Members chris-dax Posted November 1, 2006 Members Share Posted November 1, 2006 Sen. Clinton says Kerry should apologize Kingston -- Sen. Hillary Clinton, speaking at a Kingston campaign stop this morning, joined the chorus of Democrats criticizing Sen. John Kerry for what the former presidential candidate has called a joke gone awry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bnyswonger Posted November 1, 2006 Members Share Posted November 1, 2006 Our meddling in Iraq didn't bring Bin Laden to justice. He's still out there. Our continued military presence in Iraq is doing more than anything Bin Laden could dream up to recruit extremists - it's a {censored}ing magnet. There are literally THOUSANDS of weapons unaccounted for that were intended for the new Iraqi security forces (which apparently are untrainable), or is it that nobody wants any part of the new (US controlled) government? What do you suppose those weapons that OUR {censored}ING TAX DOLLARS paid for are being used for now? That's gettin 'er done isn't it? You want to get worked up about arrogance - look in the west wing. Kerry may shoot his stupid mouth off, but he's not the one who is reponsible for the way things are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members takeout Posted November 1, 2006 Members Share Posted November 1, 2006 Originally posted by georgestrings I believe the appropriate phrase for the above would be:"Hey - look over there!!!" - georgestrings I believe the appropriate phrase for the above would be: "Blame Clinton!!1!11" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members takeout Posted November 1, 2006 Members Share Posted November 1, 2006 Originally posted by hawkhuff Yep, the dem/lib party line......leave them alone and they'll leave us alone. Yeah, and WTF is only 3,000 measley Americans. They won't do that no more, we just need to talk with them and they will understand. :rolleyes: If by "them" you mean "terrorists", well... we haven't even sneezed in Osama's direction in years. On an unrelated note, we sure kicked the {censored} out of the weakest nation in the Middle East. Yet somehow they're handing it back to us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members chris-dax Posted November 1, 2006 Members Share Posted November 1, 2006 Here's a short piece about media coverage of the event....from today's Wall Street Journal.... Anyway, how is it that Kerry is so un-self-aware that he portrays himself as the indignant victim for a problem of his own making? In this attitude he has a lot of enablers, in both the mainstream media and the Angry Left. Here's how the Washington Post reported the story today: President Bush last night accused Sen. John F. Kerry of disparaging U.S. troops in Iraq, echoing the 2004 strategy of ridiculing the Massachusetts senator to raise anew questions about Democratic leaders and their commitment to the troops. The highly coordinated White House effort came as Republicans sought to shift the focus away from an unpopular war and GOP scandals that are putting their congressional majorities at risk. So Republicans "sought to shift the focus away from an unpopular war" by calling attention to Kerry's comments on that same war? Whatever, dude. Here's the New York Times: For at least a few hours on Tuesday, President Bush had a chance to relive his victorious campaign of 2004, taking a break from a bleak Republican campaign season as he attacked Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts over the war in Iraq. Mr. Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat who was Mr. Bush's opponent in 2004, is not running for any office this year. But the president seized on what he said were Mr. Kerry's disparaging remarks about the troops at a rally in California--and what Mr. Kerry insisted was little more than a botched joke--as he sought to make Mr. Kerry the face of the Democratic Party this fall. The New York Sun quotes the boy wonder of the Angry Left: The angry counterattack from Mr. Kerry, who was the Democratic nominee in 2004 and is considering another presidential run in 2008, seemed likely to endear him to the liberal bloggers who could be influential in selecting the next Democratic nominee. "Kerry responded perfectly," a leading Democratic blogger, Markos Moulitsas, wrote yesterday. When we disparage the Angry Left, we invariably get a few emails from people saying that the Angry Left has every reason to be angry, because the Bush administration has been so evil, incompetent or both. For the sake of argument, let's stipulate that that's true. The Angry Left is still guilty of unseriousness. A serious political opposition would respond to an administration's misrule by advancing arguments and alternatives, not by indulging in incoherent rage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jugghaid Posted November 1, 2006 Members Share Posted November 1, 2006 Originally posted by takeout Osama bin Laden still walks free. We haven't gone after the terrorists in years. That's more than a bit oversimplified. Al zarkawi just bought the farm a few months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jugghaid Posted November 1, 2006 Members Share Posted November 1, 2006 Originally posted by chris-dax Here's a short piece about media coverage of the event....from today's Wall Street Journal.... Anyway, how is it that Kerry is so un-self-aware that he portrays himself as the indignant victim for a problem of his own making? In this attitude he has a lot of enablers, in both the mainstream media and the Angry Left. Here's how the Washington Post reported the story today: President Bush last night accused Sen. John F. Kerry of disparaging U.S. troops in Iraq, echoing the 2004 strategy of ridiculing the Massachusetts senator to raise anew questions about Democratic leaders and their commitment to the troops. The highly coordinated White House effort came as Republicans sought to shift the focus away from an unpopular war and GOP scandals that are putting their congressional majorities at risk. So Republicans "sought to shift the focus away from an unpopular war" by calling attention to Kerry's comments on that same war? Whatever, dude. Here's the New York Times: For at least a few hours on Tuesday, President Bush had a chance to relive his victorious campaign of 2004, taking a break from a bleak Republican campaign season as he attacked Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts over the war in Iraq. Mr. Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat who was Mr. Bush's opponent in 2004, is not running for any office this year. But the president seized on what he said were Mr. Kerry's disparaging remarks about the troops at a rally in California--and what Mr. Kerry insisted was little more than a botched joke--as he sought to make Mr. Kerry the face of the Democratic Party this fall. The New York Sun quotes the boy wonder of the Angry Left: The angry counterattack from Mr. Kerry, who was the Democratic nominee in 2004 and is considering another presidential run in 2008, seemed likely to endear him to the liberal bloggers who could be influential in selecting the next Democratic nominee. "Kerry responded perfectly," a leading Democratic blogger, Markos Moulitsas, wrote yesterday. When we disparage the Angry Left, we invariably get a few emails from people saying that the Angry Left has every reason to be angry, because the Bush administration has been so evil, incompetent or both. For the sake of argument, let's stipulate that that's true. The Angry Left is still guilty of unseriousness. A serious political opposition would respond to an administration's misrule by advancing arguments and alternatives, not by indulging in incoherent rage. Oh comeon. We ALL know the mainstream media is not biased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members georgestrings Posted November 1, 2006 Members Share Posted November 1, 2006 Originally posted by takeout I believe the appropriate phrase for the above would be:"Blame Clinton!!1!11" You libs are so transparent - all you have to offer is another "hey, look over there" to excuse your last one??? How typical... - georgestrings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members filterthing Posted November 1, 2006 Members Share Posted November 1, 2006 how bout this little gem... anyone say sorry bout this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTVJ_vFMoqg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ezstep Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 And. . . . it ends. Kerry apologized - sorta. "Sen. John Kerry apologized Wednesday to 'any service member, family member or American who was offended' by remarks deemed by Republicans and Democrats alike to be insulting to U.S. forces in Iraq." But then he adds "he sincerely regretted his words were 'misinterpreted to imply anything negative about those in uniform.' " Sen. Kerry. I don't think anyone misinterpreted your words. But, I will give you kudos for apologizing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members takeout Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Originally posted by Jugghaid That's more than a bit oversimplified. Al zarkawi just bought the farm a few months ago. al Zarqawi was a creation of the Iraq invasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members takeout Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Originally posted by georgestrings You libs are so transparent - all you have to offer is another "hey, look over there" to excuse your last one??? How typical... - georgestrings And neo-cons aren't transparent? The overblown indignation over an ill-delivered remark, followed by deliberate reinterpretation of intent and an all-out media barrage? Hmmm... sounds familiar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 You're stupid! No you're stupid! Nuh uh! Ya huh! Nuh uh Ya huh! Nuh uh! Ya huh! Nuh uh Ya huh! Nuh uh! Ya huh! Nuh uh Ya huh! Nuh uh! Ya huh! Nuh uh Ya huh! There ya go Takeout and George...Just saved you guys (and the rest of us) four pages of posting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lug Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Originally posted by takeout al Zarqawi was a creation of the Iraq invasion. um, don't think so. WIKI: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bnyswonger Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Lug - get your ass to bed!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members chris-dax Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Originally posted by ezstep And. . . . it ends.Kerry apologized - sorta."Sen. John Kerry apologized Wednesday to 'any service member, family member or American who was offended' by remarks deemed by Republicans and Democrats alike to be insulting to U.S. forces in Iraq." But then he adds "he sincerely regretted his words were 'misinterpreted to imply anything negative about those in uniform.' "Sen. Kerry. I don't think anyone misinterpreted your words. But, I will give you kudos for apologizing. Actually - Kerry didn't apologize to anyone....he just had someone post some {censored} on his website.... and he didn't admit to having inadvertantly misspoke (to put it kindly) - he just said he was sorry people are too dumb to understand him.... what a loser.