Kerry has effectively handed Bush the White House

by redjade Wed Oct 06, 2004 12:43

LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- The Michigan Republican Party is asking four county prosecutors to file charges against filmmaker Michael Moore, charging that he illegally offered underwear, noodles and snacks to college students in exchange for their promise to vote.

by era Tue Oct 05, 2004 14:50

We can be guaranteed that without Powell the second Bush term will be neo-conservatism with vengeance. Great link!

by redjade Mon Oct 04, 2004 18:22

http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2004/10/the_incumbent_r.html

by Ali H. Mon Oct 04, 2004 16:26

Bring the UN on board. In this case seasoned Muslim peacekeepers from Pakistan, Bangladesh and possibly Turkey can be used to replace the Americans and other colonial occupiers. This in contrast to the boneheaded policies of Bush and his English lapdog WILL fix the problems in Iraq, after all it worked in Lebanon after 1982 when the yanks were kicked out!

by righteous pragmatist Mon Oct 04, 2004 15:56

Steve Martin used to have a routine in which he pretended to be a slick television pitchman, striding back and forth across the stage, calling out, "You can make a million dollars and pay no taxes! That's right, you can make a million dollars and pay no taxes!" After several times, he finally looked straight into the camera and described his two-step plan: "First, get a million dollars. Got it? Okay, good. Now..."


The Martin plan is a fair approximation of John Kerry's two-step solution for winning the war in Iraq: First, bring our traditional allies fully on board; and second, replace American troops with international troops to fight the insurgency and keep the peace.

Well, yeah, Step Two sounds awfully nice, but the difficulty is with Step One. To date, Kerry has provided roughly as many clues about how he'd accomplish bringing our traditional allies fully on board in Iraq as Martin did about how his listener might "get a million dollars." Which is why the key moment in the first presidential debate — setting aside rhetorical maneuvering and facial expressions — was when President Bush cited Kerry's declaration, in early September, that the war in Iraq was "the wrong war, in the wrong place at the wrong time."

"So what's the message [to our reluctant allies] going to be," Bush asked Kerry: "Please join us in Iraq...join us for a war that is the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time?"

The reality is that France, Germany, and Russia are not going to spend their blood and treasure to support the American effort in Iraq simply in response to the charm initiative of a new president — especially one who's previously characterized the endeavor as an outright mistake. Nor are they likely to be pressured into cooperation by a new president who's previously described America's allies as a "coalition of the bribed, the coerced, the bought and the extorted."

Kerry cannot accomplish the first step of his plan.

And without that critical first step, he has no plan.

by Tom - dyslexics untie Thu Sep 30, 2004 11:02 olearys at oceanfree dot net

Another example of how silly it is for Bush supporters to question Kerry's ability...

Bush says....

"I've got a reason for running. I talk about a larger goal, which is to call upon the best of America. It's part of the renewal. It's reform and renewal. Part of the renewal is a set of high standards and to remind people that the greatness of America really does depend on neighbors helping neighbors and children finding mentors. I worry. I'm very worried about, you know, the kid who just wonders whether America is meant for him. I really worry about that. And uh, so, I'm running for a reason. I'm answering this question here and the answer is, you cannot lead America to a positive tomorrow with revenge on one's mind. Revenge is so incredibly negative. And so to answer your question, I'm going to win because people sense my heart, know my sense of optimism and know where I want to lead the country. And I tease people by saying, 'A leader, you can't say, follow me the world is going to be worse.' I'm an optimistic person. I'm an inherently content person. I've got a great sense of where I want to lead and I'm comfortable with why I'm running. And, you know, the call on that speech was, beware. This is going to be a tough campaign."—Interview with the Washington Post, March 23, 2000

by Tom - dyslexics untie Wed Sep 29, 2004 21:15 olearys at oceanfree dot net

"By the way, when do the milk cartons with John Edwards's face on 'em start showing up on grocery shelves?"

I suppose that the same could have been asked when Bush was on holidays practically his entire first year in office prior to 9/11.

