october surprise coming monday morning, or just another internet rumor? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

dy156 · 10-24-2004, 05:28 PM

Remember that thread I wrote about internet political memes?

The internet blogosphere is buzzing because some people have heard that the Washington Times is coming out with a story tomorrow morning that will not be good for Kerry. No one knows what it will be, but lots of people want you to know that they have heard that there is going to be a big story.

here's but a sampling:

powerline
INDC journal
littlegreenfootballs
redstate
blogforbush
dailyKos
counterpundit

It seems as if everyone is pointing to someone else saying the same thing. My thoughts -- Why wouldn't a newspaper publish a big story, especially one that been known awhile, on a Sunday rather than a Monday? Could someone be attempting to pull a fast one on the bloggers in retaliation for the Dan Rather memogate by watching how they all blather on about something that might have started with a few fake emails to a couple of bloggers? WHo knows?

If it is legit, and not another Kerry sex scandal that didn't happen, what do you think it will be about? Iran? Osama bin dead? I'm still thinking hoax right now. Ya'll?

thefictionweliv · 10-24-2004, 05:43 PM

Don't believe anything you read on the internet, don't believe anything you see on TV, don't believe anything you hear on the radio, don't believe anything published in newspapers....move along....

pan6467 · 10-24-2004, 05:49 PM

It's a hoax or fake story that will be filled with "sources close", "this person's brother's sister's cousin's nephew is a friend of someone who heard...".

To pull it out on a Monday when you are getting nothing for it, when you could have had it on the high priced, everyone would be reading Sunday is idiotic and shows it's value right there.

As for Drudge and these bloggers sites... they all have their biases and reasons for wanting to put questions in people's heads.

When it doesn't run tomorrow or isn't that big of an issue, these people will save face by saying the Wash. Times couldn't print the whole story for some reason..... that there is more but right now the Times wants to make sure everything is accurate or whatever BS lies they can think of to cover their asses.

Ustwo · 10-24-2004, 05:58 PM

Funny this should come up.

About a month ago, I was at my grandparents house and they, being good people are Republicans, despite being retired and partially dependent on social security.

My uncle was there and mentioned a conversation he had with a friend who works for the RNC somehow who said they were planning on releasing some info in October which would kill Kerry.

Of course this is a friend of a relative type of thing, and I didn't think much of it, but I can only hope that its true

OpieCunningham · 10-24-2004, 06:30 PM

The Washington Times, eh?

On a related note, I heard that there'll be another post which is not good for Bush on DailyKos tomorrow morning.

dy156 · 10-24-2004, 07:27 PM

Uhm... turns out it's nothing more than a story about how Kerry said he met with UN Security counsel officials, and then it turns out he didn't.
Big deal.
"I remember Christmas in Cambodia"
"I volunteered at an inner city program"
"I ran the Boston marathon"

What's one more white lie by a presidential candidate?
The fact that it's not a big deal makes me sad.

Mephisto2 · 10-24-2004, 07:35 PM

Washington Times criticise Kerry.
Washington Post supports him.

Crazy Washington papers!

Mr Mephisto

OpieCunningham · 10-24-2004, 07:42 PM

The Washington Times is indeed a crazy paper. Literally.

The owner is the Reverend Sun Myung Moon. He believes himself to be the Messiah. Sold 12 nuclear missle-capable submarines to North Korea, calls America "Satan's Harvest" and was recently (March, 2004) "corronated" by members of the U.S. Congress in a ceremony held in a Senate office building.

He has also paid for a few speaking engagements by George H.W. Bush. Who has called and saluted Moon as a "man with a vision".

My favorite Moon quote:

Quote:

The five great saints and many other leaders in the spirit world, including even Communist leaders such as Marx and Lenin, who committed all manner of barbarity and murders on earth, and dictators such as Hitler and Stalin, have found strength in my teachings, mended their ways and been reborn as new persons. Emperors, kings and presidents who enjoyed opulence and power on earth, and even journalists who had worldwide fame, have now placed themselves at the forefront of the column of the true love revolution. Together they have sent to earth a resolution expressing their determination in the light of my teaching of the true family ideal. They have declared to all Heaven and Earth that Reverend Sun Myung Moon is none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent. This resolution has been announced on every corner of the globe.

daswig · 10-24-2004, 08:00 PM

I'm betting it has something to do with a "less than honorable" discharge from the US Navy in 1972, and his consequent pardon by Billy Carter in 1978. But that's just my guess...

