It should start here with Tony Foresta.
His slimy, ghoulish mind and writing
should be banned. He does not
comprehend "reasoned" or "decorum".

Terry McAuliffe is the same type.

Bush's best ally is still the insanity of the democrats.

To his audience (union workers) it was the perfect thing to say to get them fired up. They want to hear that their candidate has balls and is ready to stand up to the opposition.

It was an accident thait was caught on tape and projected onto a completely different audience (the general public). Im sure Bush, Cheney, Rove say the same type of stuff when not on the record, or when speaking to their big-dollar contributors.

With as much rancor this election is filled with I expect this type of stuff to spill over a lot. Nothing suprising here.

Dave, all this goes back to the personality of John Kerry and the democrats. You may have noticed in the postings by Carl, X, Toney etc. a signature feature of verbal abuse directed towards Bush. He is mocked, called a slime, liar and other less savory words, and held in utter contempt by his opponents. The fact that Kerry shares this view makes him incapable of seeing his own faults and removes any chance that he will salvage the good parts of Bush's administration for his own.

Kerry will be a poor president because he is incapable of any realistic self analysis. Without the reflexive opposition to Bush he won't be able to come up with his own platform. He won't lead, he will follow, and right now that spells doom for Iraq, Afganistan and the U.S. war on terrorism.

"I don't understand how poor people think." George W. Bush, confiding in the Reverend Jim Willis, New York Times, 08/26/03

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
- George W. Bush, discussing Kosovo, Houston Chronicle, 04-09-99

"There are some who feel that, you know, the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is, bring 'em on. We have the force necessary to deal with the situation."
- George W. Bush, Chicago Tribune, 07-03-03

"I'm the commander - see, I don't need to explain - I don't need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the President. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation."
- George W. Bush, Washington Post, 11-19-02

Dave, CNN reports that "Kerry campaign official David Wade later told reporters that Kerry knew his microphone was on at the time he made the comment in question." I don't think it was an accident that it was caught on tape.

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky." Bill Clinton (Washington, D.C., January 26, 1998)

Dave,

Islamofiscists are also watching Kerry make these carzy untrue statements. I am sure they are lapping it up. The message they are getting. Americans uniformaly hate Bush so we can attack while he is weak.

Stick to the issues. Sad dems have none.

"Somebody told me the other day that the Secret Service has orders that if George Bush is shot, they're to shoot Quayle. … There isn't any press here, is there?" John F. Kerry (Associated Press, Nov. 16, 1988).

Kerry is simply a smokescreen to keep the heat off of Hillary,who will pop up in time to not only run but to take FULL advantage of the bill sponsored by her potential running mate,weasel-man McCain.

Im a firm believer in a MS. Clinton/ C. Powell Ticket in 2008. Mccain/Kerry in 2004 is a pipe dream, Kerrys too damn liberal to stand for it and Mcain aint that upset over 2000.

Why can’t John Kerry and other Democrats stand up and debate policies based on reason and facts?
***********************************************************************
Run on his legislative record?

Surely you jest? ;-))

Wafflestomper,

That one about Quale was actually quite funny. Thank you. I thought he had no redeeming quality. Now I know that at one time he could tell a joke.

And

MBruce,

McCain isn't going anywhere with a Democrat. Bush is a better democrat than McCain. McCain as a Democrat VP is as likely as Bush picking Nader to replace Cheney. Sure, its somebody's dream ticket... if you suspend reality.

We aren't even in the actual election yet and personal insults have already erupted. If this is what now passes for debate in this country for the highest office we are all doomed...

Yes, the discourse must be elevated. If only he'd called him a 'major-league asshole'. Now that's presidential.

Kerry says, "These guys are the most crooked, you know, lying group of people I?ve ever seen." and eveyone thinks it's to Bush, "the sitting president". Odd how they recognize themselves in "these guys" did anyone of these attack lapdogs think to ask Kerry what he ment? Could he have possibly ment the liars? Do you think that he might have been reffering to those lying people mentioned by Franken like that Slander woman writer or Fox people?

no all the Bush terriers just keep yapping. Bush called Kerry congradulations. and thi sis the thanks we get. go tell Miss Jenkins, you 13 yr old prisses, yappers.

not presidential, sounds like Harry to me!!!

accusing Kerry of flipfloppin isn't like calling him a liar?

if this the best this crowd can do, Bush and the bushadmiratinsociety of CP is in for a long summer

Dan,

Thanks for the steer. Looks like my first impression was wrong, and thanks for the correction. From that link:

"
Wade said Kerry was not calling Bush crooked but was instead referring to Republicans who launched "crooked, deceitful, personal attacks over the last four years."