Listen, Kerry might waffle, he might be silly, he might not have employed wonderful campaign managers or wowed us in any of his speeches....BUT DON'T REWARD THE OTHER BOZO FOR THAT! The only thing that would make us more stupid than we already are is if we put a bozo in the office TWICE! One of the best definitions of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

(BTW...don't fool yourself by thinking that campaign success or failure has anything to do with the candidates...Bush and Kerry are just following the advice of their campaign teams...they don't actually think for themselves.) We have all seen what happens when Bush has to think on his own two feet without a script....rather embarrasing.

Here are just a few of the regular verbal blunders that Dubya has let slip from his lips...(and we should be worried about Kerry's capacity???)

"[I]t's the Afghan national army that went into Najaf and did the work there."—Referring to Iraqi troops during a joint press conference with Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, Washington, D.C., Sept. 23, 2004 (Thanks to Garry Trudeau.)

"The CIA laid out several scenarios and said life could be lousy, life could be OK, life could be better, and they were just guessing as to what the conditions might be like."—New York, Sept. 21, 2004

"Free societies are hopeful societies. And free societies will be allies against these hateful few who have no conscience, who kill at the whim of a hat."—Washington, D.C., Sept. 17, 2004 (Thanks to David Stanford.)

"That's why I went to the Congress last September and proposed fundamental—supplemental funding, which is money for armor and body parts and ammunition and fuel."—Erie, Pa., Sept. 4, 2004

"Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB/GYN's aren't able to practice their love with women all across the country."—Sept. 6, 2004, Poplar Bluff, Mo.

"They've seen me make decisions, they've seen me under trying times, they've seen me weep, they've seen me laugh, they've seen me hug. And they know who I am, and I believe they're comfortable with the fact that they know I'm not going to shift principles or shift positions based upon polls and focus groups." —Interview with USA Today, Aug. 27, 2004

"More Muslims have died at the hands of killers than—I say more Muslims—a lot of Muslims have died—I don't know the exact count—at Istanbul. Look at these different places around the world where there's been tremendous death and destruction because killers kill."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 29, 2004 (Thanks to Michael Shively.)

"In an economic recession, I'd rather that in order to get out of this recession, that the people be spending their money, not the government trying to figure out how to spend the people's money."—Tampa, Fla., Feb. 16, 2004

"King Abdullah of Jordan, the King of Morocco, I mean, there's a series of places—Qatar, Oman—I mean, places that are developing—Bahrain—they're all developing the habits of free societies."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 29, 2004

For a full list and a good laugh...go to: http://slate.msn.com/id/76886/

....peace out...

