Wow, If only a Democratic Senator, or maybe former Mayor of NYC would back Bush.

That would show creating a comercial around this small fry to be an act of desperation.

Posted by: jones at August 21, 2004 09:17 AM

“Small fry?” You don’t know McPeak.

We can, for the moment, put aside his experience as an Air Force officer and concentrate on his political expertise — which is really quite remarkable.

He was head of the Dole campaign in OR in 1996, and was Very active in the Bush campaign last cycle. Political folks believe he handled the effort very well — Dubya lost here by only a small margin.

Methinks that the Real “act of desperation” here is yours — not McPeak’s. Whatever else he might be, “small fry” ain’t hardly it.

Posted by: Don at August 21, 2004 10:29 AM

This is an irrelevant distraction from Kerry’s utter inability to meaningfully respond to the charges that he’s b.s.’ed everybody about his record in Viet Nam.

Given Rumsfeld’s shakeup of the Pentagon, I’m sure there are lots of senior officers that have or will be supporting Kerry.

But let’s see how long McPeak’s support lasts once it becomes more widely known that Kerry met with the North Vietnamese in Paris WHILE STILL IN THE NAVY.

Posted by: TL at August 21, 2004 10:40 AM

Kerry NOT ONLY met with the enemy, he immediately returned the the U.S. and thereafter pushed the North Vietnamese line at every opportunity.

Oh Yes! The whole world will soon see what he is and why Loyal Americans see him as we do.

Posted by: leaddog2 at August 21, 2004 10:51 AM

Kerry’s parroting of North Vietnamese Communist line is well documented.

Posted by: leaddog2 at August 21, 2004 10:52 AM

Amazing Don, it took an hour and 12 minutes to find a response to this. Wrong, but still a response. This guy is not in league with Koch or Miller.

But what is amazing, is you can not back up this:

“What there isn’t is a connection between Iraq and Ansar al-Islam. Those two entities were at war with each other.

Posted by: Don at August 6, 2004 01:15 PM

OR THIS

“You clowns have consistently tried to conjoin A a-I with Baathist Iraq under Saddam, but alas — you confuse an accident of geography with actual cooperation.

There was none. We know of none. We have Credible Evidence of none.

This is the Middle East. Everything that happens within a border is not under control of the central government of the nation within the borders. If that were true, you’d be ragging on Pakistan for harboring Taliban and al Qaeda forces within its borders — and they are certainly there.

Nice straw-grasping, but it doesn’t withstand scrutiny. Do try again to make the connection. It’s highly entertaining.

Posted by: Don at August 6, 2004 01:25 PM”

“I don’t. I’ve been tracking US info on A a-I since well Before the invasion.

Posted by: Don at August 6, 2004 05:29 PM”

ALL FOUND HERE
http://www.command- post.org/2_archives/014254.html

TWO Weeks and counting.

“

Posted by: jones at August 21, 2004 10:57 AM

TL,

Good point

“This is an irrelevant distraction from Kerry’s utter inability to meaningfully respond to the charges that he’s b.s.’ed everybody about his record in Viet Nam.”

What Kerry should do is claim to have won the MOH. Who would dare question the holder of the Medal of Honor?

Posted by: jones at August 21, 2004 10:59 AM

I suppose he is one of the select few that have actually seen Kerry’s “secret plan.” I bet it’s a doosy. Containment and law enforcement I’ll bet. Yep, there are going to be lot’s of disgruntled Generals in play this election. Bush threatens to make their whole lifes work irrelevant and they’re po’d.

Chads

Posted by: Chads at August 21, 2004 11:43 AM

Jones: You continue to perseverate. Help is available.

Chads: What you “suppose” is merely another hypothetical. Content-free on its face. Fact of the matter is, the guy swung a Lot of weight in GOP circles for many years — clearly more than such as You ever did.

Meanwhile, have a look at this:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=6035557

Posted by: Don at August 21, 2004 02:35 PM

The McPeak ad is certainly interesting and potentially damaging if we only knew what exactly he was agreeing with. Much like every other ad related to the Kerry campaign there just isn’t any THERE there. I’ve only heard a couple honest attempts to details his plans for anything. It seems his only claim to be presidential material is that he served in Vietnam…and now that service is being examined in detail…and he goes crying to the FEC. If his service was as sterling as he would want us all to believe, why not turn over his records? It’s a simple two page form.