Ustwo · 10-24-2004, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dy156

Uhm... turns out it's nothing more than a story about how Kerry said he met with UN Security counsel officials, and then it turns out he didn't.
Big deal.
"I remember Christmas in Cambodia"
"I volunteered at an inner city program"
"I ran the Boston marathon"

What's one more white lie by a presidential candidate?
The fact that it's not a big deal makes me sad.

Ah, just another fagot for the Kerry brushpile of lies.

(www.dictonary.com first kids)

mrdarcy · 10-24-2004, 08:15 PM

Yeah, I heard that there will be a huge story that rips Nader, but no one will care to read it.

Ustwo · 10-24-2004, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Security Council members deny meeting Kerry

By Joel Mowbray
SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES

U.N. ambassadors from several nations are disputing assertions by Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry that he met for hours with all members of the U.N. Security Council just a week before voting in October 2002 to authorize the use of force in Iraq.
An investigation by The Washington Times reveals that while the candidate did talk for an unspecified period to at least a few members of the panel, no such meeting, as described by Mr. Kerry on a number of occasions over the past year, ever occurred.
At the second presidential debate earlier this month, Mr. Kerry said he was more attuned to international concerns on Iraq than President Bush, citing his meeting with the entire Security Council.
"This president hasn't listened. I went to meet with the members of the Security Council in the week before we voted. I went to New York. I talked to all of them, to find out how serious they were about really holding Saddam Hussein accountable," Mr. Kerry said of the Iraqi dictator.
Speaking before the Council on Foreign Relations in New York in December 2003, Mr. Kerry explained that he understood the "real readiness" of the United Nations to "take this seriously" because he met "with the entire Security Council, and we spent a couple of hours talking about what they saw as the path to a united front in order to be able to deal with Saddam Hussein."
But of the five ambassadors on the Security Council in 2002 who were reached directly for comment, four said they had never met Mr. Kerry. The four also said that no one who worked for their countries' U.N. missions had met with Mr. Kerry either.
The former ambassadors who said on the record they had never met Mr. Kerry included the representatives of Mexico, Colombia and Bulgaria. The ambassador of a fourth country gave a similar account on the condition that his country not be identified.
Ambassador Andres Franco, the permanent deputy representative from Colombia during its Security Council membership from 2001 to 2002, said, "I never heard of anything."
Although Mr. Franco was quick to note that Mr. Kerry could have met some members of the panel, he also said that "everything can be heard in the corridors."
Adolfo Aguilar Zinser, Mexico's then-ambassador to the United Nations, said: "There was no meeting with John Kerry before Resolution 1441, or at least not in my memory."
All had vivid recollections of the time frame when Mr. Kerry traveled to New York, as it was shortly before the Nov. 7, 2002, enactment of Resolution 1441, which said Iraq was in "material breach" of earlier disarmament resolutions and warned Baghdad of "serious consequences as a result of its continued violations."
Stefan Tafrov, Bulgaria's ambassador at the time, said he remembers the period well because it "was a very contentious time."
After conversations with ambassadors from five members of the Security Council in 2002 and calls to all the missions of the countries then on the panel, The Times was only able to confirm directly that Mr. Kerry had met with representatives of France, Singapore and Cameroon.
In addition, second-hand accounts have Mr. Kerry meeting with representatives of Britain.
When reached for comment last week, an official with the Kerry campaign stood by the candidate's previous claims that he had met with the entire Security Council.
But after being told late yesterday of the results of The Times investigation, the Kerry campaign issued a statement that read in part, "It was a closed meeting and a private discussion."
A Kerry aide refused to identify who participated in the meeting.
The statement did not repeat Mr. Kerry's claims of a lengthy meeting with the entire 15-member Security Council, instead saying the candidate "met with a group of representatives of countries sitting on the Security Council."
Asked whether the international body had any records of Mr. Kerry sitting down with the whole council, a U.N. spokesman said that "our office does not have any record of this meeting."
A U.S. official with intimate knowledge of the Security Council's actions in fall of 2002 said that he was not aware of any meeting Mr. Kerry had with members of the panel.
An official at the U.S. mission to the United Nations remarked: "We were as surprised as anyone when Kerry started talking about a meeting with the Security Council."
Jean-David Levitte, then France's chief U.N. representative and now his country's ambassador to the United States, said through a spokeswoman that Mr. Kerry did not have a single group meeting as the senator has described, but rather several one-on-one or small-group encounters.
He added that Mr. Kerry did not meet with every member of the Security Council, only "some" of them. Mr. Levitte could only name himself and Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock of Britain as the Security Council members with whom Mr. Kerry had met.
One diplomat who met with Mr. Kerry in 2002 said on the condition of anonymity that the candidate talked to "a few" ambassadors on the Security Council.
The revelation that Mr. Kerry never met with the entire U.N. Security Council could be problematic for the Massachusetts senator, as it clashes with one of his central foreign-policy campaign themes — honesty.
At a New Mexico rally last month, Mr. Kerry said Mr. Bush will "do anything he can to cover up the truth." At what campaign aides billed as a major foreign-policy address, Mr. Kerry said at New York University last month that "the first and most fundamental mistake was the president's failure to tell the truth to the American people."
In recent months, Mr. Kerry has faced numerous charges of dishonesty from Vietnam veterans over his war record, and his campaign has backtracked before from previous statements about Mr. Kerry's foreign diplomacy.
For example, in March, Mr. Kerry told reporters in Florida that he'd met with foreign leaders who privately endorsed him.
"I've met with foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly," he said. "But, boy, they look at you and say: 'You've got to win this. You've got to beat this guy. We need a new policy.' "
But the senator refused to document his claim and a review by The Times showed that Mr. Kerry had made no official foreign trips since the start of 2002, according to Senate records and his own published schedules. An extensive review of Mr. Kerry's domestic travel schedule revealed only one opportunity for him to have met foreign leaders here.
After a week of bad press, Kerry foreign-policy adviser Rand Beers said the candidate "does not seek, and will not accept, any such endorsements."
The Democrat has also made his own veracity a centerpiece of his campaign, calling truthfulness "the fundamental test of leadership."
Mr. Kerry closed the final debate by recounting what his mother told him from her hospital bed, "Remember: integrity, integrity, integrity."
In an interview published in the new issue of Rolling Stone magazine, Mr. Kerry was asked what he would want people to remember about his presidency. He responded, "That it always told the truth to the American people."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/natio...0609-9428r.htm