by Tom Quinn Wed Sep 29, 2004 20:42

“When your horse is drowning, it's a good time to change horses in midstream," John Kerry declared this week. Maybe he got this line eavesdropping on his staff. How many strategy meetings are delayed as Kerry consultants daydream about how they'd be knocking down swing states if Dick Gephardt, Howard Dean, John Edwards, or even the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man were their boss? (By the way, when do the milk cartons with John Edwards's face on 'em start showing up on grocery shelves?)
I have a theory to explain why the Democratic presidential ticket is growing lamer by the week. It suffers from a little-understood condition known as the "Kerry Syndrome." This is closely related to Simple Chronic Kerrytosis, a malady that causes poll numbers to drop when the candidate opens his mouth.
The Kerry Syndrome is a rare variant of the Stockholm Syndrome. The latter phenomenon is the condition under which hostages — Patty Hearst, for example — grow to sympathize with, and in extreme cases become like, their captors. The Kerry variant, first diagnosed in the junior senator from Massachusetts, works along similar lines, prompting the patient to ape his enemies. The Democratic nominee, for example, seems to have been captured by George W. Bush and, to a certain extent, by Richard Nixon.
Nixon? you ask. Well, yeah. Tricky Dick looms very large in Kerry's personal narrative. Indeed, Kerry founded his post-Vietnam political career on his brief stint as an anti-Nixon truth-teller. Consequently, whenever the candidate talks about Vietnam, he makes it sound like that whole war was launched, conceived, and waged by the Republican president. That whole bit about being in Cambodia on Christmas, 1968 was revealing. It seems what was actually "seared" into his memory was his hatred of Nixon. After all, the moral of Kerry's story was that Nixon was lying about U.S. troops not being in Cambodia. The problem: Not only was Kerry not in Cambodia, but Nixon wasn't president yet.
Strangely enough, however, Kerry has become the most thoroughly Nixonian candidate since, well, Nixon. From his blatant pandering and fear-mongering (yes, yes, the Bush campaign plays on people's fears, too) to his constant changes in policy based on polls and tactics, Kerry comes across as a Democratic version of Nixon — with McGovern's foreign policy.
Kerry's a stiff like RN, too. But at least when Nixon said, "Sock it to me!" on Laugh-In, he understood the joke was on him. John Kerry rips off Donald Trump's "You're fired!" like a substitute teacher looking for a laugh.
The most Nixonian of Kerry's traits is his obsession with secrecy and conspiracies. In August, Kerry announced he had a secret plan to get America out of Iraq. When George Stephanopoulos said it sounded like Nixon's secret plan, Kerry responded with Nixonian combativeness: "I don't care what it sounds like. It's truth. I don't care what it sounds like."
OK, fine. But at the same time, Kerry has accused Bush of having more secret plans than SPECTRE from the James Bond movies. As the blogger Slings and Arrows has documented, Kerry has accused Bush of having secret plans to privatize Social Security, slash social services, wage nuclear war, fix oil prices at the Saudis' behest, cut VA Benefits, cut education funding, send jobs abroad, and, of course, bring back the draft. On Monday the Associated Press reported, "John Kerry told voters in America's Dairyland...that President Bush had a secret plan that would hurt milk producers after the election."
Because Kerry Syndrome can cause dementia, it's not always clear whether Kerry thinks he's running as Nixon or against Nixon.
And other times it seems he's running as George W. Bush. It's hard to remember a time when one presidential candidate so completely controlled the agenda of the other. If they were cellmates, Kerry would be doing Bush's laundry by now. John Kerry's whole foreign policy is cemented to the notion that allies are everything. And yet he spends precious time ridiculing America's allies as a "coalition of the bribed" and letting his surrogates call the Iraqi prime minister a Bush puppet.
The Kerry campaign accuses the White House of fear-mongering with its talk about mushroom clouds; it moans when Dick Cheney warns that a loss for Bush would be a setback in the war on terror. Then Kerry puts Ted Kennedy out there this week to warn that another term for Bush would make — you guessed it — "mushroom clouds" more likely. The Kerry playbook should be subtitled, "I know you are, but what am I?"
Kerry even seems to want to speak like Bush. Just this week, Kerry called a Wisconsin audience's attention to Bush's negative ads. "I'm calling them 'misleadisments,'" the candidate declared, so lamely it makes your heart ache. When Kerry starts scripting Bushisms, you know the syndrome is in its final stages and the end is near.

by cartographer Tue Sep 28, 2004 13:13

the above illustration is an outline of the continent antartica with figures and dates on it, it's got nothing to do with the war on terror... does it?

by Wiliam A. Anders Tue Sep 28, 2004 12:11

At least the US is having an election. Unlike this piss-poor excuse for a democracy!!!
Ireland becomes more like a banana republic every day. I recently got my US passport in order...guess where I'm damn glad to be heading soon?

Vote Kerry...you'll regret it!!! Better yet, be like the man himself: vote for him...then change your mind and don't vote for him...then mull it over and decide you were right the first time...but there's still something that nags you and if you only had the oportunity again...

by redjade Fri Sep 24, 2004 13:16

http://bash.org/GODvsBUSH.gif

by redjade Fri Sep 24, 2004 12:37

Presidential fright-mask sales as election-predictors

A manufacturer of rubber presidential fright masks says that their sales figures during election-year Hallowe'ens successfully predict the winner of the upcoming presidential election. Unfortunately, at the moment more people are signing up to buy Shrub funnymasks than Kerry, but it's still early times.

more info....

