posted
Okay - you all know I'm a Bush-supporting, right-wing Republican (even though I'm actually registered as independent, or non-affliated)
When the Swift Boat Vets first came out, I supported their right to free speech to say what they felt was important to them -- especially because Kerry was using photos, which included pictures of some of these same guys, in his ads promoting his military record.
But now the Swift Vets have come out with a new commercial that even I think is hitting below the belt. I heard it on Hannity's program yesterday, I think.
Don't you think this goes too far? Here is some of the text from the Ad:
quote:Announcer: Even before Jane Fonda went to Hanoi to meet with the enemy and mock America, John Kerry secretly met with enemy leaders in Paris.
Announcer: Though we were still at war and Americans were being held in North Vietnamese prison camps.
Announcer: Then he returned and accused American troops of committing war crimes on a daily basis.
Announcer: In a time of war, can America trust a man who betrayed his country?
Farmgirl
("Betrayed his country" is just awfully strong language, and very slanderous)
posted
*shakes head* Betrayed his country indeed.. (Did you come up with that title on purpose or completely by accident?) *Impolitely wonders how you can listen to Hannity*
That aside, yes it's going too far! Especially when I think Kerry did the right thing pointing out the war crimes. The honest and honourable thing. This Swift Boat people are a bunch of scummy liars... What does any of this have to do with current issues?
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Farmgirl, I actually respect the Swift Boat vets for finally coming out and saying the real reason that so many of them were willing to protest his candidacy.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Syn -- the title was a fluke in that I posted at the same time you posted the other thread. I was surprised by your title when I went back to the thread listing....
posted
I like the Jane Fonda reference, trying to allude to the faked photo of Kerry and Fonda at the same rally, when it never happened. That one made the round earlier this year.
posted
I'm afraid the Swift Vets are actually going to hurt President Bush's ratings with something like this, while they "think" they are doing just the opposite.
Of course, we never get to actually see these ads in Kansas. Kansas is so heavily Republican that no political candidate ever even bothers spending advertising revenue in this state -- we only hear about these things on national news...
I would imagine it is playing in swing states like Pennsylvania and Michigan...
quote: like the Jane Fonda reference, trying to allude to the faked photo of Kerry and Fonda at the same rally, when it never happened. That one made the round earlier this year.
-Bok
Kinda like the DNC official E-mail referencing forged CBS documents (the morning after the story aired) in their attack on President Bush's Vietnam Era Guard duty.
And they're not referencing the Photo, there is no reference to any photo of John Kerry and Jane "Johnny Walker Lind" Fonda.
I think someone needs to watch the Ad before assuming there's any such reference, which unless I missed something, isn't in there.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: No democrat has any right to complain while Mr. Internet is saying the exact same things.
Could I have a source for this assertion, please? When did Gore say the exact same things? I'm not happy about the way the Democrats are running the campaign, but I don't believe the accusations are the same on both sides. Even if the accusations are the same, I think we should all complain about all this mudslinging on both sides. I think it is telling that McCain came out against the Swift Boat ads; there is a politician who is as close as they get to being honest and respectable.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's because Kerry wasn't a Senator of Texas or the areas in which they live.
He's wanting to be Commander in Chief of our armed forces and President of the United States.
And I would venture that what Al Gore did was much worse (and this is an opinion as much as YOURS was as well) because the Swift Boat Vets are NOT part of the Official Republican Campaign.
Al Gore IS an official spokesperson for the Democratic Campaign and was in fact speaking at a Democratic Sponsored Campaign Rally when he said those things.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What could anyone criticize about the ad? It is totally factual. No one denies, not even Kerry himself, that he did meet with leaders of the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese in Paris on two occasions, while our nation was still at war with them, and Kerry was still an officer in the Naval reserves. This was totally against the law. It was by definition an act of treason. Private citizens are not allowed to conduct diplomacy unless at the specific request of the president, and John Kerry did exactly and precisely betray his nation by doing this. American soldiers were still being killed by the foreign powers Kerry talked to. And notice also that when Kerry returned, he gave public speeches where he parroted the communists' propaganda line and called for the U.S. to cut and run from Vietnam, and then pay reparations to North Vietnam and the Viet Cong.
Do you know what treason is? Do you know what betrayal of your country and fellow soliders is? Do you know what breaking the law is? This is one of the reasons I have been saying all along that John Kerry deserves to be in prison, not in the U.S. Senate, and certainly not in the White House.
As much as anything else he has done and said, this proves that John Kerry is no patriot. He was willing to let our enemies determine our national policy in 1972-1973, and he talks now in the present campaign like he wants to oursource our national defense and let the U.N. determine our foreign policy.
What could possibly be more relevant to a presidential candidate's fitness for office?
