The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Swift boating again
The Scribe
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
In 2004 Jerome R. Corsi wrote Unfit for Command. This was an often slanderous attack on the war record of Sen. John Kerry – who unlike the incompetent in the White House fought in Vietnam. Now Corsi has written Obama Nation. In this book Corsi accuses Obama of having “extensive ties to Islam,†of smoking marijuana after he was twenty years old, and of having radical friends. Are these even problems? o_O
The Republican Party cannot run on the eight year record of George the Lesser. Republicans cannot plausibly maintain that John McCain will do a better job than GW by following essentially the same policies. All the GOP has are the politics of personal destruction, and the politics of identity. John McCain’s slogan has become, “Vote for John McCain. He’s a real American (unlike Barack Hussein Obama.) The GOP has nothing to offer a troubled country but the politics of hate, fear, and resentment. :x
The Republican Party cannot run on the eight year record of George the Lesser. Republicans cannot plausibly maintain that John McCain will do a better job than GW by following essentially the same policies. All the GOP has are the politics of personal destruction, and the politics of identity. John McCain’s slogan has become, “Vote for John McCain. He’s a real American (unlike Barack Hussein Obama.) The GOP has nothing to offer a troubled country but the politics of hate, fear, and resentment. :x
The Scribe on
0
Posts
However, you don't win elections by being better suited to the position.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
What's the problem here? Some guy wrote a book, big deal. How influential was his book about Kerry in the last election? Wasn't a lot of it rebuked, didn't real swift boat veterans come out both for and against Kerry? So what Kerry lost, it wasn't like he was that great of a politician in the first place, and I'm not advocating that Bush has been great either.
Both sides are stupid, both sides have their nutjobs who you just can't seem to shut up. It doesn't make it right, it sure as hell is wrong, but who cares. The country seems to have moved so far beyond Obama's history with Islam and accepted the fact that hey, this guy might actually be a great leader if he does what he says he will do.
He will also outlive McCain.
Closing: I must be an idiot or living in a cave, because I don't see the relevance here at all. It's a stupid book in a sea of stupid politics. It will join the stupid book heap and will be forgotten.
The Swift boat thing did actually hurt Kerry pretty badly.
Which is hilarious considering Bush's war record.
But then again I think slander and libel in an effort to influence an election should be jailable offenses. It will never, ever happen.
edit: to be clear, this book already has been debunked before even hitting stands, it's got quite a number of factually and obviously incorrect information, down to slamming Obama for not dedicating one of his books to his family, when the dedication page does just that in the book. It's provably and obviously factually incorrect and proud of it. That should be subject to very swift legal action but never will be.
I also don't think that Kerry was helped at all by the videos and constant references to him earning all these medals then throwing them on the White House lawn as a protest. He went back and forth between being proud to have served to the image of him resenting his service and selling out his comrades.
So he's the Jack Thompson of politics?
The GOP of the last 10 years or so has systematically destroyed, abandoned or corrupted even the most straight forward of Republicans. Theres very few of those old guys left at least on the national level.
It's a horribly stupid term, but probably appropriate when it's the same dude.
Maybe this is the lefty in me, but I have to agree to this. It seems like the GOP have done they're dammed best to win at all costs, and sold their party values down the river to do it.
The major problem - ONE of the major problems, for there are several - one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must WANT to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem.
-- Douglas Adams
I'm pretty sure it's in the new Safire dictionary. So yes.
That attitude began the moment people stopped voting for the guy they want to win, and starting voted against the guy they want to lose.
Or maybe it started when people started voting for their party rather than for the politician.
Kang: Yes we are aliens, but what are you going to do about it? It's a two party system, you have to vote for one of us!
Citizen: I believe I'll vote for a third party candidate
Kodos: Go ahead, throw your vote away! HAHAHAHAHA!
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Leads? That's the intent of negative ads. It's telling that the GOP has, for about the last 50-60 years (remember, Reinquist made his bones as a "poll watcher") engaged in outright voter suppression.
Lee Atwater, who was George H.W. Bush's campaign manager, said that when a voter went to the polling place he wanted the voter to be thinking three bad things about the opposing candidate. He also said that when you can't get a voter to vote for your candidate you want to get the voter so disgusted with the other candidate that he doesn't vote at all. There is little doubt but that negative campaigning works. Because the Republicans have nothing good to say about themselves you can expect them to run a very dirty campaing this time.
The main reason I voted for John Kerry for President in 2004 was the fact that he had lead the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. The War in Vietnam was evil. It took real character to fight in that war when he could have easily avoided combat duty the way most prominent middle aged Republicans did, and then to go before the American people and tell them that the War was at best a tragic mistake, and at worst an unjustified act of American aggression. Unfortunately, in American politics those who tell the truth often lose elections. Frequently the voters want to be lied to.
"People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful, or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so, the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn't that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but you had the wrong kind of people.
As soon as you saw people as things to be measured, they didn't measure up."
Terry Pratchett, Night Watch