Is a 40-paged rebuttal enough?

It's a start. And better than Kerry every did in fighting the lies. But unless this 40 paged document makes it to the top of the NYT Best Seller list, that means there are going to be millions of people with this book in one hand and NOT a 40-paged rebuttal in the other. And with or without the 40 paged book, the radio heads are going to be talking it up as fact.

I think it is not enough. I think they should file a lawsuit. If there are indeed flat baldface lies in the book that is labeled "Non-Fiction," then the publishing house and the author should be sued for libel.

The bulk sales will sit in a warehouse until they're pulped. Many more people will read the free rebuttal. :hi:

However there is still a perception that millions of copies were sold (and it was #1 on the list) which justifies radio talk shows to discuss it with legitimacy, and you can bet they're not going to mention the rebuttal. however if there was a lawsuit it would have to be discussed in the media and assuming Obama wins the lawsuit it would blow their cover completely.

It's been disseminated to people who watch politics closely and political junkies like us but I don't think a lot of average joes know about it-- at least more of them know about the NY Times Bestseller's List. So there needs to be a big push to get this out.

it's not going to be nearly as big as putting it on the NYT #1 slot and having radio talk show assholes talking about it daily. Which is what is happening with the book.

The rebuttal is like putting out a fire with a squirt gun. The only place you'll see it mentioned is Olbermann. Otherwise you'll see the book being the headline and mention of the rebuttal somewhere in the 23rd paragraph, if at all.

For God's sake, look at the CNN home page right now. One of the headlines says "Obama plan called 'economic disaster'" when you click the link you find out it's a **McCain Advertisement** that makes the claim. So now you expect these same guys to put the 40 paged rebuttal on the front page?????

In any case a law suit is the worst way to go. Libel laws in the US are almost impossible to win in general, one in a billion against public figures and have no possibility of even being heard for a presidential candidate.

The first ammendment was made for trash like that. If you try and supress it you will only convince some people that it must be true.

that's what Kerry tried to do. You have to fight this lie machine and blow their cover.

No one is paying any attention to this book and, quite frankly, the previous attacks on Rev Wright have already taken whatever impact this stuff might have had. Right now the MSM is calling it factually incorrect and moving on.

Your strategy would bring it back into major coverage and legitimize it.


I don't think we should ignore it but that we should ridicule it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6639709&mesg_id=6639709


Mel Brooks proved a long time ago that if you really want to cause somebody damage - don't argue with them laugh at them.

Put it out there for everyone to see, show them it's a bunch of lies, slap a lawsuit on them for doing it, and put an end to this sort of shit, once and for all.

...probably also believe that Rush Limbaugh came THIS close to winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

I live in "lefty" vermont,... and I hear Rush Limbauh on the radio everywhere I go... The UPS driver is tuned in... cooks at the restaurant.... I think you underestimate the power of this kind of propaganda.

but mostly, I want McCain pummeled. By all means, send out the surrogates to trash this PoS Corsi; if a lawsuit would actually accomplish something (I doubt it would) then yeah, Obama can make it happen.

I just want to keep eyes on the prize. and also, let's not over-estimate Rush's influence. Yeah, he's got 13 million or so listeners. And they weren't going to vote for Obama anyway.

A bit from Rude Pundit about beating up the old guy:

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2008/08/when-do-we-get-to-beat-up-old-man-heres.html

the book is targeted at morans who have been voting republican for years but are fed up and considering voting for Obama to scare them away from it. they listen to Limbaugh and watch Oliely. they won't read the book, or even ever own a copy but they'll hear quotes from it daily.

the rebuttal is targeted to people who actually actually look into the facts.

major disconnect.

the people who need to know about this rebuttal are not going to read it, let alone ever hear about it. the book is planted just to hit the idiots who actually listen to Rush Limbaugh and will never read the book or the rebuttal, but they will hear MANY MANY quotes from it on the radio and if they were ever considering giving up on the Republican Party, this will stop them. That's what the goal of this book is, and no 40-paged rebuttal is going to stop it. A lawsuit on the other hand, that would stop it.

It sure wouldn't prevent the book from being distributed; I suspect it would only help to legitimize it.

I'm open to ideas about how one might launch attack ads (from friendly 527s if necessary), but not sure where such ads should be deployed, or even what kind of content would be effective.