by James Fri Sep 24, 2004 12:12

its always the best predicter, but of course only a predicter

by Derek Fri Sep 24, 2004 11:40

BUSH ---------------------------4/11
Kerry-----------------------------2/1

by mr data Fri Sep 24, 2004 00:32

the polls are nothing to go on so early as the undecided usually dont make up their minds until after the TV debates.
Combine this with the poll is taken of lightly voters but there have been drives to politicise non voters eg. punks against bush. Polls can not be considered an accurate yardstick of the outcome at this time

by eeekkk Thu Sep 23, 2004 16:47

The White House Web site also reflects the strategy of withholding information. It used to actively provide content on Operation Iraqi Freedom (or as the Web site now says, "Renewal in Iraq"), but the last new entry is dated Aug. 5.  The effect of the White House's control of information has been dramatic. The chart shows how English-language press coverage of Iraq has fallen off since July. Early in July, it was typical to find almost 250,000 articles each day mentioning Iraq. That number has dropped to 150,000. The goal of denying the adversary access to information is being realized. But, again, who is the adversary?  Before, during and immediately after the war, the White House orchestrated an intensive program of press briefings and releases to saturate media time and space, stay on message, keep ahead of the news cycle and manage expectations. The White House conference call set the daily message. The press briefings from the Central Command headquarters in Doha, Qatar, were designed to dominate the morning and afternoon press coverage, while the afternoon press briefing by the Pentagon was intended for the evening news.  The White House is also using psychological warfare -- conveying selected information to organizations and individuals to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning and ultimately behavior -- to spread its version of the war. And the administration's message is obviously central to the process. From the very beginning, that message, delivered both directly and subtly, has been constant and consistent: Iraq = terrorists = 9/11.  The president tells us that we are fighting terrorists in Iraq so we don't have to fight them here in the United States. But I know of no one with a respectable knowledge of the events in Iraq who shares that view. My contacts in the intelligence community say the opposite -- that U.S. policies in fact are creating more terrorism.  ...... Karl von Clausewitz, the Prussian theorist of war, wrote, "War is an extension of politics by other means." When I taught Clausewitz to students at various military war colleges, I told them that he meant international politics. But I may have been wrong -- I fear war has become an extension of domestic politics, moving beyond influencing adversaries on the battlefield to influencing the decision making of friendly nations and, even more important, American public opinion. Why have the American people become the adversary? 

by redjade Thu Sep 23, 2004 14:53

from http://Sinkers.org

by redjade Thu Sep 23, 2004 14:13

all true - but i'd check the american bookies - i doubt the irish bookies would have a clue about american politics

by Noel Thu Sep 23, 2004 14:09

The US Presidential race is very, very close according to the pollsters.

If I were a Kerry supporter I would draw no comfort from the latest Zogby.
Kerry's electoral vote has eroded from 322 to 264 in less than 10 weeks.

It looks and feels like George Bush will be returned to the White House.

When in doubt, check out the bookies.

by redjade Thu Sep 23, 2004 13:44

This election is far from over, remember this.

The only Opinion Poll worth watching is the Zogby Poll - they have been more accurate on Presidential elections than any other.

Zogby (21 Sept) says Kerry currently has 264 electoral votes compared to Bush having 241 and further says it is too close to call right now: 'Neither Mr. Bush nor Mr. Kerry holds a clear-cut lead in enough states to win the Electoral College votes required to capture the White House.'
http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=868

And remember, Love Kerry or not, we know what Four More Years will bring - Kerry/Edwards has promised two important things 1) withdrawal from Iraq within first term and the start of withdrawal by next Summer 2) No military Draft.

Its easy to be cynical and say all is lost and there are no differences between Bush and Kerry - but we do know what an unrestrained four more years of Bush will bring.....

- - -

''At some point the Iraqis will get tired of getting killed and we’ll have enough of the Iraqi security forces that they can take over responsibility for governing that country and we’ll be able to pare down the coalition security forces in the country.''
- Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
http://www.dod.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040914-secdef1302.html

by James Thu Sep 23, 2004 13:10

I just cant go anywere without hearing about those bloody upcoming Iranian elections, honestly youd think they never had one before, its just polling and canvessing and speeches, shamelessly appealing for votes.
I cant wait untill the Iran election is over and we can hear about something new like were they are voting to detonate their A-bomb,
tick A for Isreal or B for Israel
But what a role model...

by Jim Thu Sep 23, 2004 12:27

“Iran is as much a democracy as the United States”

Why don’t you ask Salman Rushdie about that one.

by David C. Thu Sep 23, 2004 02:03

Iran is as much a democracy as the United States, although neither is as democratic as Europe, Canada, Australia, etc. In 1979 the Iranians successfully threw off a manipulative American-sponsored puppet government and began to determine their own destiny. The Arab world, beginning with Iraq, should do the same.

