Current lie making the rounds about Kerry and Pre-emption - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Superbelt · 09-27-2004, 05:07 PM

Here is the lie:

Quote:

"We know we can't count on the French. We know we can't count on the Russians. We know that Iraq is a danger to the United States, and we reserve the right to take pre-emptive action whenever we feel it's in our national interest." - John Kerry 1997

This comes to us by a man named John McCaslin, a Washington Times editorialist. Washington Times is owned by the Conservative Philanthropist Sun Myung Moon by the way. He says he got the quote from a tape from the CNN show Crossfire on which Kerry was featured. One of his debate opponent that day, Republican Representative Peter King gave Mr McCaslin a copy. He says that no transcripts exist, Only this tape. Fortunately he's wrong. Nexis has transcripts, always has and still does for anyone who doubts the truth of the following excerpt. If you want, go to a local library or university to use their Lexis Nexis search and find this yourself.

Here is the truth:

Quote:

November 12, 1997, Crossfire:

JOHN SUNUNU, CROSSFIRE: Senator Kerry, in fact, in spite of the administration claiming it has restored unanimity, that has not occurred. All the strength of this resolution had to be pulled out of it get any votes at all other than our own. Isn't this exercise actually counterproductive in sending a signal to Iraq that the coalition still remains frayed?

SEN. JOHN KERRY, (D), MASSACHUSETTS, FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: Well, John, you're correct that this resolution is less than we would have liked. I don't think anybody can deny that we would have liked it to have threatened force and we would have liked it to carry the term serious consequences will flow. On the other hand, the coalition is together. I mean, the fact is there is a unanimous statement by the security council and the United Nations that there has to be immediate, unrestricted, unconditional access to the sites. That's very strong language. And it also references the underlying resolution on which the use of force is based. So clearly the allies may not like it, and I think that's our great concern -- where's the backbone of Russia, where's the backbone of France, where are they in expressing their condemnation of such clearly illegal activity -- but in a sense, they're now climbing into a box and they will have enormous difficulty not following up on this if there is not compliance by Iraq.

SUNUNU: But senator, the whole process of presenting this through the security council had each of those allies you have mentioned giving a warning in fact to the U.S.. Let's take a look at what each one of 'em had to say. First of all, France said, "The resolution doesn't encourage nor does it justify any escalation." Russia said, "Actions involving force or threatening the use of force could wipe out all of our achievements." And China said, in that very same debate, "We are opposed to the use of force or the threat of force or any actions that might further exasperate tensions. This whole process gave our allies an opportunity not only not to follow America's leadership, not only not to allow us to lead, but to tell us we'd better not do what the president is now saying he might do.

KERRY: Well, John, there's absolutely no statement that they have made or that they will make that will prevent the United States of America and this president or any president from acting in what they believe are the best interests of our country. And obviously it's disappointing. It was disappointing a month ago not to have the French and the Russians understanding that they shouldn't give any signals of weakening on the sanctions and I think those signals would have helped bring about this crisis because they permitted Saddam Hussein to interpret that maybe the moment was right for him to make this challenge.

SUNUNU: But isn't what he has seen is a loss of U.S. leadership and an erosion under an administration that has failed to lead?

KERRY: On the contrary. The administration is leading. The administration is making it clear that they don't believe that they even need the U.N. Security Council to sign off on a material breach because the finding of material breach was made by Mr. Butler. So furthermore, I think the United States has always reserved the right and will reserve the right to act in its best interests. And clearly it is not just our best interests, it is in the best interests of the world to make it clear to Saddam Hussein that he's not going to get away with a breach of the '91 agreement that he's got to live up to, which is allowing inspections and dismantling his weapons and allowing us to know that he has dismantled his weapons. That's the price he pays for invading Kuwait and starting a war.

[...]