Bottom line is, I think 2008 isn't 2004. They've pretty much shot their wad already with the "secret Muslim" crap that even (honest) I've heard Rush (Rush!) describe as "loony". Besides, it's Team McCain itself who's been whining about Obama not putting his country first, willing to lose a war to win an election, yadda yadda. That, to me, is what needs batting down more than anything.

commenting on almost every new 5 star review with a post including the URL of the rebuttal. I hope people read the rebuttal before buying the book, and are so turned off that they don't buy it at all.

I wish the Obama people had put the part that refutes Corsi's claims in the form of a chart, though--claims on the left, rebuttals on the right. The way it is, it's really hard to read, and really easy to lose your place. Especially online. Even I gave up around page 26, and only scrolled down to see that at the end they skewered Corsi on his slimy background. Unfortunately the need for speed precluded the campaign from honing the prose and adding a little drama. It doesn't begin to rival Corsi's fiction as an absorbing (but disgusting) read.

And did you forget Kerry attacking the swifts AND challenging Bush to stop hiding behind them and come out and publicly debate their Vietnam services? That wasn't tougher than ANY Dem nominee ever did over a trumped up scandal? Can you NAME one tougher challenge made?

BTW - you and many Dems don't KNOW this happened because corpmedia didn't WANT you to, and they were certain that those casually engaged and not actively backing up Kerry on these fights wouldn't know what they missed. I knew it happened because I was backing up our nominee against all the lies as most Dem lawmakers and the left media seemed to be MIA in 2004 - too scared to get on Rove's radar when he was at his most powerful, I guess.

>>>>
Kerry campaign's quick response to Swift boat vets
By Marie Horrigan
UPI Deputy Americas Editor
Washington, DC, Aug. 5 (UPI) -- The campaign for Democratic Party presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts issued an exhaustively researched and extensively sourced 36-page refutation Thursday of allegations Kerry lied about events during his service in Vietnam, including how and why he received medals, and had fled the scene of a battle.

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040805-012143...



Kerry: Bush lets attack ads do 'dirty work'
McClellan points out criticism by anti-Bush group
Friday, August 20, 2004 Posted: 2:37 PM EDT (1837 GMT)
BOSTON, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry accused President Bush on Thursday of letting front groups "do his dirty work" in questioning his military service during the Vietnam War.

"The president keeps telling people he would never question my service to our country. Instead, he watches as a Republican-funded attack group does just that," Kerry told a firefighters' union conference in his hometown of Boston.

"Well, if he wants to have a debate about our service in Vietnam, here is my answer: Bring it on."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/19/kerry.attacka... /


http://www.johnkerry.com/petition/oldtricks.php

I'm so glad you're here to refute them 'cause I'd be pretty tired by now. In fact, Kerry did at least as well as Obama in this department. Yet, Kerry still lost. The way Obama could actually do better than Kerry in refuting the obvious lies about himself and his record would be to go on the air with a massive TV blitz outlining the lies and laying the blame directly at the feet of John McCain. Kerry couldn't do that because he was at a fundraising disadvantage and needed to save his cash for after the convention.

Obama doesn't have those restrictions. He could be all over the airwaves not only debunking the lies but using it to create a narrative of McCain being a liar. He can make this whole thing blow up in McCain's face in a way that Kerry simply couldn't afford to do. I don't know what he's waiting for.

and backed Kerry up when he made these attacks at the time. Too many who call themselves activists and fighters weren't there furthering Kerry's attacks in 2004 and that's why they STILL don't know what happened in 2004 though they claim to nearly every day. If they HAD done their part they would KNOW the facts - and know them COLD and fight for the truth.

This personal life stuff won't fly. And I think the same guy's lies will have diminishing returns. Yes, this response is ok for now, but if it gains much traction, Obama needs to use a lot of air time to state how they've been debunked. And give them a dose of their own medicine.

Maybe someone ought to write a hit book on McBush. It's unfair that the Democrat always has to be on the defensive merely because some right winger lies.

And the book on McWar would be true. Why does no one write it?

interview her though she'd been a regular guest over the years - he said he didn't want to hurt his close friendship with GHWBush.

Those who don't GET that corpmedia has an agenda that will target any Dem nominee who isn't approved by their fascist masters, simply aren't paying attention.

for this POS "author"....civil law suit for slander/libel? I think a group could sue him for his previous "swiftboat" book....sue for damages he has cost this country by helping to install Bush & Co for a second term.