Among the examples Wade cited were comments made about former Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia during his failed re-election campaign in 2002 and about Sen. John McCain of Arizona during his race against Bush in 2000 for the GOP nomination, as well as doctored photographs appearing to place Kerry alongside Jane Fonda during protests against the Vietnam War.

Blaming the incidents on a GOP attack "machine," Wade said, "We are going to make it very clear that [Kerry's] a Democrat who punches back."
"

So my interpretation of what he was trying to get across in this statement was correct. Apparently the target and audience that I assumed were wrong. He is still just flexing his rhetorical muscles for people. By this statement the target was non-politician conservatives. The audience was the public.

--------------------------------------------

Jones,
Your comments have zero value. Go back to your cave and listen to Rush pop some more pills.

dave, just because you can't put 1 and 1 together doesn't mean AQ can't. Instead of brushing them off with faulty attacks, refute them.

After all the Partisan, Absurd Bush Bashing I have seen here, Kerry's Comments seem mild to me.

Fabricating Lies and misleading half truths is a bi-partisan endeavor. Its a prerequisite to being a politician. Letting Lawyers make national policy is never a good idea.

The best part of Kerry's apparent early nomination was, he didn't spend much time or money convincing my Local Liberals, that he was the Liberal of Choice in last weeks Texas Primary. I didn't see a single Ad on local TV. In fact I dont think he even stopped in Dallas. Probably, on the good advice of his butt buddy Ted Kennedy.

The once mighty Democratic Partisans in Texas, are getting used to being marginalized down here. Redistricting is going to give many ( re: Martin Frost ) a permanent vacation in Oklahoma.

But the Republicans are going to give Liberalism a boost, if they are serious about this, Imposing a Religiously Inspired forcing of moral values via the FCC. Whats next Blogs.

Kerry is just saying what he has to to impress his base. He dont owe anyone an apology. If you live in a Glass House, you might as well throw the first stone, your going to lose anyway.

Kerry's target audience was no doubt, impressed.

Texas is a "right to work" state, so unions are not a dominant voting block here, yet still mostly straight ticket, single issue, vote wasters. These Democratic Candidates must get a good giggle, out of having these unobjective brainwashed followers ( Straight Ticket Union Members ) undivided lifetime support. What have the Democrats actually accomplished lately to help the Unions. Yet, with the union leaders supporting democrats exclusively, it gives the Party in power, no reason to give a shit about them. And if there is no chance of getting union support ( Re: Your a Republican ) you risk nothing pandering to the Employers Interests.

In the 90s I was cursed with the task of managing / coordinating Union Employees in the D.C. Area. As you can probably guess they loved me :o) It was the worst experience of my professional life. Being forced to employ an anti-management workforce, that fought to defend their right to lower production and prevent profit was a nightmare.

don't know about the rest of your post, Mr. Texan, but your description of managing people in DC is hilarious.

you probably got fired for being a bad manager. If I had to work for someone like you, I would try to make you angry and fired.

We always know when the boss hates us. And we think that's good to make them mad. It serves them right. They make more money and they don't do very much. And when all they do is hate us, they aren't even managing. You probably never did real work. Just make a lot of money. Tha'ts why your happy about Bush's tax cuts.

maybe your children will have to work for someone like you. you porbably treat them that way too.

Well, Z you have came to several false assumptions. I have supported my family with a Shovel, and a Sledge Hammer in my early twenties. And gone to bed sore and calloused for years.
But because I showed true concern for my employers interests, I was eventually rewarded for it.

The people I currently manage are, like me, still employed here due to our job performance. Management and Labor are on the same team. We consider ourselves friends and co-workers not enemies.

I figure thats why thousands of Yankees come to work in Texas every day, and few ever leave. If I didn't not enjoy working here, I would find somewhere else. If my Boss didn't enjoy having me on his payroll, he is free to fire my ass. Thats the way it should be.

I thought everybody would be happy with Bush cutting all of our taxes. I guess you believe Mr. John Kerry Heinz is looking out for the poor man. He cant even see any poor people from his mansions.