Shocking

Mephisto2 · 10-24-2004, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Ah, just another fagot for the Kerry brushpile of lies.

(www.dictonary.com first kids)

Haha... that made me laugh. First time I've ever heard an American use the word fagot. And entirely appropriately too!

Mr Mephisto

Scipio · 10-24-2004, 08:41 PM

Kerry's been in public life for the better part of his life; if there were something dirty in his past that might fairly be called "devastating," it would have been found already. There's no smoking gun, or closet skeleton, or stone left unturned in Kerry's past or record.

(This is, of course, bound by the limits of knowing a negative, but I would be amazed if they (the Bush people or their surrogates) found something nuclear at the last minute.)

daswig · 10-24-2004, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scipio

Kerry's been in public life for the better part of his life; if there were something dirty in his past that might fairly be called "devastating," it would have been found already. There's no smoking gun, or closet skeleton, or stone left unturned in Kerry's past or record.

I dunno....the huge gaping holes in his military records portrayed by the documents on his website certainly have me wondering what happened between 1972-1978, and if Kerry was part of the Carter amnesty WRT Vietnam.

Mephisto2 · 10-24-2004, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

I dunno....the huge gaping holes in his military records portrayed by the documents on his website certainly have me wondering what happened between 1972-1978, and if Kerry was part of the Carter amnesty WRT Vietnam.

If there are gaping holes, then that's a fair question.

I just find it sad that someone who fought bravely for his country and was awarded medals for herorism is attacked by someone who avoided combat entirely.

Go figure.

Mr Mephisto

MSD · 10-24-2004, 08:53 PM

Ok, where's the real surprise? This is just a decoy, right?

Ustwo · 10-24-2004, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

If there are gaping holes, then that's a fair question.

I just find it sad that someone who fought bravely for his country and was awarded medals for herorism is attacked by someone who avoided combat entirely.

Go figure.

Mr Mephisto

You could argue that Bush is the one doing it, but you would be wrong.

Its the other guys who fought, or should other vets not have the right to speak out about Kerry?

Bush has never attacked Kerry for his service while in Vietnam. The vets who are have been doing so long before Bush was president, they really don't like Kerry.

Mephisto2 · 10-24-2004, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

You could argue that Bush is the one doing it, but you would be wrong.

Its the other guys who fought, or should other vets not have the right to speak out about Kerry?

Bush has never attacked Kerry for his service while in Vietnam. The vets who are have been doing so long before Bush was president, they really don't like Kerry.

