
Journal pudge's Journal: Desperation 57
John Kerry is blatantly lying when he says that there is any illegal tie between Bush and the Swift Boat Veterans group that has been attacking Kerry. There is no evidence whatsoever of any such ties. Kerry calls on Bush to condemn the ad. And Kerry says veterans don't have the right to "lie."
So we have three issues: lack of condemnation, ties to the 527 group, and the right to speak.
What Kerry doesn't want you to know is about 30 times more money has been spent by these independent "527" groups on ads for Kerry ($60M to $2M), and that Kerry has only recently (last week, just before calling on Bush to condemn the Swift Boat ad, but months after similar ads attacking Bush went on the air) condemned one of these ads against Bush.
But back in February, Kerry said "The issue here, as I have heard it raised, is was he present and active on duty in Alabama at the times he was supposed to be? I don't have the answer to that question." And back in April, his campaign put out a detailed press release questioning the President's service! Did they yet denounce their own press release? No. Kerry condemned the ad only when it suited him to do so.
As to ties to 527s, Kerry's are numerous as well. You want donors? Several of the wealthy donors of the pro-Kerry 527s have given money to Kerry's campaign and the DNC, including George Soros. You want political ties? How about Harold Ickes, who used to work for both Bill and Hillary Clinton, and now runs Media Fund? Or how about Ickes recently hiring Jim Jordan, who was running Kerry's Presidential campaign a year ago?
And Kerry says of the vets who attack Bush, "Those are veterans who earned the right to their opinion." But of those who attack Kerry? "They don't have a right to lie."
Kerry is so desperate he is willing to further magnify an ad that makes him look bad by attacking Bush for things he himself is guilty of. I can think of no other rational explanation but desperation: it seems he really thinks he stands more to gain from attacking Bush than he stands to lose from this ad being replayed on the news over and over and being exposed as a hypocrite.
Well, there is some evidence... (Score:2)
Also, regarding Kerry's charge that the veterans "cannot lie", he does have the law on his side - a minor legal point called slander.
If the Swift Boat veterans are lying to dirty Kerry's name, that could definitely be seen as slander.
Re:Well, there is some evidence... (Score:2)
Unless you are one of those rare individuals who actually READ the articles -- and not just the headlines and MAYBE the first paragraph. If you dont read the articles, you might miss tidbits like this:
Re:Well, there is some evidence... (Score:2)
No more than the evidence linking Kerry to other 527s, which have spent much more money than this one. That's the point.
Also, regarding Kerry's charge that the veterans "cannot lie", he does have the law on his side - a minor legal point called slander.
But to Kerry, the distinction between who is lying and who is
Re:Astonishing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Astonishing (Score:2)
I think it is a two birds, one stone, situation.
Re:Well, there is some evidence... (Score:2)
Huh? Pudge, at times I have found you to be somewhat open to the idea that the Republican party is not always 100% correct and the Democrats 100% wrong (your take on Kerry's voting record for going to war with Iraq).
At times like this (and your take on "young and female == ignorant"), I find you to be a blind follower of the Republican line.
So let me get your argument straight - becaus
Re:Well, there is some evidence... (Score:1)
I neither said nor implied that. Stop lying. I was very clear about what I meant when people misunderstood it before, and you did not address my clarification before, and if you persist in this lie, you will be banned.
So let me get your argument straight - because left-leaning 527 organizations have spent a lot more money than right-leaning 527 organizations, then THERE HAS to be evidence of collaboration with the Kerry campaign.
I neither said nor impl
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
A Bush volunteer campaign adviser was in the most recent ad. He quit over it. Here [cnn.com] is the story. Most relevant parts:
I don't know about you, but having a campaign adviser appear in an ad sounds like a coordinating effort to me.
The difference between one Swift Boat Veterens for Truth and the Kerry press release is th
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
Interesting choice of "most relevant parts". I would think that these are far more relevant:
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
I believe you are reading something into my post that I didn't say. Whether or not the Bush campaign organization proper knew about it is beside the point. A member of Bush campaign "collaborated" with the 527 group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. This violates FEC rules or at the very least their spirit. The extent of SBVT and Bush campaign collaborations are unknown. You believe this is an isolated incident. Kerry's campaign believes SBVT is an attack group actively coordinating with the Bush campaig
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
What you said was that it sounds like a coordinating effort. But it doesn't. Nothing at all implies that Cordier coordinated between the two. "Collaboration" does not mean that someone is affiliated with both, but that the two organizations collaborated with each other, and there is nothing showing this. Nothing.
Kerry's campaign believes SBVT is an atta
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
I think you and I have very different notions of what defines collaboration.
I'm very bad at figuring out what other people know and believe. I usually try to worry about myself. But, I agree, this is a bunch of political bickering.
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
Since we are talking about an FEC complaint, I am using the notion enumerated in the elections laws, as I understand it.