Time to call bullshit once again:

All of you sanctimonious conservatives who believe it is unfair to Bush-bash and believe Kerry's comments of "crooked" and "liars" are truly worthy of apology, kindly apologize for the following epithets directed toward various left-leaning posters:

lefties
trolls
dumbcrats
tinfoil hats
asshats
liars
traitors
terrorists (oh, wait, that was Bush's Sec. of Education; my apologies)

You know who you are. If you claim to have principles and stand by them, and stand up here.

I won't even ask for apologies for all the things Kerry has been called in these posts; I have very little faith in the self-awareness of conservative hypocracy.

Todd,

Please note that these terms are not directed at folks simply due to a leftward stance. One does something to earn them. So Mr. Kerry should put up or shut up. (NOTE: please spare me posts from Michael Moore et al. I don't want them from you, I want them in print form, documented, notarized and sworn to, by Kerry).

Secondly, if you are unable to see the difference between a blog and a presidential campaign, clean your glasses.

Thirdly, if you don't like name calling, don't vote for me, you monkey.

There a new one for your list. :)

Jones,

So by your argument, you have no objection to lefties and monkeys to Bush-bashing, as long as it is on a blog? I trust, then, that I will not hear conservatives like yourself bellyaching that some comments are Bush-bashing and indignatly claim the higher moral ground?

Didn't think so.

No, If there is fact, the setting is appropriate (not a public event, not from an elected official, and constructive (doesn't encourage our enemies then fire away. But instead of calling him chimp, suggest a better course for policy.

And real monkeys can say whatever they want, in the Queen's English..

This is my first ever post here so please go gentle on me...

This is what finally took me over the top (from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,114037,00.html):

"Even before the ads became public, Kerry slammed them for what he described as their negativity.

"There is a Republican attack squad that specializes in trying to destroy people and be negative," Kerry said Thursday. "I think the president needs to talk about the real priorities of our country."

Kerry criticized Bush's ads for not focusing on health care, the economy, education, the environment or national security."

Kerry slamming Bush for being negative? Kettle calling pot black? Reap what you sow? My rules are my rules and you have none. WTF?

This is beyond any rational human being's comprehension, regradless whether they are dems or reps... I wish I had access to the drugs them looney lefties are using...

v,

Welcome. No need to be nervous. Jump in.

However, mono-letter NICS have been getting a bad wrap, may want to move out of that demographic.

"Welcome. No need to be nervous. Jump in.

However, mono-letter NICS have been getting a bad wrap, may want to move out of that demographic."

Thanks. There is reason behind the madness - I'm not willing to relinquish the mono-letter domain 'cause what's next, two-letter, etc? ;-)

The real reason Kerry is trying to control the tone (I can trsh you, but you can't trash me) and content (no matter what you say, just remember who went to Vietnam) in this election, just think of this:


What was the last important bill sponsored by John Kerry, which made it into law?

OK, then, what was the last bill OF ANY KIND, sponsored by John Kerrym which made it into law?

There, in summary, is the evidence for whether or not John Kerry should or should not be elected President.

The real reason Kerry is trying to control the tone (I can trsh you, but you can't trash me) and content (no matter what you say, just remember who went to Vietnam) in this election, just think of this:


What was the last important bill sponsored by John Kerry, which made it into law?

OK, then, what was the last bill OF ANY KIND, sponsored by John Kerry, which made it into law?

There, in summary, is the evidence for whether or not John Kerry should or should not be elected President.

Todd,

You have the memory of a gold fish.

John Kerry spends all of the Democratic Primaries talking about what he will do to handle the 'negativism' of President Bush. And yet in his own hypocrisy John Kerry is the one being negative all over the place.

And that is completely different than us Bloggers being negative. We can be negative because we support it and expect it from the other side. And in most cases our negativity comes in response to our opponent's negativity.

Or, put more bluntly, the same Freedom of Speech that lets John Kerry be a hypocrite, is the same Freedom of Speech that we have to point out what a hypocrite he is.

There is a big difference between calling someone an asshole, and calling someone a liar. As a term, asshole is descriptive of a general attitude, (whether of the speaker or the target, is left for the listener to decide.) while liar is and accusation of specific immoral and possibly unlawful actions.

In other words, Kerry and the rest of the Democratic party have been accusing Bush of crimes, crimes that border on treason if they were true. Of lying about going into Iraq specifically. But they NEVER make the case to back up such accusations.

Another example: In a recent Bush ad, Bush says that Kerry is "wrong on taxes" and "wrong on defense". The Kerry camp has called this a "negative attack ad". But looking at Kerry's voting record, as well as his own comments about raising taxes (on the rich) there is a case to be made that Bush's charges are true. And more importantly, this is part of a substantive debate on the very issues we are looking at when we head to the voting booths.