SUNUNU: Senator Kerry, I think the issue that concerns a lot of us who have seen the process in the past and have been watching what has been going on now is that the previous administration, President Bush, Jim Baker worked to weave the fabric before rolling out the goods and the tough talk. This administration's got the tough talk now, but it let the fabric get unraveled and that is the problem. We have to at least understand that failure if we want to move forward correctly.

KERRY: John, again, I think you're prejudging this. I mean, the fact is that over a period of time France and Russia have indicated a monetary interest. They on their own have indicated the desire to do business. That's what's driving this. I mean, as Tom Freedman (ph) said in a great article the other day, France, Inc., wants to do business with oil and they are moving in the exact sort of opposite direction on their own from the very cause of the initial conflict, which was oil.

SUNUNU: But that's not new, Senator Kerry. You're pretending that this desire...

KERRY: Correct, but ...

SUNUNU: ...of commercial interest is new. That's always been there. They were there in 1990, they were there in '91, they were in the tough times and they stood with us.

KERRY: Correct, absolutely correct, and I believe, and they stood with us today, and I am saying to you that it is my judgment that by standing with us today and calling for the unrestricted, unconditional, unlimited, you know, access, they have now taken a stand that they are duty bound to enforce, and if Saddam Hussein doesn't do that, the president, I think, has begun a process which you remember very well, John, was not done in one week, in one day, in one month. It took months to weave together the fabric to lead up to an understanding of what was at stake. I am convinced that many people have not yet even focused in full measure on what is at stake.

SUNUNU: All right ...

KERRY: This is not just a minor confrontation. This is a very significant issue about the balance of power, about the future stability of the Middle East, about all of what we have thus far invested in the prior war and what may happen in the future.

There is nothing in there even relatively close to the error of a quote that is being tossed around.
He does not advocate "pre-emptive action whenever we feel it's in our national interest." Kerry says the United states upon "finding a material breachy... will reserve the right to act in its best interests"
Thanks to the good people at Media Matters for digging that baby up.

irateplatypus · 09-27-2004, 05:14 PM

so... where did you want the thread to go from here?

cthulu23 · 09-27-2004, 05:14 PM

This is not surprising at all given the mountains of slander that have been heaped on Kerry.

Superbelt · 09-27-2004, 05:16 PM

So, from here we all realize that Kerry is being misquoted, it is being done on purpose to try and falsely denigrate him and his vision. We are here to discuss politics and the way this thing is going around all the news channels and editiorials right now is painting Kerry in a false light that is unfair and untruthful.

Why do you think this McCaslin guy decided he had to do this?

irateplatypus · 09-27-2004, 05:29 PM

probably because he thought the tape was genuine. lots of media fraud going on these days.

i'd be interested in hearing the tape. i will take lexis nexis over a lone tape everytime, but there was something abou this tape that made the man think he had something on kerry. maybe it's a bit sketchy but was done well enough to make someone who wanted to believe it anyway fall for the ruse. he should release it on the internet and let the rest of the country ascertain its veracity. probably a forgery.

cthulu23 · 09-27-2004, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irateplatypus

probably because he thought the tape was genuine. lots of media fraud going on these days.

i'd be interested in hearing the tape. i will take lexis nexis over a lone tape everytime, but there was something abou this tape that made the man think he had something on kerry. maybe it's a bit sketchy but was done well enough to make someone who wanted to believe it anyway fall for the ruse. he should release it on the internet and let the rest of the country ascertain its veracity. probably a forgery.

The Washington Times has retracted their quotations of this fabrication so you can at least assume that the case is bad enough for a conservative paper to back away from it.

Edit: so, given the recent CBS uproar, is it time to start calling for the resignations of Drudge, et al?

Superbelt · 09-27-2004, 05:35 PM

I don't see how this former representative was able to forge a tape so conclusively that someone could not only fall for it but be able to pick such an specific quote out of it. It wasn't a forgery. He modified the output on his editorial enough to make a pretty damaging statement against Kerry believing that there were no other copies of the show around (and no transcripts) to refute him. At least not before the election.