You think My Lai was an isolated incident in Vietnam?
What I said is that My Lai was a single incident that did not prove or otherwise demonstrate any claims of systematic activity that Kerry claimed to exist.
I guess they are right about people having very different world views... geez.
Yes, I believe that
Re: Desperation (Score:1)
I don't know what standard the FEC uses to determine that a campaign is independent of a 527. I'm not a lawyer. I do know what Cordier did is an absolute no-no. It doesn't surprise me that it gets the Bush campaign in hot water. If people file complaints to the FEC that Farenheit 9/11 should be viewed as campaign ad for Kerry and the FEC investigated that. Then, I think this case ha
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
It looks bad, and in that sense is a no-no. But it is not, as best I can tell, illegal, unless Cordier was representing the Bush campaign, which it seems he was not. Here's an excerpt from a summary [brookings.org] of McCain-Feingold:
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
Actually, My Lai, like the current prison abuse scandal, does point to something interesting. What do both of these horrible events have in common? They were both "broken" by the same reporter (boggle!). How did he "break" the stories? By getting ahold of copies of the proceedings wherein the military was investigating and punishing those involved. How did those military p
Re: Desperation (Score:1)
Those who are unfamiliar with history [wordiq.com]....
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
Ok. For the sake of argument, lets assume Kerry was truthful and not grossly exagerating his participation and what he personally witnessed. Now we have a guy who didn't lift a finger to stop these war crimes. Hasn't lifted a finger to bring either himself or those who committed those war crimes to justice. Hasn't help document specifically any of these war crimes for the purposes of crimi
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
For the record, you should know that John Kerry himself is lately painting his claims as exagerations. You should read the transcript of his 71 O'neill debate on the Dick Cavett show -- then do the same with his interview with Russert from earlier this year.
He says things like calling the actions "attrocities" was "inappropriate". And he said "I think some soldiers were angry at me for that
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
As Jhon notes, that doesn't mean they are linked, any more than it means Kerry is linked to Media Fund just because his former campaign manager works for them now. If the Bush campaign is seen as guilty of collaboration over this, then so is Kerry because of Jim Jordan.
Look at
Re: Desperation (Score:1)
You believe Jim Jordan + Kerry is analagous to Bush + Ken Cordier. I don't think they are similar enough examples. You've stated your reason why, I've stated my reason why. We'll have to leave it at that. All other subsequent arguments about the 527 collaboration are meaningless.
Re: Desperation (Score:2)
You did? I thought you merely denied that it meant anything. I don't recall you stating why you thought that. Regardless, the Jordan example is far stronger evidence of collaboration, by any objective view of the facts.
What aspects of the press release do you feel are misleading about Bush?
527s (Score:2)
Re:527s (Score:2)
527s are great when they pound on "the other guy". But when the pound on "your guy", they are and evil institution run by devils.
Funny that...
Looking for prima facie case (Score:2)
1) Why should people be required to document the source of their claims? Shouldn't the burden be on the listener to decide what criteria will constitute proof and investigate on their own? Why should the nanny-state have to remind people you can't believe everything you hear? Doesn't it cultivate a more investigative media and public if people are tracking these things down on their own?
2) Why should the contributors be required to be disclosed? Shouldn't anonymous speech be protected?
Re:Looking for prima facie case (Score:2)
Note that I did not say they should "prove" their claims, but document the source of them. For example, if I claim in an ad Bush increased taxes on the middle class (as Dean did), he should document where that comes from (even if it is my own campaign literature), so that people can investigate those claims further.
Wh
Re:Looking for prima facie case (Score:2)
Note that I did not say they should "prove" their claims, but document the source of them.
Understood. In talking about the listener deciding what constitutes proof, I wasn't trying to imply otherwise.
For example, if I claim in an ad Bush increased taxes on the middle class (as Dean did), he should document where that comes from (even if it is my own campaign literature), so that people can investigate those claims further.
Okay, and I am asking, "Why?" Suppose the claim is made in the ad and the
Re:Looking for prima facie case (Score:2)
So a viewer can investigate the claim if he wishes.
Suppose the claim is made in the ad and the source is not cited. Now, those who choose to question the claim can, if they choose, contact the organization that made the claim and ask, "Where did you hear that?"
Most people cannot do that.
In a decentralized information system like we have, the fact that the claim has not been backed up with any source is going to become attached to the claim when it is reported
That's imp
Re:Looking for prima facie case (Score:2)
Please end it. For the last time: this is not about protecting people, but about providing them with tools and information that they can use if they choose. I won't say it again.
Sorry; I didn't mean to come across as inflammatory at all, nor to repeat my assertion ad-nauseum.
I think we just have a fundamentally different assumption about the world. Since I'm constantly investigating facts, I come with the axiom that anybody could do that given enough desire and resources. You don't share that axiom,
Re:Looking for prima facie case (Score:2)
But that has nothing to do with what you said, which was a fundamentally different assumption about my intentions, which were clearly stated by me, the ultimate authority on my intentions.