One the one side, I am seeing specific charges related specifically to the issues at hand. And I see these charges backed up. Kerry's defense is "That's unfair". No counter case, no real defense.

On the other side, I see specific charges that are not backed up, no case is made, which makes it very hard to refute or even argue. To me, if you got a charge, you have to make the case. If you ain't got a case, or refuse to even present it, well, this is still a land of innocent until proven guilty.

Ben

Bush is a liar, according to his own wife (regarding whether or not George read newspapers).

We can't know everything he's lied about or not, but there is a stench of deception and duplicity about him--to me. I wrap all that up into a neat little bundle called "liar". It has the same sort of undefined "I know it when I see it" as your other term there. You may not see it the same way.

Some people (like me) say that he lied about WMDs when we know damn good and well that there are any number of legitimate reasons why no WMDs have been found. I often accuse Bush of lying so that his loyal-duped-subjects get twitchy and scream for proof. If I was being politically correct like Time Magazine, or like conservatives think anti-Bushites should act, then I would politely say that he has a credibility problem. Maybe you've noticed that the current political debate isn't being held at that level. You may have also noticed that it ain't very easy to pin Mr. Bush down for the facts.

"Wrong on taxes" and "wrong on defense" are opinions, not facts. Of course people may see them as factual if they hold the same opinion. How would you deal with Kerry being wrong on defense if he had voted with Cheney and George 1 on some of those supporting "facts"? How would it affect your factual perspective to have qualified experts saying that Bush's tax cuts are largely responsible for the economic pickle the country is in?

"That's unfair" is a political defense. That statement is made to influence voters' thinking. It's Kerry's opinion. If it causes Bush/Rove to back off, it was successful.

There is a big difference between political and criminal cases. When "no case is made, which makes it difficult to refute or even argue", politically, the charge has hit close to the bulls-eye.

I admire your sense of right-and-wrong in "To me, if you got a charge, you have to make the case." "Innocent until proven guilty" works in criminal cases; it's not how politics works. Politics is mostly a matter of opinion--presenting oneself and the opponent to score points with the electorate.

John Kerry January 23rd made a statement in regards to Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction.

But, I suppose Buttonpusher's own hatred will miraculously make him physically unable to look up the transcript. I am too tired tonight to look it up myself, but it's definitely available.

There wasn't a single intelligence agency on Planet Earth that didn't think Saddam had WMDs.

And the entire war on Iraq was all about stopping Saddam's connection to terrorism and freedom and democracy for Iraq. It was called 'Operation Iraqi Freedom' and 'Enduring Freedom' not operation, 'There's definitely WMDs to be found.'

Jeff,

You seem to be familiar with hatred. My guess is that says something more about you than about the people you label with it. "Kerry...made statement...Saddam..." Who cares? No, I'm not going to look it it. If you use that "fact" and you won't include the link, then your arguments don't carry weight. I'm too tired...weak, weak, weak, wimpy, weak!

Are you dismissing Blix and Kay and Tenet statements on WMD? The Admin had on BlackAndWhiteBlinders to go to war. WMD was a good excuse. Iraq was a good excuse for not putting full resources immediately on finding Osama. The only al Qaeda people in Iraq were protected in the northern-no-fly zone. Your wimpy broken record ill-considered support of Bush is tiresome. Your "stopping terrorism, freedom and democracy in Iraq" could be used to justify military action anywhere. Your excuse for the Iraq war sounds like liberal pattycakes.

Bush's own father warned that the U.S. would be bogged down with nation-building in Iraq. The dumb cluck went ahead anyway. Only lately have adequate resources been put on finding al Qaeda, OBL, Omar and the rest of the Happy Ranch Gang. If Curious George wanted to stop terrorism, why didn't he go after the people who attacked our country? Your excuses sound like you don't care about that.

Bush weak on terror, weak on defense, weak on brains

Those are 'True Lies' there, Mr. Buttons. These things you say of the President are true of Senator Kerry! Leastwise, the President hasn't abandoned any POW-MIAs that I know of. We'll leave that little episode as a simple miscarriage, and forget about Justice. Kerry is spineless, for if he were truly anti-War (which he has claimed for over thirty years), he'd express that sentiment with some constancy. He doesn't. We don't need that guy anywhere, unless he's willing to own up to his past lies about his fellow soldiers. I don't see that happenin'.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: