I CAN'T BELIEVE IT! Just said it, with force and anger, live in Cleveland!

C-span claims it is live now... the campaign event in Ohio. He JUST said it, and he's ripping Bush a new asshole in his speech. AMAZING!

Some people have no idea what this thread is about.

on C-Span

This was posted one hour ago according to the StarTribune website:
http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/4967083.html (subscription)

It's an AP article but I can't find a link to the release yet

Kerry gets comeback advice from Clinton, says W stands for wrong

Mary Dalrymple, Associated Press

September 6, 2004 RACINE, W.Va. -- Democrat John Kerry, with fresh campaign advice from the Comeback Kid, hammered President Bush anew today on the economy and Iraq, determined to snap the GOP momentum.

``The 'W' stands for wrong,'' Kerry said of Bush's middle initial. ``Wrong choices, wrong judgment, wrong priorities, wrong direction for our country.''

snip

The Kerry-John Edwards ticket got some unsolicited advice from supporters in Wisconsin.

``You have to speak up - they're going to run you right over and make you look like idiots,'' Katie Simenson, 41, told Edwards at a campaign event in Oak Creek, Wis.

Edwards reassured the supporter. ``We're going to make sure the American people know the truth,'' he said. ``You watch what happens between now and Election Day and see if keep my word to you.''

more



:dem: :dem:

bush being 'consistent' but consistently wrong.

Hillary - Transcript from Aug 29th 2004 MTP
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5858461/

"You know, all this talk about this president and how consistent and strong he is, well, you know, if you're consistent and wrong, and you're leading your country in the wrong direction, I don't think that's much of a selling point.

On point after point, this president has been wrong. He said that he would cut taxes dramatically and increase revenues. It doesn't add up in the arithmetic and it doesn't make any sense as a policy. He said that he would, you know, try to have a quick victory in Iraq, and then we'd democratize Iraq. He had to admit it was a miscalculation. So whether we're talking about important domestic issues or critical life-and-death issues abroad, this president may be consistent, I'll give him that, but he's been consistently wrong and he's put our country on the wrong track."

Watch the free video of Hillary at that site - at the 2 minute mark, she takes off on the riff of bush being wrong wrong wrong. It's not a far stretch from there to use "W" in the way Kerry has today!


edit: added transcript

"We're going to make sure the American people know the truth. You watch what happens between now and Election Day and see if keep my word to you."

That's important to me. :bounce:

"We're going to make sure the American people know the truth. You watch what happens between now and Election Day and see if keep my word to you."

That's important to me. :bounce:

If GW would have listened to the generals, the state dept, congress

we wouldn't be suffering here at home

"W" stands for WRONG!!!!!!

you've just won the "Most Vague" thread award.

I'll do it too. :)

and not be "getting personal." Arguing that the other candidate is wrong on the issues is standard politics. And it's a great meme since they have tried to use "W is for Women" and we know that's WRONG!

Wrong president!

"Hey! What does that "W" on your car stand for?

Ohhhhh...it's gonna burn them up

he said (paraphrasing) 'it was the wrong war at the wrong time". But he voted for it. But voted against supplemental money for it. But he said he would vote for the use of force again. Now its wrong? I'm afraid he's his own wrost enemy on Iraq.

Sheesh ... we shoulda' nominated Leiberman.

If you had been standing anywhere near the truth for the last six months, some of it would have rubbed off on you. Kerry did NOT vote for the war; he voted to give Douche the authorization, to strengthen his hand, but with some huge caveats! If you don't understand the story about this whole "supplemental money" propaganda, that tells me your only source of news is FAUX. Don't try to spin that bullshit here. Here we happen to place a huge premium on the truth.

You're WRONG.

1. No one "voted for war"; they voted on giving bush the authority to use force AS A LAST RESORT. But bush kicked out the UN weapons inspectors, didn't try for a 2nd UN resolution, and did not invade as a LAST RESORT.

In other words, bush VIOLATED his own resolution.

2. NO Kerry DID NOT vote against supplemental money. He voted FOR a separate bill, as did the MAJORITY of Dems AND Republicans, and as the VAST MAJORITY of US citizens wanted. But BUSH didn't want that bill, so bush HELD OUR TROOPS UP AS RANSOM and threatened to VETO HIS OWN BILL unless he got exactly what he wanted.

So BUSH was willing to screw our troops and VETO HIS OWN BILL.

And only RWWs still don't know this...

We double teamed 'em! Good catch!

Ok first off I'm not spinning anyhting and you don't have a copyright on the truth. Most political opinion is based on perception and values and interpetation. so don;t insult me- but then again I've found that a moderate to conservative DEM voice (yes there are a few of us) tends to get flamed here.