Ustwo · 09-27-2004, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthulu23

The Washington Times has retracted their quotations of this fabrication so you can at least assume that the case is bad enough for a conservative paper to back away from it.

You mean there are conservative news media? Does that mean perhaps there are liberal ones as well?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superbelt

So, from here we all realize that Kerry is being misquoted, it is being done on purpose to try and falsely denigrate him and his vision. We are here to discuss politics and the way this thing is going around all the news channels and editiorials right now is painting Kerry in a false light that is unfair and untruthful.

Why do you think this McCaslin guy decided he had to do this?

Hmmmm I see an incomplete transcript. Perhaps I should say the 'gist' of this story is true even if the quotation is not authentic?

I find your indignation false.

This is the Washington times piece after the fact.

Quote:

Quoting Kerry
"We know we can't count on the French. We know we can't count on the Russians."
Not the words of Sen. John Kerry, as a press release from the office of Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican, incorrectly stated — and as we passed along in this column last Friday.
The congressman was paraphrasing Mr. Kerry's sentiments on Iraq in a debate on CNN's "Crossfire" in 1997.
Referring to a U.N. Security Council resolution demanding access to Iraqi weapons sites, Mr. Kerry had these harsh words for France and Russia: "I think that's our great concern — where's the backbone of Russia? Where's the backbone of France? Where are they in expressing their condemnation of such clearly illegal activity? But in a sense, they're now climbing into a box, and they will have enormous difficulty not following up on this if there is not compliance by Iraq."
The congressman said the transcript of the CNN program quotes Mr. Kerry as saying in reference to France and Russia: "There's absolutely no statement that they have made or that they will make that will prevent the United States of America and this president [Bill Clinton] or any president from acting in what they believe are the best interests of our country."
In a telephone interview over the weekend, Mr. King says this is not another case of Mr. Kerry simply changing his position.
"The fact is, he was strongly for the war, for searching for chemical and biological weapons, working against terrorists, and, basically, he's now denying he ever said that," Mr. King says. "This is not the basic flip-flop you hear from politicians. This is not John Kerry being careless in his views.
"He's going right to the guts of his position — it's like Dr. Martin Luther King suddenly becoming a segregationist," Mr. King says. "He is not just changing his position, he is rewriting history on that position."

Of course the Washington Times corrected their error right away.

Of course Superbelt your boy gives me lots of quotes, check the new one.

Edit: Had wrong poster quoted in the wrong place.

cthulu23 · 09-27-2004, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Hmmmm I see an incomplete transcript. Perhaps I should say the 'gist' of this story is true even if the quotation is not authentic?

I find your indignation false.

This is the Washington times piece after the fact.

Of course the Washington Times corrected their error right away.

The difference is that Kerry never once talked about preemptive invasion, which was the part of the quote that was so tantalizing to conservatives. In fact, the real statement jibes quite nicely with Kerry's recent comments about Iraq.

I assume that everyone that howled about Dan Rather's mistake will now join in to demand the head of Mr. King.

cthulu23 · 09-27-2004, 06:28 PM

From a false quote to a completely out-of-context one.

See http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1099256/posts

Quote:

If Saddam Hussein is unwilling to bend to the international community's already existing order, then he will have invited enforcement, even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act. But until we have properly laid the groundwork and proved to our fellow citizens and our allies that we really have no other choice, we are not yet at the moment of unilateral decision-making in going to war against Iraq.

Here are some other choice quotes from that same speech that is supposed to incriminate Kerry:

Quote:

It may well be that the United States will go to war with Iraq. But if so, it should be because we have to -- not because we want to. For the American people to accept the legitimacy of this conflict and give their consent to it, the Bush administration must first present detailed evidence of the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and then prove that all other avenues of protecting our nation's security interests have been exhausted. Exhaustion of remedies is critical to winning the consent of a civilized people in the decision to go to war. And consent, as we have learned before, is essential to carrying out the mission. President Bush's overdue statement this week that he would consult Congress is a beginning, but the administration's strategy remains adrift.