That's fair enough. I guess I implied Bush was attacking Kerry, which I accept is not true. Certainly the Bush campaign is knee deep in it, but both sides are throwing shit that has no place in a good election campaign.

Mr Mephisto

daswig · 10-24-2004, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

If there are gaping holes, then that's a fair question.

Look at his website. They have military documents that he wanted posted posted there. One, his acceptance of a discharge, is dated 1978, and is an endorsement of a document from SecNav. Why was Secnav involved in the discharge of a lowly O-2? Why was he discharged so late, instead of in 1970 or 1972, when he was supposed to be discharged? Given that a person who receives a less than honorable discharge can apply to have their discharge upgraded to honorable after 5 years have passed, I REALLY have to wonder. That makes his refusal to allow the release of his ENTIRE record very, very suspect in my book.

But PLEASE, don't take my word for it, go to johnkerry.com and examine the .pdf yourself. http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilse...al_Reserve.pdf

Mephisto2 · 10-24-2004, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

But PLEASE, don't take my word for it, go to johnkerry.com and examine the .pdf yourself.

I certainly am not going to visit johnkerry.com and examine the PDF myself, as the question is steeped in the minutae of US military law and procedures, neither of which I'm familiar with in the slightest.

So like it or not, I am going to take your word for it.

Mr Mephisto

daswig · 10-24-2004, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

I certainly am not going to visit johnkerry.com and examine the PDF myself, as the question is steeped in the minutae of US military law and procedures, neither of which I'm familiar with in the slightest.

So like it or not, I am going to take your word for it.

Mr Mephisto

Hasn't Kerry said publicly that he left the service in the early 1970's? Given that, doesn't a discharge document dated 1978 make you wonder exactly what is going on?

Mephisto2 · 10-24-2004, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Hasn't Kerry said publicly that he left the service in the early 1970's? Given that, doesn't a discharge document dated 1978 make you wonder exactly what is going on?

Dude... I agree it looks odd. But I'm not going to delve into a web-site and try to understand the details of something I have no familiarity with at all.

I said I took your word for it as being something unusual.

Sheesh...

Mr Mephisto

daswig · 10-24-2004, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

Dude... I agree it looks odd. But I'm not going to delve into a web-site and try to understand the details of something I have no familiarity with at all.

I said I took your word for it as being something unusual.

Are you the kind of guy who when you need information, you open your encyclopedia to the right page, read the appropriate entry, and then close the encyclopedia?

OpieCunningham · 10-24-2004, 09:54 PM

Stolen verbatim from pandagon.net:

Quote:

Bush, Kerry Face Allegations in Final Days Of Election

by Faceless Drone

WASHINGTON, DC -- With only 9 days to go before the election, both John Kerry and George W. Bush found their campaigns faced with accusations of wrongdoing. Monday's "Washington Times" broke the story that John Kerry may not have spoken with every member of the UN Security Council prior to the Iraq War. This would be in contrast to an address Kerry gave, in which he claimed to have spoken with every member of the Council.

For his part, George Bush's campaign is responding to a Nelson Report story that found 350 tons of high power explosives, housed at the Al Qa Qaa bunker and weapons complex, were left underguarded and subsequently stolen in the post-invasion looting. As this weaponry was kept under IAEA seal, standard procedures would have dictated that the Bush administration notify the IAEA of the theft. The Nelson Report has found that the Bush administration has known of the arm's disappearance for over a year, but withheld the information from both the IAEA and the public for political reasons. Numerous experts have speculated that the insurgency possesses the stole explosives and has been using them to carry out attacks on coalition members.

With polls showing a tight race and neither camp able to make headway, both campaigns are closing ranks. Bush spokesman Gary Bauer called the Nelson Report's article "a politically motivated attack aimed at distracting voters from Senator Kerry's record of weakness". Tad Devine, speaking for the Kerry camp, called the Washington Times' allegations "meaningless". With a handful of days till the election, both campaigns have expressed confidence in their position and a desire to focus on GOTV efforts.

Reminds me of that old saying:

I made a mistake in how I talked about the war. The president made a mistake in going to war. Which is worse?

Scipio · 10-24-2004, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

You could argue that Bush is the one doing it, but you would be wrong.

Its the other guys who fought, or should other vets not have the right to speak out about Kerry?

Bush has never attacked Kerry for his service while in Vietnam. The vets who are have been doing so long before Bush was president, they really don't like Kerry.

I might as well point out that the vets didn't seem to have much problem with Kerry until he ran for president, and that there are strong connections between Bush and the SBVs (hint: they have the same lawyer).