I believe these are legitimate questions raised by the Swiftboat guys…regardless of their funding. If there is hard evidence that the RNC and these guys are in bed together then let’s see it and get that investigation underway too but the Kerry campaign should probably be alittle careful about that approach. I don’t think Mr. Soros or the various Clinton Admin officials who are now running some of the 527s supporting Kerry will appreciate it.

Posted by: Wayne Fielder at August 21, 2004 10:01 PM

Heh! If you can’t figure out what McPeak’s objection is, feel free to revisit his statement. It’s really quite clear.

Meanwhile, in a related development:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=6036302

Posted by: Don at August 21, 2004 10:20 PM

What the hell’s a “doosy”? Sounds Canadian.

Posted by: j at August 22, 2004 01:27 AM

It’s not Canajun. It’s somewhat archaic — being in vogue during the 20’s and 30’s. It connotes something extraordinary — deriving from the Deusenberg automobile (which was also quite extraordinary at the time) and the phrase was “It’s a Deusie (alternatively “Deusey”).”

Yours in better diction.

Meanwhile, in a related development:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/aug04/253040.asp

Posted by: Don at August 22, 2004 02:03 AM

Don: I didn’t know that derivation. Ta for that. I’ve wanted a Duesenberg ever since reading Moorcock’s Jerry Cornelius series. I think everyone should read that series, if only because it’s a tetralogy. I love that word.

Posted by: bananas at August 22, 2004 11:28 AM

Link help here

Posted by: bananas at August 22, 2004 11:32 AM

Nanas: My pleasure.

As for having a Deusenberg, you can’t. Sorry. They are all accounted for, most in museums, and those that aren’t are going to end up there, or in private collections that are essentially the same thing.

As for book series, I commend you to the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, in which one of the volumes was marketed as the fourth book in the trilogy. A ripping good read too!

Douglas Adams really does understand.

Posted by: Don at August 22, 2004 12:57 PM

I need help for you being a liar?

Posted by: jones at August 22, 2004 01:33 PM

Doubtless, Jones ol’ chap, History will determine that Your tolerance for “truth” is approximately the same as those on the SBVT.

Which is to say, None.

Posted by: Don at August 22, 2004 05:16 PM

Don,

Are you just unable to admit you don’t know what the heck you are talking about?

Trying to be insulting does not help you.

Posted by: jones at August 22, 2004 06:52 PM

Thanks Don, for a great answer to my rhetorical question. “Doozy” is how we say it in the sticks. Enjoyed the Hitchhiker’s guide many years ago.

Posted by: j at August 22, 2004 10:08 PM

JOC: Your problem seems to be less about my knowing what I’m talking about than my unwillingness to talk about what You want to talk about.

Go ahead — perseverate some more.

J: Yours wasn’t a “rhetorical” question as defined, but a real one. Oftimes folks don’t know the etymology of words and phrases in common usage. Clearing such things up is sorta fun, as is being a lifelong motorhead with an interest in classic automobiles.

Glad to be of help.

Posted by: Don at August 23, 2004 02:38 PM

unwillingness? Is that a new word for inability?

I see you like to assign malaprops to me, go ahead. I think we both know who the joke here is.

Posted by: jones at August 23, 2004 09:09 PM

Don,

Here is an elected Dem putting his political neck on the line for Bush. I look forward to you evading.

http://www.wkbn.com/Global/story.asp?S=2209683

Youngstown’s Democratic Mayor Backing Bush

The mayor of Youngstown is an elected Democrat who is throwing his endorsement to the Republican candidacy of President Bush.

The Bush campaign in Washington confirms that Mayor George McKelvey will announce support for Bush. An announcement from the mayor is expected this afternoon.

Ohio is widely considered to be a closely contested battleground state in the presidential election. The governor and both U.S. senators are Republicans, and the Legislature is Republican
controlled. But the mayors of Ohio’s biggest cities are Democrats.

Youngstown is Ohio’s eighth largest city. McKelvey is serving his second four-year term.

Posted by: jones at August 24, 2004 01:18 PM