Regime change in Iraq is a worthy goal. But regime change by itself is not a justification for going to war. Absent a Qaeda connection, overthrowing Saddam Hussein -- the ultimate weapons-inspection enforcement mechanism -- should be the last step, not the first. Those who think that the inspection process is merely a waste of time should be reminded that legitimacy in the conduct of war, among our people and our allies, is not a waste, but an essential foundation of success.

If we are to put American lives at risk in a foreign war, President Bush must be able to say to this nation that we had no choice, that this was the only way we could eliminate a threat we could not afford to tolerate.

In the end there may be no choice. But so far, rather than making the case for the legitimacy of an Iraq war, the administration has complicated its own case and compromised America's credibility by casting about in an unfocused, overly public internal debate in the search for a rationale for war. By beginning its public discourse with talk of invasion and regime change, the administration has diminished its most legitimate justification of war -- that in the post-Sept. 11 world, the unrestrained threat of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of Saddam Hussein is unacceptable and that his refusal to allow in inspectors is in blatant violation of the United Nations 1991 cease-fire agreement that left him in power.

Context is a beautiful thing.

OpieCunningham · 09-27-2004, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthulu23

I assume that everyone that howled about Dan Rather's mistake will now join in to demand the head of Mr. King.

I'm sure they'll get right on that ... as soon as they howl at Bush for failing to heed the numerous warnings he received about the poor Iraq-Uranium information - later demonstrated to be forged.

Which should happen in about never.

onetime2 · 09-28-2004, 05:15 AM

Umm yeah. The outrage! The horror! The audacity! Lying about a candidate's words and or actions. Who would do such a thing? Oh wait everyone in this campaign has been doing it for the last year and a half or more. But yeah it's just the horrible right wingers who are guilty.

Bush lied about WMDs!

Bush is after Iraq's oil!

Cheney has financial interests in Haliburton!

The Bush dynasty is in bed with the Saudis!

Bush knew about 9/11!

Bush never completed his guard duties!

Bush's team forged the CBS papers!

Kerry's medals weren't earned!

Kerry is a traitor!

Kerry is for pre-emption!

cthulu23 · 09-28-2004, 05:34 AM

Onetime2,

No one was saying that bending the truth is a right-wing only trait, but we are trying to correct a mistaken assumption that some in this forum seemed to hold. Are we not allowed to reveal a misconception? I see no feigned outrage in this thread other than your post.

By the way, Cheney does have some financial interests in Haliburton (stock). I'm not making anything of that, but you shouldn't use it as an example of a lie.

onetime2 · 09-28-2004, 05:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthulu23

Onetime2,

No one was saying that bending the truth is a right-wing only trait, but we are trying to correct a mistaken assumption that some in this forum seemed to hold. Are we not allowed to reveal a misconception? I see no feigned outrage in this thread other than your post.

By the way, Cheney does have some financial interests in Haliburton (stock). I'm not making anything of that, but you shouldn't use it as an example of a lie.

Your post:

Quote:

Originally Posted by chtulu23

This is not surprising at all given the mountains of slander that have been heaped on Kerry.

certainly gives the perception that this is somehow primarily focused on Kerry.

Then there was Opie's claim about the forged uranium papers.

Yep it certainly seemed like it was a solely non-partisan attempt to set the record straight.

Oh, and the Cheney ties to Haliburton are ridiculous since his assets are in blind trusts and they revolve around a commonly used option of deferred compensation from the time he spent leading Haliburton. But we probably shouldn't get into that here. Feel free to mentally remove that "disputed" claim from my list if it makes you feel any better.

cthulu23 · 09-28-2004, 06:21 AM

I never claimed that the thread was non-partisan, just as no one said that bending the truth was the sole domain of the right wing. Are there any other misapprehensions that I can help set straight?