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in638389.shtml

Anybody who knows anything about Karl Rove knows that the SBV attack is in line with at least two things he likes to do: 1. acting through surrogates, and 2. attacking an opponent where he seems to be strongest.

Is Bush doing it? Not directly, but he is the man that Republicans touted as being a good delegator. You know, somebody who knows how to manage people and operations without handling all the nitty gritty details on his own? Doesn't he cause a lot of things to happen that he can't really take credit for, even though he started it?

pan6467 · 10-24-2004, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OpieCunningham

The Washington Times is indeed a crazy paper. Literally.

The owner is the Reverend Sun Myung Moon. He believes himself to be the Messiah. Sold 12 nuclear missle-capable submarines to North Korea, calls America "Satan's Harvest" and was recently (March, 2004) "corronated" by members of the U.S. Congress in a ceremony held in a Senate office building.

He has also paid for a few speaking engagements by George H.W. Bush. Who has called and saluted Moon as a "man with a vision".

My favorite Moon quote:

Is this the same Rev. Moon that ran the mother of all cults and took massive donations from his "religious converts" more aptly known as "Moonies" in the late 60's and 70's.

The same one that the federal government under Nixon tried to prosecute and deport for extortion, plotting terroristic activities, kidnapping and a grocery list of other crimes, until he befriended Nixon during Watergate?

The same one Christian leaders such as Jerry Falwell claimed were evil?

"In the early stages of the Reagan Revolution that embraced the Washington Times and Moon's anti-Communist movement, it was embarrassing to be caught at a Moon event. Until George H.W. Bush appeared with Moon in 1996, thanking him for a newspaper that "brings sanity to Washington," famous guests often spoke at front groups that concealed ties to the Unification Church. Bill Cosby was horrified to discover he'd agreed to speak at one. The reputation of future "Left Behind" author Tim LaHaye suffered after his wife accidentally gave Mother Jones a recording of him dictating a fond letter to Moon's lieutenant Bo Hi Pak, plotting to replace Vice-President Bush with Jerry Falwell on the 1988 ticket. To many Christians, Moon was offensive, preaching that Jesus failed and that he would clean up the mess."

The same Rev. Moon that on Easter of 2003 started a series called,

"coast to coast series of "tear down the cross/Who is Rev. Moon?" events, targeting pastors in poor neighborhoods. From the Bronx to L.A., Moon's people were convincing pastors to pull the crosses off their walls and replace them with his Family Federation flag. An old hymn was invoked: "I'll trade the old cross for a crown.""

(LINK to above quotes: http://gadflyer.com/articles/?ArticleID=131)

The same Rev. Moon that in the 90's gave N. Korean leaders money?

The Rev. Sun Myung Moon's business empire, which includes the conservative Washington Times, paid millions of dollars to North Korea's communist leaders in the early 1990s when the hard-line government needed foreign currency to finance its weapons programs, according to U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency documents.

The payments included a $3 million “birthday present” to current communist leader Kim Jong Il and offshore payments amounting to “several tens of million dollars” to the previous communist dictator, Kim Il Sung, the partially declassified documents said.

(Link: http://www.consortiumnews.com/2000/101100a.html)

Other links to research this man Bush is hailing as a "great American" "a visionary" that shows what kind of person Bush believes is a "great American".

Wonder how his Christian followers would vote if they knew the truth about whom Bush is praising?

http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen01142003.html

http://www.perkel.com/politics/moonies/bush.htm

http://www.gorenfeld.net/blog/2004/0...-kim-jong.html

The same Rev Moon Congres earlier had a coronation for and he declared himself "THE MESSIAH"

LINK: http://www.iht.com/articles/526375.html)