I'm a JL fan and somewhat indy/lib/conservative depending on the subject at hand.

I'm NOT defending Bush, I AM pointing out a flaw with Kerry that is adriotly (and expectedly) being exploited by the GOP. He HAS changed his postions on the most important issue of the day (and keeps on doing so). A few candidates did not do this, most notably Joe and Howard from two opposite sides of the debate.

BUT - just for your entertainment, I'll see your BS and raise you some more ;-0

The resolution ENCOURAGED - did not require UN assistance & he had to certify (what ever that means) that diplomacy failed. I'd say Chirac answered that question when he deceived Powell on the first vote and announced that under no curcumstances would France approve a vote that included force. So no second vote (much like no votes at all with Bosnia when the outcome was preordained).

Blix was adamant in his first report that there wasn't cooperation and then suddenly in the 2nd report - there was a plea for more time (again) but no real change in cooperation with the regime. Read the Blix reports. Maybe we shouldn't have gone in, but hindsight is 20/20 and at the time there was no real indication of cooperation.

Kerry obviously (?) felt the same way (as did most of the Senate DEMS).

Now if Kerry thought Bush had failed on those counts (UN, diplomacy, etc.) he could've said so a few years before he tried to be a Howard Dean suck up. In fact, after the invasion was launched he co-sponsoried a Senate resolution in which he declared that the invasion was “lawful and fully authorized by the Congress” and that he “commends and supports the efforts and leadership of the President . . . in the conflict with Iraq.”

Regarding the 87 billion I'll just refer you to the REAL story as related by a campaign insider in the New Yorker (real right wing rag that is huh?):

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040726fa_fact

Now please quit calling me names OK? It is so unbecoming, especially from liberalmuse who is cool enough to have the Zep pics!

What I would like to point out is that I have been sort of semi-permanently locked into sitting in front of this tv with this computer on my lap for the last three years. My sources of info are, of course, limited to those of cspan, cspan2 and the satellite news services, the internet and all it is connected to, and a fairly well developed skepticism.

I have watched as each of these stories unfolded and as time went on, with an ever deepening cynicism relating to the planners/executors of missions, and a widening knowledge of obvious slant of each news source in their efforts to control the conception of the news, rather than reporting the news. I would like to take your points in the order you presented them, understanding, of course, there may be some overlap.

Copyrights aside, I wouldn't suggest you, yourself to be deliberately, conciously spinning the truth; I'm sure you are much too intelligent to need to do that.
Political opinions may well be based on perception, values, and interpretation, but I personally prefer that my own grasp of any situation should force me to, at least, dig beneath interpretation and my own notions of what should be right and proper, and get to the facts.
I am not really sure about the value of getting "flamed" since, as far as I know, that hasn't happened, yet.

I, like you, tend to consider myself an independent (perhaps some private conceit on my part) and, as a rule, prefer not to go into the question of whom I supported prior to the primary victories of John Kerry. I must say, at this time and for whatever the reasons, Mr.Kerry has been selected as the most electable and best compromise candidate for all of us, since we must band together, despite our lesser differences, in order to seize the reins of government from those we disagree with to a much greater degree.
I, too, would not defend Mr.Bush, as he certainly has a large enough circle of apologists.

I must take exception to your description of John Kerry as changing his positions on issues of importance and this supposed flaw being exploited.
To my own frustration and concern, Mr Kerry refuses, adamantly, to change position on giving the president the authority to strengthen his demand for cooperation from the Hussein regime. I, too, have heard many of his detractors mis-characterize his original statements and an attempt to determine the purpose of this misstatement is definitely in order. I have replayed his speeches several times to get to the gist of it, and it appears the real source of the problem is as follows:

1. The entire congress was stampeded into making a decision without sufficient time and discussion for an orderly process to occur-why?
The answer to that, in retrospect, is fairly obvious. The pnac group used the pushing and nudging as a tool to get what they wanted, using the fear and concern of the congress and the citizens engendered by the catastrophic events of 911.
John Kerry, as well as many others, did not realize, to their eternal chagrin, the absolute lack of character and integrity of the charlatan selected for the most important office in the world. They also did not understand the depths of depravity endemic to the souls of the criminally incompetent group of camp-followers supporting Mr.Bush. True this was a misjudgment, although somewhat understandable and, certainly, a warning for the future.

2. The declarations in Mr. Powell's speech before the UN were, as we know now, out-and-out falsehoods, and were particularly egregious, given that Powell had earlier turned down an even worse pack of lies for his talking points, which tells me he knew the lay of the land, as it were.
The perfidy and bad faith that this dishonored lackey displayed were totally beyond the expectations of anyone who knew him to any degree at all. Sad, sad day for all of us. No amount of finger pointing in some other direction can relieve this calumny.

