anti-Bush book? I mean, doesn't she know that book is reasearch material for the one you're writing?

"Dubya and The Forum Curse: How the American President Stole the Stanley Cup from Calgary"

I'd be willing to bet that'd be a New York Times bestseller!

Ha! I don't need to do any research to write an anti-Bush book!

Actually I'd never even heard of the author but the cover and the title told me which way it was going.

If I come across any evidence that Bush had anything to do with the Stanley Cup, I'll let you know. It wouldn't be the first thing that the Bush's stole in Florida so I'm looking closely.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by RougeUnderoos+Aug 25 2004, 03:06 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RougeUnderoos @ Aug 25 2004, 03:06 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Displaced Flames fan@Aug 24 2004, 08:28 PM
:P Lower class and unbiased!

Was your Mom serious asking YOU if you'd heard of an anti-Bush book? I mean, doesn't she know that book is reasearch material for the one you're writing?

"Dubya and The Forum Curse: How the American President Stole the Stanley Cup from Calgary"

I'd be willing to bet that'd be a New York Times bestseller!

Ha! I don't need to do any research to write an anti-Bush book!

Actually I'd never even heard of the author but the cover and the title told me which way it was going.

If I come across any evidence that Bush had anything to do with the Stanley Cup, I'll let you know. It wouldn't be the first thing that the Bush's stole in Florida so I'm looking closely. [/b][/quote]
AHHHHHHHHHH!

If you find that evidence you'd better let me know, because that would be enough to turn me in a heartbeat!

[RougeUnderoos]

Deal.

Actually, no deal. I'd try but just the slightest poking around on that topic brings up so many contradictions and garbage from opposing sources that I doubt we'll ever get to the bottom of it. The battle-lines in that war are predictably drawn, with one side saying one thing and the other side... well, you know how it goes.

It all seems sketchy to me, but I don't know much about it. The "optics" don't look good, even if everything went properly. His brother being the governor just doesn't help. Maybe it was perfectly clean , but you gotta admit that that didn't help. Of course, he had his job before George had his and bla bla bla but still.