WASHINGTON As a shining symbol of democracy, the United States capital is not ordinarily a place where coronations occur. So news that the Reverend Sun Myung Moon, the eccentric and exceedingly wealthy Korean-born businessman, donned a crown in a Senate office building and declared himself the Messiah while members of Congress watched is causing something of an uproar.
.
A Democratic congressman from Illinois, Danny Davis, wore white gloves and carried a pillow holding one of two ornate gold crowns that were placed on the heads of Moon and his wife, Hak Ja Han Moon, at the ceremony, which took place March 23 and capped a reception billed as a peace awards banquet.
.
Davis, for the record, says he held the wife's crown and was "a bit surprised" by Moon's Messiah remarks, which were delivered in Korean but accompanied by a written translation. In them, he said emperors, kings and presidents had "declared to all heaven and earth that Reverend Sun Myung Moon is none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent."
.
By Wednesday, after the event had been reported in the online magazine Salon and various newspapers, Capitol Hill was in full-blown backpedaling mode, as lawmakers who had attended but missed the coronation- or saw it and did not think much of it - struggled to explain themselves.
.
"I remember the king and queen thing," said Representative Roscoe Bartlett, a Maryland Republican. "But we have the king and queen of the prom, the king and queen of 4-H, the Mardi Gras and all sorts of other things. I had no idea what he was king of."
.
Others, like Senator Mark Dayton, a Minnesota Democrat, insisted that they had been duped and had had no idea that the organization holding the reception was connected to Moon.
.
Dayton said he had attended because a constituent was being honored. He left before the crowning ceremony. "I never saw Reverend Moon present during the time I was there," he said. "I did not stay for any formal program."
.
At 84, Moon cuts a curious figure in Washington, where he mingles with the city's elite by dint of his dual roles as religious leader and media mogul. He owns The Washington Times, which bills itself as a conservative alternative to The Washington Post, as well as United Press International, the wire service. He calls himself "Father" and has drawn notoriety for officiating at mass weddings. As a conservative, he claims close ties to President George W. Bush and the Republican Party.
.
Moon's Unification Church has many branches, including the Interreligious and International Federation for World Peace, which held what it called an Ambassadors for Peace awards banquet in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on March 23. Lawmakers were told that "exemplary leaders from across the nation will be honored with the 'Crown of Peace' award for leadership in reconciliation and peacemaking."
.
An initial invitation, sent to all members of Congress, stated that Moon and his wife would also be present and honored for their work. But follow-up letters, including one provided by Dayton, mentioned only the peace foundation and simply told lawmakers what individuals from their states would being honored.
.
Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United, an organization devoted to preserving the separation of church and state, said that Moon often drew lawmakers into his fold in this manner. Lynn said it seemed that Moon was particularly courting black lawmakers, including Davis of Illinois, and Representative Elijah Cummings, a Maryland Democrat, who attended but said he did not stay for the coronation.
.
"Reverend Moon has been very intentional about promoting his activities within the African-American church community," Lynn said.
.
He said he was disturbed by lawmakers' "flimsy excuses," adding, "You had what effectively amounted to a religious coronation in a government building of a man who claims literally to be the savior."
.
Cummings, however, said the invitation had been similar to many requests he received to honor local constituents.
.
Bartlett said he had attended to support The Washington Times. "I'm a conservative," he said. "I'm delighted that we have a middle-of-the-road paper in Washington."
.
The event itself attracted little notice, and the uproar did not occur until this week, when John Gorenfeld, a freelance writer in San Francisco, published an account of the event in Salon. Gorenfeld, who wrote that at least a dozen members attended, said he had been researching Moon on the Internet when he stumbled on a video of the coronation ceremony.
.
Archbishop George August Stallings, pastor of the Imani Temple, an independent African-American Catholic church in Washington, who helped coordinate the reception, does not see what all the fuss is about. "From his spiritual perspective," he said, referring to Moon, "that is how he sees his role, as ordained by God."
.
He added: "This is not the first time the man has been on Capitol Hill. It's not the first time he's spoken there."
.
As to whether it will be the last, that is an open question.

===
Yep, I want a president that thinks this is a great man and visionary..... how about you?

Mephisto2 · 10-24-2004, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Are you the kind of guy who when you need information, you open your encyclopedia to the right page, read the appropriate entry, and then close the encyclopedia?

No. Far from it. I probably have more interest in, and have done more reading and research on the American election that about 95% of Australians and Irish. I can also say with a fair degree of certainty, for example, that I know more about European and Australian politics and history than you do.

I just have no desire to investigate the specifics on how one goes about revising a military record, US military procedures and polices, possible indescrepancies on Kerry's (or indeed Bush's) military records and how either party is using these as political amunition.

I wouldn't try to argue with you about US legal precendent, as a further example.

Does that bother you? Don't tell me you're one of those people who don't believe anything unless you've seen it or proved it yourself? After all, your whole job is based upon interpreting cases as laid down by others and citing decisions and findings come about by others than yourself.

Mr Mephisto

Boo · 10-24-2004, 10:52 PM

I just LOVE surprises!

Zeld2.0 · 10-24-2004, 11:52 PM

It's monday morning and after checking things out I'm saying:

That's it?

Bit underwhelming if you ask me.