3. Hans Blix was, understandably, upset and frustrated on the removal of the inspection teams in 1998, however those teams were allowed back into Iraq, under threat, as demanded by the US. Blix was angered, when, after numerous inspection failures resulting from poor aiming by US intelligence, the inspection teams were forced out by the US in the lead up to the war. He expressed his frustration several times at the poor treatment afforded by Bush's unscrupulous drive to start a war on his own demented timetable.
Contrary to the public trashing by Bushco, Hussein did not throw the inspectors out in March, 2003-we did.
Oh, and by the way, I have read the reports and I must stand by the above statements-Blix begged and pleaded for more time, but our leaders wanted a war-Blix loses. His recent book backs up this view.

4. The one area that I can support your view is on the speeches given in support of our little Hitler, understandable though they were. In light of the almost 80% US popular support resulting from fear, anger, and the shameless lies and distortions put our by the OSI, as well as the immediate administration, several really stupid assumptions were made-again no one really expected the total lack of integrity later discovered at the heart of this lousy leadership.

5. As to the 87 billion, that point was adequately addressed elsewhere in this thread, so I shan't bother with that here.
In summation, I stand by my original statement. Your "talking points" are those same discredited misinformation propounded by FOX "news" and the right-wing distortions of those world beaters whose nefarious goals, sadly, seem to be aimed at world domination and empire.

By their fruits ye shall know them.

You're just plain WRONG.

You need to read a little bit and understand the issues better, imho.

He didn't vote "FOR" the war--he voted to give Bush the authority to go to war as a LAST RESORT. Bush f*cked up and went to war anyway.

And I can't believe you still believe the $87 billion BS. Please--that's been discredit about 1000 times. He voted to give $$ to the troops but Bush wanted an extra $20 billion to go to Halliburton, which Kerry disagreed with. Bush got his way anyway.

Riiiiight. Sounds like a right wing talking point to me. YOU should have nominated McCain, 'cause 'W' stands for 'Wrong'.

than I saw during the entire GOP convention, LOL!

:headbang:
rocknation

Mentioned how other presidents managed to create jobs during wartime!

as being the problem...."What do you think FDR had? Truman, Johnson..etc.

Oooh, he's making Bush look like a girlie man!!

IF you think...........and lists all the crap Bush has done.



VERY EFFECTIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nice, simple, effective. Seems those recent staff additions are paying off.

http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13

Trash the whole damn GOP. They are led by extremists at odds with party and national traditions. Explain NeoCon foreign policy with traditional Containment and Internationalism. Explain Diplomacy and international leadership. Explain Fiscal Responsibility. Explain solving people's problems not Halliburton's.

...heheeeee!

Maybe Carville is having the desired effect already, eh?

Why would Bush even bring up jobs with two months to go knowing that he will have the worst jobs record since Hoover?

Because Kerry is framing the debate and when you can frame the debate you win the election.

ON BOOZE AND BLOW


Did I mention how much I hate the sonofabitch?

And Kerry is right.

It's about time Kerry started fighting. He needs to fire up the base and Americans in general.

Wrong for Women

Wrong for Wombs

Wrong for Workers

Wrong about Weapons of Mass Destruction

W stands for Warmongering

W stands for War Profiteers

W stands for Wall Street

W stands against the "Will of the People"!!!

That was a classic! Way to go John!!!

ala "it's the economy, stupid"

only now it's "w stands for wrong"

and there are so many wrongs, Kerry will always have something to talk about..

because W also stands for "winner" - or didn't they think of that...?

He's really nailing that theme.

Kerry can count the ways.

as in Walks away from responsibility.

walks away from Kyoto
walks away from allies
walks away from Arms Accords
walks away from Osama
walks away from those children he said he wouldn't leave behind
walks away from Air National Guard Service
walks away from sensible economic policies
walks away from creating new and better paying jobs
walks away from our veterans of whom he asks so much
walks away from the White House so he can hide at the ranch
walks away from reality whenever it presents itself to his face

walked away from Homeland Security until it became a political necessity

walked away from the 9/11 comission until it became a political necessity.

walked away from Abu Ghraib until it became a political necessity

walked away from a report at the ranch that told him "Osama bin Laden Determined to Strike in the United States"

walked away from Saudi Arabia - home of a majority of the hijackers.

walked away from promises to have a humble foriegn policy

walked away from universal good will after 9/11 so he could get Saddam

walked away from the Constitution and Free Speech with his Patriot "Act"

walked away from securing our ports so he could prove Saddam had weapons of mass destruction

walked away from dealing with North Korea and Iran so he could get the guy who tried to kill his Daddy.

and walks away from his own record any chance he gets.