Bush up in the polls, Kerry down

[Freak]

Ya and in addition he's probably in the best position to know how risky it is to bring it up.  Which actually makes you think a bit...

[Tobias Beecher]

I think Kerry will be back up.  It's going to be close but I still think Kerry will win.

Same here.

Bush, Cheney, and Rove Inc's negative karma will come back to haunt them.

And didn't Zell Miller and male private part seemed like hate mongers tonight?

Wow...I don't really like Kerry that much, but at least he's not that angry all the time.

[I'm voting for kerry].

[coloroflaw.org]

I think that would be a very dangerous card for Bush to play.  If he comes out claiming that as a victory and then we get attacked, it would make an incredible Kerry commercial.  It is much safer to leave it to others to comment on.

What about Bush playing the card to the tune of no terrorist attacks on our soil since 9/11?  The closer the election the more it makes sense for him to play it.  The likely hood of an attack before the election goes down and if he's down in the polls then it really won't matter if there is an attack (at least as far as Bush’s election chances go).  In addition, if there's an attack after the election it will not affect who is president either (unless of course it's an assassination).

After all, protecting us from internal and external really is the president’s primary job.

[jas9999]

Has anyone seen the newest ad? There's no mention of the whole medals controversy. Instead, its just quotes from Kerry's senate testimony about war crimes and atrocities in Vietnam, in his own voice. Then some vets talk about how betrayed they felt by this, etc. Its pretty harsh, but I guess no one can complain about the swift boat people making stuff up this time

no, but it's taken completely out of context. what kerry was testifying to was things that other people said at a veterans rally (since he was the public face of the VVAW organization). it his full testimony, it was clear that he was speaking on behalf of the whole group, as to the things they did and witnessed. however, the commercials cut off that part and make it sound like he's making the accusation himself, which is not the case. further, kerry never actually cast blame on the veterans, but on the political and military leadership which were putting american lives into an unwinnable situation. this point is always lost in the hysterics, where people (incorrectly) claim that he was casting aspersions on the foot soldiers in the war.

also, it's important to point out that as horrible as the things they were claiming are, it's basically all been proven true. all serious vietnam scholars from sy hersh on fully recognize the levels of atrocities that occurred there, and that the stories about free-fire zones and cutting off victims' ears all really took place.

[jas9999]

I stand with Bush on this.  The Democrats didn't give a damn when the 527's were going to town on Bush, then it was freedom of speech or whatnot.  But then, when it happens to them, they go crying about how unfair it is.

Bush has taken the appropriate response.  He has stayed above the fray, refusing to comment on the Kerry ad, and saying he feels Kerry served honorably.  Yet, he's calling for Kerry to stand with him on calling for an end to the 527's entirely, which Kerry refuses to do.  Bush has taken the right stance.  Kerry's stance has been opportunistic.  Of course, Bush is benefitting from all this... the grand irony is that he's been calling from the beginning to end the very thing that he's now getting a boost from! 

If Kerry really wants this stuff to be brought to an end, he should not play a double standard when it comes to Bush.  Either end it all or don't condemn any of it.

ZAP

as usual, your grasp of the facts is significantly deficient. first, of all the ads run against bush, only one stepped over the line by making personal accusations, as opposed to rest which were legitimate critiques of his record as president. as soon as that ad ran (which dealt with bush's lack of vietnam service), kerry denounced it. but when an ad comes up against kerry which is proven to be false on every claim it makes, bush won't denounce it, but instead comes up with the idea that all 527 ads should be illegal. well, it's a nice thought, but they are completely legal right now, so it's an irrelevant point. if he was really so concerned, he'd call congress back into session and demand they outlaw the ads effective immediately or sign an executive order doing so himself.

so let's see, on the one hand: "bush was wrong/mislead americans about wmd in iraq and about iraq/al-quaida ties" which is true, by all accounts, and being run by a group that originally didn't even back kerry (moveon's straw poll in the dem primary favored dean originally with kerry in the middle/bottom of the pack).

and on the other hand: "john kerry is lying about his record because i served with him" was said by a bunch of people who didn't serve with him, or if they did, their own service records and previous public comments completely contradict their current comments; the ads are being financed by long time bush family friends and associates of karl rove with legal advice being given by bush's top external lawyer.

sure looks the same to me...