Ustwo · 10-25-2004, 05:23 AM

Kerry lying saddly does not qualify as a surprise

Superbelt · 10-25-2004, 05:54 AM

as was said on DailyKos:
So the big scoop is that Kerry didn't meet with the UN ambassadors of Colombia, Mexico, and Bulgaria. Stop the freakin' presses! LOL.

he did meet with the powerful, influential and important ones though.

Thus his statement is not a lie, just some people getting nitpicky

Ustwo · 10-25-2004, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superbelt

as was said on DailyKos:
So the big scoop is that Kerry didn't meet with the UN ambassadors of Colombia, Mexico, and Bulgaria. Stop the freakin' presses! LOL.

he did meet with the powerful, influential and important ones though.

Thus his statement is not a lie, just some people getting nitpicky

You didn't read the story did you, or you need to count again.

Superbelt · 10-25-2004, 09:01 AM

No, I read it. There is a fourth, unnamed country.
Kerry never said he met with ALL of the security council members. He met with some. He wanted accounts from what are the most poweful members of the security council.

This October Surprise can only name 3 nations he hasn't met with, and a fourth unnamed.
Whoopity do! I'm sure there are others, and they probrably read like a who's who of the bottom 75% of the "Coalition of the Coerced", which has a combined population equal to New Jersey.

xepherys · 10-25-2004, 09:11 AM

Who even cares about this crap anymore? My vote, your vote, neither matter much. The electoral college doesn't even HAVE to, by law, vote what those beneath them vote. Voting machines don't work right in some counties (Dade, Fla). The political system is stacked against anyone that the people would really want in office anyways, and our bipartisan system disallowed by virtue anyone outside from being elected.

It's just sad.

quicksteal · 10-25-2004, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xepherys

Who even cares about this crap anymore? My vote, your vote, neither matter much. The electoral college doesn't even HAVE to, by law, vote what those beneath them vote. Voting machines don't work right in some counties (Dade, Fla). The political system is stacked against anyone that the people would really want in office anyways, and our bipartisan system disallowed by virtue anyone outside from being elected.

It's just sad.

Apathy is pretty uncommon in Tilted Politics, despite the fact that it's a pretty common view in America. Thanks for representing those who don't care.

And while our political process may not be perfect, it is very important--not just for us, but for the whole world. We can't control who's running for office, but we can control who gets the job. Picking the President is a huge deal (and by the way, in many state constitutions, it does say that the electors must vote for who wins the popular vote in the state). Just think of how different this country would be with Al Gore as president (or even with Bob Dole 4 years ago). Our history would not be the same.

Locobot · 10-26-2004, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

No. Far from it. I probably have more interest in, and have done more reading and research on the American election that about 95% of Australians and Irish. I can also say with a fair degree of certainty, for example, that I know more about European and Australian politics and history than you do.

I'd say without hesitation that you know more about U.S. politics than 95% of Americans.

10-24-2004, 05:28 PM	#1 (permalink)
dy156 cookie Location: in the backwoods	october surprise coming monday morning, or just another internet rumor? Remember that thread I wrote about internet political memes? The internet blogosphere is buzzing because some people have heard that the Washington Times is coming out with a story tomorrow morning that will not be good for Kerry. No one knows what it will be, but lots of people want you to know that they have heard that there is going to be a big story. here's but a sampling: powerline INDC journal littlegreenfootballs redstate blogforbush dailyKos counterpundit It seems as if everyone is pointing to someone else saying the same thing. My thoughts -- Why wouldn't a newspaper publish a big story, especially one that been known awhile, on a Sunday rather than a Monday? Could someone be attempting to pull a fast one on the bloggers in retaliation for the Dan Rather memogate by watching how they all blather on about something that might have started with a few fake emails to a couple of bloggers? WHo knows? If it is legit, and not another Kerry sex scandal that didn't happen, what do you think it will be about? Iran? Osama bin dead? I'm still thinking hoax right now. Ya'll?