[ September 22, 2004, 11:42 AM: Message edited by: Ron Lambert ]
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Democrats from other states didn't attack George Bush's service when he was governor of Texas.
But they are now.
I could very well say the exact same thing you did, from the opposite side of the fence.
I think the issue began when John Kerry decided to make his Vietnam Service the cornerstone of his election campaign.
Well his view of himself (and others positive views) do not gel with these Vietnam Vets who disagree.
I really can't see any single person complaining about these ads considering there's a feature length political propaganda movie called Fahrenheit 9/11.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, there was no direct reference to the silliness earlier in the year, that, for a time, people thought (and some probably still do) that Kerry and Fonda were at the same pro-North Vietnam rally. There was no point to mentioning Jane Fonda in the ad, at the beginning, with no later reference in the ad. At the least it was trying to connect Fonda and Kerry in the minds of voters, where Fonda was a very vocal opponent of the Vietnam Conflict; more likely it was to remind people of that pesky photo that made some headlines earlier this year, and was forwarded to have the country. There is another photo that showed them both at an earlier rally. This photo was taken two years before Fonda visited North Vietnam, a visit that Kerry has publically disagreed with.
posted
Ron -- I'm not attacking it for not being factual. I know they wouldn't have dared to air it if they didn't have facts to back it up.
It just seems so -- I dunno -- rancid. I mean even though it is true, I don't think this kind of mud needs to be drug into the presidential race.
We all have past mistakes. I certainly wouldn't want my Hatracker friends judging me on the kind of person I was 20+ years ago (you wouldn't have liked me). So maybe that is why I feel this way.
I still support our President. And I still support free speech. I just think this might backfire on the Swift Vets and get everyone up in arms in defense of Kerry.
quote: It just seems so -- I dunno -- rancid. I mean even though it is true, I don't think this kind of mud needs to be drug into the presidential race.
Michael Moore is going to attempt to get F9/11 on Network TV before the election in order to sway it.
It's going to get dirtier before it gets any cleaner.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I certainly wouldn't want my Hatracker friends judging me on the kind of person I was 20+ years ago (you wouldn't have liked me). So maybe that is why I feel this way.
That's where the difference lies. Kerry HIMSELF made his vietnam service (and lest we forget 3 purple hearts) the cornerstone of his election.
He WANTED people to judge him based on his service there. He WANTED people to vote for him because of his past.
He just doesn't like the current opposition to his platform that he took.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sure, and maybe Kerry is a secret member of the Communist Party. That's not to say it's likely.
There are 2 photos in question. One shows the two at a podium. This never happened. There is one where they were both in a crowd at a rally (Vietnam Veterans Against the War), and that they both separately spoke at, though they didn't know each other personally, and that Fonda hadn't visited North Vietnam yet.
You have already decided to disbelieve anything Kerry says, assuming the worst motives. That's fine, it could certainly be that way, but you must admit that it's just as, or perhaps more, plausible that they shared some subset of opinions, though not all, and that these rallies weren't so fine tuned as to include only speakers who agreed, down to the finest nuance, on what that opinion was. Odds are, they went looking for high profile people who in a nebulous way all disagreed with Vietnam.
-Bok
EDIT: Whoa, this thread has passed me by. My comment was only at the disguised attempt to link the two, when this link is tenuous at best. If you want to say Kerry was treasonous because of his visit with North Vietnamese leaders, that's fine. It's just a little slimey (when either side) casts aspersions using obtuse comments.
quote: Exactly. Al Gore is not afraid he's crossing any lines by calling Bush a traitor. The Republican Party is not on solid ground when they call Kerry a traitor; what the Swift Boat Vets are saying may be actionable under defamation law, and it may not turn out to be such a smart campaign tactic. In that light, it's ironic that they accuse Kerry of flip-flopping.
I didn't know GWB meet with the leaders of North Vietnam during wartime.
Maybe you could point that out to me.
quote: You have already decided to disbelieve anything Kerry says, assuming the worst motives.
Funny, but that's what most Liberals/Democrats do to anything Bush says.
I guess it's a two way street then.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yup, you know me, I'm just like that whole class of people "liberal". I walk lockstep with them!
I think Bush's problem is not that he is lying (I don't generally believe that), but that he sincerely believes in implementing certain policies that I disagree with. That's my opinion.
So if you could please take me off the unthinking Liberal Cabal list (but not the Hatrack Liberal Cabal list... Shh, it's a secret!), and instead deal with me as an individual, that'd be great.
Our you can just assume my motives like you have in every single response to me that you have had, in your Hatrack time thusfar.
posted
So wait, you make judgements about ME directly,
quote: You have already decided to disbelieve anything Kerry says, assuming the worst motives.
which I did NOTHING of the sort to you because YOU,
quote: Funny, but that's what most Liberals/Democrats do to anything Bush says.