[Bisquick]

so let's see, on the one hand: "bush was wrong/mislead americans about wmd in iraq and about iraq/al-quaida ties" which is true, by all accounts,

There it is again (and again and again and again).  NO ONE KNOWS!!  Stop stating this as a fact.  If you feel mislead, state that.  Don't make facts where they aren't.

What are the 527's supposed to attack on the Bush side?  Kerry hasn't put forth any of his record in his campaign.  All he has said is that he is an honorable Vet. and made a bunch of pie in the sky promises without setting forth the means to accomplish most of it (not that nearly every politician doesn't do the same).  Bush has agreed with that and praised him for it.  If they are lying, Kerry should file a suit against them.  I really don't think their is enough evidence to prove that they are.  "Serving with" is a very vague phrase.  The facts are blurred after 30 years.  Kerry has been caught blunders in his own stories.  Right or wrong, Kerry needs to deal with it and not let it define him.

[coloroflaw.org]

So, apparently the 527 ad run by moveon.org earlier this year, that compared President Bush to Hitler was perfectly acceptable??

You also seem to have conveniently ignored the fact that Robert Bauer, the legal advisor to John Kerry's campaign also gives legal advice to Democrat 527's.

The only time John Kerry doesn't like 527's is when they are critical of him.

as usual, your grasp of the facts is significantly deficient. first, of all the ads run against bush, only one stepped over the line by making personal accusations

You also seem to have conveniently ignored the fact that the legal advisor to John Kerry's campaign also gives legal advice to Democrat 527's

[jas9999]

>So, apparently the 527 ad run by moveon.org earlier this year, that compared President Bush to Hitler was perfectly acceptable??

are you baiting me, or are you really that stupid and uninformed? moveon sponsored a contest whereby anyone in the world could enter their own videos, and then vote on the ones entered, with the winner being run on national tv. two videos that were entered compared bush to hitler, and those were two of the lowest rated videos on the entire site. they were never run on tv, and never would have been, because they didn't even make the first cut.

>NO ONE KNOWS!!  Stop stating this as a fact.  If you feel mislead, state that.  Don't make facts where they aren't.

i don't feel mislead. i never believed what bush said because i've followed this issue closely for the better part of a decade. the facts have been out there for years, and were widely available for anyone willing to look past the spin. don't you remember colin powell's 'this is bull' line when he read the speech that he had to give before the un? it was widely reported at the time that even he knew the lines he was being fed had no basis in truth.

> "Serving with" is a very vague phrase. 

give me a f-ing break. any reasonable person knows what is meant by saying 'i served with so and so.' there's nothing ambiguous about it, except to those who try to deny the obvious.

[The ZAPINATOR]

Ignorant and uninformed... I guess if we don't get all our news directly from the Democratic party line and press releases (not to mention Michael Moore), we'd all fall into that category here.  I also notice that you've failed to address some very significant points made by coloroflaw, and have instead resorted to namecalling.

Please don't start with your superioristic liberal attitude again.  You really like to present your liberal opinions as unslanted facts, don't you?  Until you stop doing that, and stop putting your spin on everything while calling it objective fact, I can justify henceforth completely ignoring your posts.  Besides, with you everything gets personal.  You've stepped over that line time and time again (not only with me, but with others as well), and I'm insulted by it.  I just don't need your negativity, and no one else does either.

People like you are the reason Bush will win the election.  Mainstream America, which is not packed with angry conspiracy theorists, has a hard time swallowing the kind of anger-mongering your type are up to.  And we have a hard time buying your facts as well, since they're usually so contrary to what our own eyes tell us.

Take care, lose the anger, stop the namecalling.  Then I'll take you seriously.