10-24-2004, 05:49 PM	#3 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	It's a hoax or fake story that will be filled with "sources close", "this person's brother's sister's cousin's nephew is a friend of someone who heard...". To pull it out on a Monday when you are getting nothing for it, when you could have had it on the high priced, everyone would be reading Sunday is idiotic and shows it's value right there. As for Drudge and these bloggers sites... they all have their biases and reasons for wanting to put questions in people's heads. When it doesn't run tomorrow or isn't that big of an issue, these people will save face by saying the Wash. Times couldn't print the whole story for some reason..... that there is more but right now the Times wants to make sure everything is accurate or whatever BS lies they can think of to cover their asses. __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

10-24-2004, 05:58 PM	#4 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Funny this should come up. About a month ago, I was at my grandparents house and they, being good people are Republicans, despite being retired and partially dependent on social security. My uncle was there and mentioned a conversation he had with a friend who works for the RNC somehow who said they were planning on releasing some info in October which would kill Kerry. Of course this is a friend of a relative type of thing, and I didn't think much of it, but I can only hope that its true __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

10-24-2004, 08:15 PM	#11 (permalink)
mrdarcy Tilted Location: down the street from Graceland	Yeah, I heard that there will be a huge story that rips Nader, but no one will care to read it. __________________ [Insert pithy comment here]

10-24-2004, 08:41 PM	#14 (permalink)
Scipio Mencken Location: College	Kerry's been in public life for the better part of his life; if there were something dirty in his past that might fairly be called "devastating," it would have been found already. There's no smoking gun, or closet skeleton, or stone left unturned in Kerry's past or record. (This is, of course, bound by the limits of knowing a negative, but I would be amazed if they (the Bush people or their surrogates) found something nuclear at the last minute.) __________________ "Erections lasting more than 4 hours, though rare, require immediate medical attention."

10-24-2004, 05:43 PM	#2 (permalink)
thefictionweliv Insane	Don't believe anything you read on the internet, don't believe anything you see on TV, don't believe anything you hear on the radio, don't believe anything published in newspapers....move along....

10-24-2004, 06:30 PM	#5 (permalink)
OpieCunningham Loser	The Washington Times, eh? On a related note, I heard that there'll be another post which is not good for Bush on DailyKos tomorrow morning.

10-24-2004, 07:27 PM	#6 (permalink)
dy156 cookie Location: in the backwoods	Uhm... turns out it's nothing more than a story about how Kerry said he met with UN Security counsel officials, and then it turns out he didn't. Big deal. "I remember Christmas in Cambodia" "I volunteered at an inner city program" "I ran the Boston marathon" What's one more white lie by a presidential candidate? The fact that it's not a big deal makes me sad.

10-24-2004, 07:35 PM	#7 (permalink)
Mephisto2 Junkie	Washington Times criticise Kerry. Washington Post supports him. Crazy Washington papers! Mr Mephisto

10-24-2004, 08:00 PM	#9 (permalink)
daswig Banned Location: BFE	I'm betting it has something to do with a "less than honorable" discharge from the US Navy in 1972, and his consequent pardon by Billy Carter in 1978. But that's just my guess...

10-24-2004, 08:53 PM	#17 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	Ok, where's the real surprise? This is just a decoy, right?

10-24-2004, 10:52 PM	#29 (permalink)
Boo Leave me alone! Location: Alaska, USA	I just LOVE surprises! __________________ Back button again, I must be getting old.

10-24-2004, 11:52 PM	#30 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	It's monday morning and after checking things out I'm saying: That's it? Bit underwhelming if you ask me.

10-25-2004, 05:23 AM	#31 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Kerry lying saddly does not qualify as a surprise __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

10-25-2004, 05:54 AM	#32 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	as was said on DailyKos: So the big scoop is that Kerry didn't meet with the UN ambassadors of Colombia, Mexico, and Bulgaria. Stop the freakin' presses! LOL. he did meet with the powerful, influential and important ones though. Thus his statement is not a lie, just some people getting nitpicky

10-25-2004, 09:01 AM	#34 (permalink)
Superbelt This vexes me. I am terribly vexed. Location: Grantville, Pa	No, I read it. There is a fourth, unnamed country. Kerry never said he met with ALL of the security council members. He met with some. He wanted accounts from what are the most poweful members of the security council. This October Surprise can only name 3 nations he hasn't met with, and a fourth unnamed. Whoopity do! I'm sure there are others, and they probrably read like a who's who of the bottom 75% of the "Coalition of the Coerced", which has a combined population equal to New Jersey.

10-25-2004, 09:11 AM	#35 (permalink)
xepherys <3 TFP Location: 17TLH2445607250	Who even cares about this crap anymore? My vote, your vote, neither matter much. The electoral college doesn't even HAVE to, by law, vote what those beneath them vote. Voting machines don't work right in some counties (Dade, Fla). The political system is stacked against anyone that the people would really want in office anyways, and our bipartisan system disallowed by virtue anyone outside from being elected. It's just sad.