And you have the gall to cry foul?
Maybe I'm missing something here. You are talking about ME DIRECTLY and I am talking about Liberals/Democrats in general with regards to YOUR opinion, and there's a problem.
posted
I haven't compartmentalized. It appeared to me that you were lumping me in with this pre-defined category. I apologize for that misconception. I would rather you impugn me directly, rather than toss me into some box where you no longer feel obligated to listen to me.
I'm sorry about assuming any motives on you, vis a vis Kerry, or anything else.
posted
I wasn't talking about you in that group at all. I was talking about Liberals in general. That's why I said that is what liberals/democrats do with GWB.
If I had meant for you to be included I would have written "that is what liberals/democrats like YOU".
If you thought I was meaning YOU, I'm sorry, I was meaning liberals in general (and referring to the kerry like response to every speech Bush makes whether campaign related or whether it's part of his presidential responsibility, like the UN)
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"That's why I said that is what liberals/democrats do with GWB."
Ah. I think this is going to be the source of some confusion around here.
In general, on Hatrack, when you are generalizing about a group but do not wish to imply that ALL members of the group behave in a certain way, it's best to prefix the group with "some."
In other words, try: "what SOME liberals/Democrats do with GWB." It's not only more accurate but altogether less universally insulting.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
What is beautiful about the 527s is that they have allowed parties to remain "clean" by slinging the mud themselves. Kerry is doing worse by this because he has felt the need to reply to each attack whereas Bush just ignores them completely. Some folks have brought up Bush in the 60's and 70's outside of his honorable time in the National Guard and what is there isn't encouraging if we were to apply it to his character today. He was a frequent drug and alcohol user. If we use his time in the 80's to reflect on him now, he was a frequent loser in the business field sending 3 or so oil businesses into the ground, selling his stocks at the last minute with Harken prompting the SEC to look into insider trading. Should we consider this?
Doesn't matter. Bush is running a sweet campaign. He lets the 527s sling the mud and Kerry, too slow on the update, keeps dodging and taking the hits. He needs the can of Teflon that Bush uses. In the current discussions around the election, it hasn't at all been about the issues. Bush isn't running as an incumbent, he is running on what he will do if he becomes President. He talks about things to come, not the current state of affairs because to do so would hurt him, not help him (due to horrible economy, massive job loss, poorly implemented education policy, roll-back environmental policy, etc.). He can't even tout his tax cut because honestly, a good portion of America never felt the effects of it
But that's okay because he can just roll along and let Kerry sputter and putter along responding to inane claims that are over 30 years old. Brilliant, I say. Below the belt, sure, but brilliant.
I only wish the Democrats would just come out swinging, but also half proud that they haven't.
quote: In general, on Hatrack, when you are generalizing about a group but do not wish to imply that ALL members of the group behave in a certain way, it's best to prefix the group with "some."
Actually the original post said "MOST". Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: In general, on Hatrack, when you are generalizing about a group but do not wish to imply that ALL members of the group behave in a certain way, it's best to prefix the group with "some."
hmmm... Then, Tom, I really wish I could backtrack and find that thread where you said fundamentalist Christians are the worst thing to happen to America (or something similar -- since I can't find it right now). I don't believe there was any "some" with that statement.
And I think it would have helped not to offend "some" that may not fit your stereotype.
I am a liberal. I am a Democrat. I do not do this.
Hence I know your logic is flawed. Hence I doubt all the rest of your logic.
Screaming and yelling and insulting the opposition en-masse, no matter how witty, never wins converts.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Screaming and yelling and insulting the opposition en-masse, no matter how witty, never wins converts.
Hence why Al Gore and Michael Moore are idiots. (as well as any number of people on the right who do the same)
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If he was, that was uncalled for. Tom may be calling foul over things he himself is guilty of, but calling him directly a name is uncalled for. Your response was much better.
Let someone reveal themself that they are a hypocrit (I'm not saying he is because I don't know) but don't call them one.
It's good advice I should take to heart myself.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW is everyone skipping the word "MOST" in my original post? It seems that the paraphrased quote is getting more attention than the actual post.
For the record, I'd like to point out that my original post says "MOST Liberals/Democrats" despite what people are saying.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Chad, FG is right I was referring to Tom and the designation is well deserved on his part. In previous threads he made the statement that all Republicans/conservatives/people who vote for Bush are hateful bigots who want to roast homosexuals over an open fire, despite the fact that the only two Republicans who commented on the proposed Michigan amendment were against it. I'd prefer not to wait for Tom to take the title upon himself, but rather call him on it now.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