ZAP

[jas9999]

Ignorant and uninformed... I guess if we don't get all our news directly from the Democratic party line and press releases (not to mention Michael Moore), we'd all fall into that category here.  I also notice that you've failed to address some very significant points made by coloroflaw, and have instead resorted to namecalling.

there was only one point i did not address (kerry advisor) and i concede that point. the rest i refuted because they were wrong on the fact.

Please don't start with your superioristic liberal attitude again.  You really like to present your liberal opinions as unslanted facts, don't you? 

i present facts as facts, and add my opinions on top of them (sometimes). if you cannot distinguish between the two, that's not my problem.

it is FACT that moveon did not air those ads, and never would have.
it is FACT that kerry denounced the one 527 ad that attacked bush personally (as opposed to for policy reasons), and it is FACT that nearly all of the people speaking in the 'swift boat' commercial did so by contradicting their own past statements or were outright lying about their service (like the laywer, get this, who signed a sworn affidavit accusing kerry of lying and then admitted that all his information was second hand http://www.kval.com/x30530.xml?ParentPageID=x2649&ContentID=x46616&Layout=kval.xsl&AdGroupID=x30530).
it is FACT that muchof the WMD evidence cited by bush et al in the runup to the war had already been discredited or was at least in serious question, and that the presentation of it as otherwise was not honest.
it is FACT that since our invasion of iraq, the number of terrorist attacks worldwide has gone up considerably (i'm not arguing causation here, just correlation (because that's all you can get from raw numbers), but it puts to lie the notion that the invasion made us safer).

Until you stop doing that, and stop putting your spin on everything while calling it objective fact, I can justify henceforth completely ignoring your posts.  Besides, with you everything gets personal.  You've stepped over that line time and time again (not only with me, but with others as well), and I'm insulted by it.  I just don't need your negativity, and no one else does either.

again, you seem to not understand the difference between facts and opinions. just as you have significant misunderstandings about the facts you are trying to argue. also, you attacked me looong before i ever attacked you, so get off your moral high horse. but i suppose i deserve it because i keep coming back for more when the other more intelligent posters have gotten tired of your drivel and refuse to engage your 'arguments' which lack any merit whatsoever.

People like you are the reason Bush will win the election.  Mainstream America, which is not packed with angry conspiracy theorists, has a hard time swallowing the kind of anger-mongering your type are up to.  And we have a hard time buying your facts as well, since they're usually so contrary to what our own eyes tell us.

i love how you stereotype me (after accusing me of getting personal just because i use strong language) when you don't know jack *&^% about me. i also love your vision of some mythical 'mainstream america' which has no basis in any sort of reality. polls consistently show that americans, by and large, are very close on most of the issues to my opinions. the difference is not so much in substance, but (as you sort of allude to) in presentation. there are exceptions of course, where i'm more liberal than the majority, and even some where i probably fall more conservative. of course, the labels are stupid, since the current conservative economic philosophy is to run up endless deficits and the liberal one is to balance the budget...

but here's the point: i refuse to take anyone's word at face value, and look instead at actions and sources - isn't the purpose of education to allow poeple to weigh evidence and think for themselves, rather than going with the obvious or with what they're told?. when someone makes a claim about something, i go to the original source to get the real information (i assure you, the democratic party would be one of the last places i'd go for accurate informtaion), just like all of us should be doing.

i'm sorry if you believe the fictions being sold to america by the current administration. i, however, refuse to keep my eyes shut from the real realities facing american and the world today, be it security, health care or the effects of massive tax cuts for the wealthy on the rest of us. you, on the other hand, have admitted here many times that you give the bush administration the benefit of the doubt unless proven otherwise (but then you refuse to acknowledge the contradictions when pointed out to you).

if there's one thing i learned from the clinton administration (by your estimation, i should be a clinton lover, right?) it's the old adage that truth is the first casualty in politics. it's just now that bush has taken that maxim and turned it into an art form of orwellian proportions. a 'healthy forest' act that increases clear-cut logging in our national forests. a 'clean air' act that allows more mercury emissions from coal power plants. the list goes on, but some of us just choose not to read it.