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members hawkhuff Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 On the upside of all this, it probably tanked Learch' 08 presidential hopes. So we measure everything by way of the capture of Bin Ladeen? In that vein, the libs war on poverty has been a dismal failure. :thu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lazy Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Originally posted by hawkhuff On the upside of all this, it probably tanked Learch' 08 presidential hopes. So we measure everything by way of the capture of Bin Ladeen? In that vein, the libs war on poverty has been a dismal failure. :thu: It doesn't really matter if he apologized. There is truth in what he said. But that doesn't matter either... What matters is that it was an incredibly stupid thing to say and he's going to pay for it dearly if he runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bnyswonger Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Turn the lights out when you're done, boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members takeout Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Originally posted by hawkhuff On the upside of all this, it probably tanked Learch' 08 presidential hopes. Good. The guy's a schmuck. Y'all are still making way too big a deal out of this, but whatever. So we measure everything by way of the capture of Bin Ladeen?I believe in taking out the number one guy of the group that actually attacked us on 9/11, rather than kicking the {censored} out of a virtually defenseless punching bag like Iraq just for show. But that's just me. In that vein, the libs war on poverty has been a dismal failure. :thu: Agreed. Much like the War on Drugs, and the War on Terror. Or on Christmas. Or on Traditional Marriage (a hilarious phrase). Or any other "War on [insert abstract concept here]". Gigantic monetary sinkholes that don't produce any results except providing election year fodder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lug Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Originally posted by bnyswonger Lug - get your ass to bed!!! yawn................................. I found all that whilst sleeping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RSBro Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Originally posted by georgestrings Now that's funny right there... - georgestrings Put that on my wallpaper this morning... classic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members georgestrings Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Originally posted by King Kashue You're stupid!No you're stupid!Nuh uh!Ya huh!Nuh uhYa huh!Nuh uh!Ya huh!Nuh uhYa huh!Nuh uh!Ya huh!Nuh uhYa huh!Nuh uh!Ya huh!Nuh uhYa huh!There ya go Takeout and George...Just saved you guys (and the rest of us) four pages of posting... Good point... - georgestrings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jugghaid Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 Originally posted by takeout al Zarqawi was a creation of the Iraq invasion. Lug beat me to it. I was out late last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members B-Bottom Posted November 2, 2006 Members Share Posted November 2, 2006 http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061102/D8L4QH580.html Kerry's '72 Army Comments Mirror Latest Nov 2, 3:12 AM (ET) By JOHN SOLOMON WASHINGTON (AP) - During a Vietnam-era run for Congress three decades ago, John Kerry said he opposed a volunteer Army because it would be dominated by the underprivileged, be less accountable and be more prone to "the perpetuation of war crimes." Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran who turned against the war, made the observations in answers to a 1972 candidate questionnaire from a Massachusetts peace group. After Kerry caused a firestorm this week with what he termed a botched campaign joke that Republicans said insulted current soldiers, The Associated Press was alerted to the historical comments by a former law enforcement official who monitored 1970s anti-war activities Kerry apologized Wednesday for the 2006 campaign trail gaffe that some took as suggesting U.S. soldiers fighting in Iraq were undereducated. He contended the remark was aimed at Bush, not the soldiers. In 1972, as he ran for the House, he was less apologetic in his comments about the merits of a volunteer army. He declared in the questionnaire that he opposed the draft but considered a volunteer army "a greater anathema." "I am convinced a volunteer army would be an army of the poor and the black and the brown," Kerry wrote. "We must not repeat the travesty of the inequities present during Vietnam. I also fear having a professional army that views the perpetuation of war crimes as simply 'doing its job.' "Equally as important, a volunteer army with our present constitutional crisis takes accountability away from the president and put the people further from control over military activities," he wrote. Kerry's spokesman, David Wade, said Wednesday the historical document needed to be viewed in the era in which it was written but that it nonetheless raised a "bedrock question in a time of war when sacrifice should be shared by all Americans." "These are the words 34 years ago of a 28-year-old veteran home from a war gone wrong, wondering who in America will bear the cost of battle and shoulder the responsibility of military service," Wade said. Kerry filled out the candidate questionnaire at the request of Massachusetts Political Action for Peace, an anti-war group that decades later turned over its historical documents to university researchers. AP obtained the document from someone who gathered it from archives during Kerry's unsuccessful 2004 presidential campaign against President Bush. Republicans in that election relentlessly assailed Kerry's role in the anti-war movement decades earlier. Kerry and Bush renewed their rivalry again this week, with the president accusing Kerry of offending troops. Kerry said he botched the text of a joke and didn't mean to insult troops. On Wednesday, Kerry canceled campaign appearance on behalf of Democratic congressional candidates and issued an apology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.