Since I'm constantly investigating facts, I come with the axiom that anybody could do that given enough desire and resources. You don't share that axiom, so we've been talking past each other.
Your axiom assumes that a claim is not too vague to
Re:527s (Score:1)
This is one reason I've grown to despise McCain in the past coupld of years. I almost wish Kerry had asked McCain to be his VP candidate, and McCain accepted. His congressional record is becoming easier to rip apart with every passing day.
527s, a dumb idea (Score:1)
Like anybody cares? I think most Americans know that it costs a lot of money to buy TV airtime, and this was no public service announcement. What people care about is whether the allegations are true or not.
(In general, I think the SBVT thing has been shady, but that's not my point).
I have to concede
clarification (Score:1)
The approach these days is to allow freedom for the individual, but parties, corporations, media, trade unions, etc., are heavily regulated [www.sfu.ca].
Re:527s, a dumb idea (Score:2)
Even if my claim of desperation is retarded, I thinkn in the interest of education it's reasonable for me to point out how Kerry is condemning in Bush the same things he's done before.
I don't see desperation in the Kerry camp's reaction, I see myopia. Don't you people see!!! Everyone is ganging up against us, the people who are here to save America!!!
I hear you, but I don't think they are that myopic. I think they are very smart. And I think they realize these at
Re:527s, a dumb idea (Score:1)
I meant the question of who funds the SBVT (and the counter-question of who funds MoveOn.org, etc.) I should have been clearer.
Re:527s, a dumb idea (Score:2)
And one thing we've not tried -- at least not since the Information Age hit upon us -- is a total LACK of restrictions, as long as there's complete and immediate disclosure.
Very insightful. The fact of the Internet changes a lot of the dynamics of the past. It's usually possible to find the source and info behind an allegation, if you go looking, whether you're investigating a serious political charge, or the true name for the product variously known as "Duct tape" and "Duck tape." And if the truth i
Re:527s, a dumb idea (Score:1)
How amazingly lame of them! Is that discussion archived anywhere where I can read it?
Re:527s, a dumb idea (Score:2)
I have the mails here, though. It was about McCain-Feingold, which I was not supporting, but I was saying there is possibly a role in government of regulating campaigns, in financing and communications. One started off, "Thanks an incredible position for a Republican to take! Doesn't it strike you as rather difficult to reconcile the Republican Party's role as the limited government party with allowing government the incredible power of regulating the
interesting (Score:1)
One of the critiques of the current crop of Republicans is that the more rigid ideologues are taking leading roles, making too many issues into tests of loyalty.
Maybe this was just a couple of local dimbulbs, but you're not exactly dispelling that image for me here.
Re:interesting (Score:2)
Re:527s, a dumb idea (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:527s, a dumb idea (Score:1)
Really, it's always been that way in the U.S., a
Re:527s, a dumb idea (Score:2)
Re:527s, a dumb idea (Score:2)
Let the "527"s continue to do what they do. However, remove their tax exempt status. Imagine all that extra federal money coming in! So far, just for the 2000 election, 527s have raised over $250 million (over $216 mil, iirc for the Dems/Left). Imaging 30% of that coming back as taxes!
Re: (Score:1)
Re:527s, a dumb idea (Score:2)
This may seem simplistic, but as the government grows both in power and scope, there will be corruption. Period. There is no way we can try to legislate around the fact that power brings corruption. If you want to clean up
corruption is not a constant (Score:1)
Aside from theoretical problems, I know from my own country that it's possible to have a less corrupt system. For most of my lifetime, it has been fairly routine for cabinet ministers to be forced to resign over the mere *appearance* of impropriety. Like, writing a letter to somebody to suggest they consider someone for a job, using their official parliamentary stationery. Or having some home renovations done by a neighbour w
Notes (Score:2)
http://blog.johnkerry.com/rapidresponse/archives/0 02519.html#002519 [johnkerry.com]
Re:Notes (Score:2)
As to the Alachua County GOP, jeez, who the hell cares?
Re:Notes (Score:1)
In other news, it seems that SBVFTer John O'Niell has been considerably less than honest. From his appearance on "This Week" last week:
Re:Notes (Score:2)
I think you mean a same lawyer, not the. And still, Kerry's tie via Jim Jordan is much stronger and more significant than this.
Re:Notes (Score:1)
Gi
Re:Notes (Score:2)
While what he did certainly looks bad, if he only gave both advice concerning campaign finance law, then there's no real conflict here, as opposed to Richardson, whose role in both is inherently political. There is a difference. Of course, we can't know what Richardson and Ginsberg have said and done for each group, which is the real point, which is why the complaint against Media Fund and ACT was dismissed, and why the one against SBVT will be
Re:Notes (Score:2)