Willravel · 09-28-2004, 07:36 AM

Well f*** the Washington Times, then! I can't stand this childish horse crap. I hope they get cornered and proescuted for this.

Ustwo · 09-28-2004, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

Well f*** the Washington Times, then! I can't stand this childish horse crap. I hope they get cornered and proescuted for this.

For imidiately correcting a story once it couldn't be verified?

I take it you want CBS drawn and quartered then.

cthulu23 · 09-28-2004, 08:00 AM

Hey, Ustwo, you do know that your sig is completely out-of-context, right? Why not change it before someone mistakenly believes it? We wouldn't want to be misleading, would we?

onetime2 · 09-28-2004, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthulu23

I never claimed that the thread was non-partisan, just as no one said that bending the truth was the sole domain of the right wing. Are there any other misapprehensions that I can help set straight?

If you truly believe that I've got a nice piece of swamp errr I mean vacation property for sale in Florida.

The partisanship immediately attributes guilt to the "right" while playing up the "left" as poor victims of the bad right's actions. Omitting the fact that the "left" has used this tactic the entire race doesn't lend much support to the outrage felt by many of those posting in this thread.

cthulu23 · 09-28-2004, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onetime2

If you truly believe that I've got a nice piece of swamp errr I mean vacation property for sale in Florida.

The partisanship immediately attributes guilt to the "right" while playing up the "left" as poor victims of the bad right's actions. Omitting the fact that the "left" has used this tactic the entire race doesn't lend much support to the outrage felt by many of those posting in this thread.

Ummm, I think that my last post made it clear...no one said that this thread didn't have partisan statements, just like no one said that only right-wingers lie. I guess that you misread my last few statements. Either that or you are intentionally putting words in my mouth. I prefer the former explanation.

Edit: whether or not there are partisan statements made in this thread does not detract from the truth of the topic in any way. Of course, that didn't stop you from jumping in and immediately hammering us for acting as if our side doesn't bend the truth, something that we never said. Sheesh.

onetime2 · 09-29-2004, 04:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthulu23

Ummm, I think that my last post made it clear...no one said that this thread didn't have partisan statements, just like no one said that only right-wingers lie. I guess that you misread my last few statements. Either that or you are intentionally putting words in my mouth. I prefer the former explanation.

Edit: whether or not there are partisan statements made in this thread does not detract from the truth of the topic in any way. Of course, that didn't stop you from jumping in and immediately hammering us for acting as if our side doesn't bend the truth, something that we never said. Sheesh.

And you've ignored my point that the partisan statements imply that this is something that "your side" isn't doing or that the "right's" actions are somehow beyond the pale for this election. The fact is the left has done far more to make this race the way it is than the right. Using the excuse of just trying to set the record straight doesn't cut it, IMO.

cthulu23 · 09-29-2004, 05:03 AM

So now it's the "implications" of our words that you're criticising. I guess I can't defend what I didn't say. And then you follow it up with a broadside partisan slam accusing the left of lowering the political dialogue. Nice one. It's a classic political maneuver...accuse your "enemy" of something and then do exactly the same thing yourself.

onetime2 · 09-29-2004, 05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthulu23

Nice one. It's a classic political maneuver...accuse your "enemy" of something and then do exactly the same thing yourself.

My whole point of this thread. Thanks for finally understanding. Except in this case it was "do this the entire race, then accuse your "enemy" of doing it, while continuing to do it yourself".

Use every resource at your disposal for the entire race to flat out lie about anything and everything and whine and complain when the opposition follows the ground rules you created.

My work here is done.

cthulu23 · 09-29-2004, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onetime2

My whole point of this thread. Thanks for finally understanding. Except in this case it was "do this the entire race, then accuse your "enemy" of doing it, while continuing to do it yourself".

Use every resource at your disposal for the entire race to flat out lie about anything and everything and whine and complain when the opposition follows the ground rules you created.

My work here is done.

Except we never said that "our" side doesn't engage in political obfuscation, as has been made extremely clear in this thread. After finding nothing indictable in our statements you pan their "implications." You accuse us of partisanship and then proceed to blame the Democrats for introducing lying into politics. Geez, that takes nerve. I think that the real partisan hack has revealed themselves. You're right, your work here is done. Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.

onetime2 · 09-29-2004, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthulu23

Except we never said that "our" side doesn't engage in political obfuscation, as has been made extremely clear in this thread. After finding nothing indictable in our statements you pan their "implications." You accuse us of partisanship and then proceed to blame the Democrats for introducing lying into politics. Geez, that takes nerve. I think that the real partisan hack has revealed themselves. You're right, your work here is done. Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.

\

The intentions of this thread and your posts in it were clear. It was another "poor Kerry getting beat up by the bad Republicans" with the intentional ignoring of the fact that this is the campaign your side decided to run. Call me a partisan hack all you like but it will not make it true.

cthulu23 · 09-29-2004, 06:20 AM

I take back the partisan hack statement. There is no need to get personal here.

Ustwo · 09-29-2004, 06:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthulu23

Except we never said that "our" side doesn't engage in political obfuscation, as has been made extremely clear in this thread. After finding nothing indictable in our statements you pan their "implications." You accuse us of partisanship and then proceed to blame the Democrats for introducing lying into politics. Geez, that takes nerve. I think that the real partisan hack has revealed themselves. You're right, your work here is done. Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.

Sorry but the Democrats have perfected lying and obfuscation to a science. If only the republicans were half as good at it, these elections wouldn't even be a contest. This is my honest and heartfelt belief after years of following politics. I used to be young and stupid and thought 'well the republicans are good at foreign policy but the democrats are good at domestic issues'. Then when I started really paying attention and not just watching the news I got hit with a big obvious clue. The democrats have offered nothing but fear, divisiveness, class envy, and helplessness to the state. I have really started to hate their leadership, and the limousine liberals, scorn for the self serving unions, and pity for those locked in poverty and hopelessness by state programs which have destroyed the family unit for so many Americans.

Superbelt · 09-29-2004, 07:01 AM

God we suck. I've seen the light. I'm registering Republican!

gcbrowni · 09-29-2004, 07:58 AM

Here's a link to a more recent Kerry pro-pre-emption statement, from July 17. This is what pushed me in to the Kerry camp.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0717-03.htm

Selected Quote: "Kerry said the intelligence needs to be improved so that the word of a U.S. president "is good enough for people across the world again."

But he added, "I will never allow any other country to veto what we need to do and I will never allow any other institution to veto what we need to do to protect our nation."

cthulu23 · 09-29-2004, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Sorry but the Democrats have perfected lying and obfuscation to a science. If only the republicans were half as good at it, these elections wouldn't even be a contest. This is my honest and heartfelt belief after years of following politics. I used to be young and stupid and thought 'well the republicans are good at foreign policy but the democrats are good at domestic issues'. Then when I started really paying attention and not just watching the news I got hit with a big obvious clue. The democrats have offered nothing but fear, divisiveness, class envy, and helplessness to the state. I have really started to hate their leadership, and the limousine liberals, scorn for the self serving unions, and pity for those locked in poverty and hopelessness by state programs which have destroyed the family unit for so many Americans.

Look, we all feel strongly about our side of the issues, but can't we keep the most blatant "rah-rah" team comments out of this forums. You may believe that your "team" are the ultimate "good guys" and that the opposition are nothing but baby-eating scoundrels but posting that does nothing to increase understanding and will only alienate those who don't completely agree with you. These types of posts frustrate me as they show no civility to the other side and are basically a slap in the face. Do you understand what I'm trying to say?

analog · 09-29-2004, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Sorry but the Democrats have perfected lying and obfuscation to a science. If only the republicans were half as good at it, these elections wouldn't even be a contest. This is my honest and heartfelt belief after years of following politics. I used to be young and stupid and thought 'well the republicans are good at foreign policy but the democrats are good at domestic issues'. Then when I started really paying attention and not just watching the news I got hit with a big obvious clue. The democrats have offered nothing but fear, divisiveness, class envy, and helplessness to the state. I have really started to hate their leadership, and the limousine liberals, scorn for the self serving unions, and pity for those locked in poverty and hopelessness by state programs which have destroyed the family unit for so many Americans.

Wow. Biggest troll i've seen come from a regular Tilted Politics person in a while.

Simply amazing. If a Dem pulled this, you'd be up their ass so fast that you'd be knee-deep in colon before they even got to hit the submit button.

scout · 09-30-2004, 03:32 AM

I think it's time for a group hug, remember we are all still in this together no matter what or who wins the election. This has been one of the most divisive elections I can ever remember, and one side can point to the other side for the blame.

tecoyah · 09-30-2004, 04:20 AM

This is why I am but a Lurker now......I fail to see any benefit from this entire thread, other than increasing the level of disdain. This whole thing started out as an attempt to put a misleading statement into its proper context, and became the typical slugfest. perhaps a lesson can be learned....but I doubt it.

Ustwo · 09-30-2004, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by analog

Wow. Biggest troll i've seen come from a regular Tilted Politics person in a while.

Simply amazing. If a Dem pulled this, you'd be up their ass so fast that you'd be knee-deep in colon before they even got to hit the submit button.

I'm sorry but its an opinion, its my opinion and why I am a Republican. I'm sick of democrat class envy, race politics, and doubletalk. If you think its a troll so be it but I don't really care. Also for the most part, and I can't think of any off hand, I don't get up someones ass for their opinion unless they are trying to back it up with some bogus or biased article in which case I'll slam the article.

You don't agree with my opinion and thats fine, I didn't ask you to.

Superbelt · 09-30-2004, 05:45 AM

Damn democrats! Go take your gay-haiku-writing-bongo-beating-antiamerican-poetry readings somewhere else…Like the back of your ’69 VW van where no one can here you!
Remember hardened conservative vets died face down in the swamps of Vietnam so you could just wipe your ass with that american flag and wear your hair like a Lion with Mange.

That's just my opinion.

analog · 09-30-2004, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I'm sorry but its an opinion, its my opinion and why I am a Republican.

Yes, massive trolls usually are opinions in one form or another. Thank you for exemplifying this fact.

09-27-2004, 05:14 PM	#2 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	so... where did you want the thread to go from here? __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill

09-27-2004, 05:14 PM	#3 (permalink)
cthulu23 Banned	This is not surprising at all given the mountains of slander that have been heaped on Kerry. Last edited by cthulu23; 09-27-2004 at 05:23 PM..

09-27-2004, 05:29 PM	#5 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	probably because he thought the tape was genuine. lots of media fraud going on these days. i'd be interested in hearing the tape. i will take lexis nexis over a lone tape everytime, but there was something abou this tape that made the man think he had something on kerry. maybe it's a bit sketchy but was done well enough to make someone who wanted to believe it anyway fall for the ruse. he should release it on the internet and let the rest of the country ascertain its veracity. probably a forgery. __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill

09-28-2004, 05:15 AM	#12 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	Umm yeah. The outrage! The horror! The audacity! Lying about a candidate's words and or actions. Who would do such a thing? Oh wait everyone in this campaign has been doing it for the last year and a half or more. But yeah it's just the horrible right wingers who are guilty. Bush lied about WMDs! Bush is after Iraq's oil! Cheney has financial interests in Haliburton! The Bush dynasty is in bed with the Saudis! Bush knew about 9/11! Bush never completed his guard duties! Bush's team forged the CBS papers! Kerry's medals weren't earned! Kerry is a traitor! Kerry is for pre-emption! __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

09-29-2004, 07:58 AM	#29 (permalink)
gcbrowni Tilted Location: Indianapolis	Here's a link to a more recent Kerry pro-pre-emption statement, from July 17. This is what pushed me in to the Kerry camp. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0717-03.htm Selected Quote: "Kerry said the intelligence needs to be improved so that the word of a U.S. president "is good enough for people across the world again." But he added, "I will never allow any other country to veto what we need to do and I will never allow any other institution to veto what we need to do to protect our nation." __________________ From the day of his birth Gilgamesh was called by name.

09-27-2004, 05:16 PM	#4 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	So, from here we all realize that Kerry is being misquoted, it is being done on purpose to try and falsely denigrate him and his vision. We are here to discuss politics and the way this thing is going around all the news channels and editiorials right now is painting Kerry in a false light that is unfair and untruthful. Why do you think this McCaslin guy decided he had to do this?

09-27-2004, 05:35 PM	#7 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	I don't see how this former representative was able to forge a tape so conclusively that someone could not only fall for it but be able to pick such an specific quote out of it. It wasn't a forgery. He modified the output on his editorial enough to make a pretty damaging statement against Kerry believing that there were no other copies of the show around (and no transcripts) to refute him. At least not before the election.

09-28-2004, 05:34 AM	#13 (permalink)
cthulu23 Banned	Onetime2, No one was saying that bending the truth is a right-wing only trait, but we are trying to correct a mistaken assumption that some in this forum seemed to hold. Are we not allowed to reveal a misconception? I see no feigned outrage in this thread other than your post. By the way, Cheney does have some financial interests in Haliburton (stock). I'm not making anything of that, but you shouldn't use it as an example of a lie.

09-28-2004, 06:21 AM	#15 (permalink)
cthulu23 Banned	I never claimed that the thread was non-partisan, just as no one said that bending the truth was the sole domain of the right wing. Are there any other misapprehensions that I can help set straight?

09-28-2004, 07:36 AM	#16 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Well f*** the Washington Times, then! I can't stand this childish horse crap. I hope they get cornered and proescuted for this.

09-28-2004, 08:00 AM	#18 (permalink)
cthulu23 Banned	Hey, Ustwo, you do know that your sig is completely out-of-context, right? Why not change it before someone mistakenly believes it? We wouldn't want to be misleading, would we?

09-29-2004, 05:03 AM	#22 (permalink)
cthulu23 Banned	So now it's the "implications" of our words that you're criticising. I guess I can't defend what I didn't say. And then you follow it up with a broadside partisan slam accusing the left of lowering the political dialogue. Nice one. It's a classic political maneuver...accuse your "enemy" of something and then do exactly the same thing yourself.

09-29-2004, 06:20 AM	#26 (permalink)
cthulu23 Banned	I take back the partisan hack statement. There is no need to get personal here.

09-29-2004, 07:01 AM	#28 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	God we suck. I've seen the light. I'm registering Republican!

09-30-2004, 03:32 AM	#32 (permalink)
scout Psycho	I think it's time for a group hug, remember we are all still in this together no matter what or who wins the election. This has been one of the most divisive elections I can ever remember, and one side can point to the other side for the blame.

09-30-2004, 04:20 AM	#33 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	This is why I am but a Lurker now......I fail to see any benefit from this entire thread, other than increasing the level of disdain. This whole thing started out as an attempt to put a misleading statement into its proper context, and became the typical slugfest. perhaps a lesson can be learned....but I doubt it. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

09-30-2004, 05:45 AM	#35 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	Damn democrats! Go take your gay-haiku-writing-bongo-beating-antiamerican-poetry readings somewhere else…Like the back of your ’69 VW van where no one can here you! Remember hardened conservative vets died face down in the swamps of Vietnam so you could just wipe your ass with that american flag and wear your hair like a Lion with Mange. That's just my opinion. Last edited by Superbelt; 09-30-2004 at 05:47 AM..