Bush's words about 'freedom' in the Arab world are deeply ironic, because of course by freedom he means an American-dominated existance. But the Arabs CAN gain real freedom, if they can unite and force the Americans and their puppet regimes to give up control. The Iranians did it and the Arabs can do it too...

by american voter Wed Sep 22, 2004 23:41

"we have to do what they tell us anyway.
eh... that's one of the main issues of this election for the "non-voters"."

Beyond pitiful.
I'll just offer a few comments.
If by "they", you mean "Americans", then history proves you wrong, making further remarks by me unnecessary. If by "they" you refer to elected politicians, then you are also incorrect. The strategy of classifying all politicians into one group is a sloppy way of thinking from the very start. Criticizing electoral politics is certainly necessary, but to argue that meaningful change is impossible from within the system is simply wrong.
Your final comment is possibly the most absurd. Who are you to claim that you can talk for this entire group called the "non-voters". You obviously cannot, revealing even greater weakness in your thinking.
Maybe you can further clarify what it is that you're trying to say.

by an irish viking who unfortuanately lost the big boned blonde - aggresive competitive genes for a bunch of freckles and a paunch. Wed Sep 22, 2004 17:31

America is only pursuing the same processes of giving civilised values to warring factions obsessed with religion pursued by the British army in Ulster.
It works every time.
You send in soldiers to help people think of democracy. Because soldiers are very democratic you know. Just before every battle they sit down and have a chat, listen to each other speak, (respectfully without interuption), make useful suggestions, take a ballot and then put their favourite battle CD on the tank stereo and go spread Liberty.

I wrote many years ago and as long there is a breath in my body (hyperbole) I will repeat in as many tongues as I may have-

They could not
They can not
They never will be able
to prosecute this war.

Bush has also admitted Rightous Pragmatist in the longest print interview yet given (as we count down to the first TV debate) that if the USA leaves Iraq it shall be seen to have failed. And if the USA stays in Iraq the cohesive of "nation-state building" will not happen as security concerns will outstrip reconstruction neccesities and Iraqi society will polarise into those who "can live with the US occupation" and those "who can't". Some call this "catch 22". We did tell them. So now that they have demonstrated that the Iraqi campaign is a failure (for all) how can they credibly be "world policeman" again?
Some kids still say "they're going to Iran" others say "they'll go to Syria". Other kids say "they've given a generation of foreigners a reason to hate us". A few kids say "you have compromised our security and the only way out is to swallow the very bitter pill of humility and geopolitical hegomonic decline".

***

But none of this is the real issue in the forthcoming election to the office of President of the USA as celebrated under the constitution every four years.

non exercitus neque thesauri praesidia regni sunt verum amici.

by Brian O'Dea Wed Sep 22, 2004 17:05

"We must help the reformers of the Middle East as they work for freedom, and strive to build a community of peaceful, democratic nations. "

Presumably that is why he has helped a bunch of crooks to take control of Iraq.

by righteous pragmatist Wed Sep 22, 2004 16:53

"For too long, many nations, including my own, tolerated, even excused, oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability. Oppression became common, but stability never arrived. We must take a different approach. We must help the reformers of the Middle East as they work for freedom, and strive to build a community of peaceful, democratic nations. "

by having things in perspective Tue Sep 21, 2004 22:01

we have to do what they tell us anyway.

eh... that's one of the main issues of this election for the "non-voters".

by american voter Tue Sep 21, 2004 21:00

It's not very productive to merely complain that the leading American presidential candidates need to be improved. There has been fierce debate over here about organizing the left behind a candidate, and typically, Ralph Nader's name and David Cobb (green candidate) get thrown into it.
Activists on the left have lost friendships, and at times, their sanity, during debates over voting for Kerry, Nader or Cobb.

No doubt, Kerry is terrible. On several military issues, he is to the right of Bush. He stands next to Bush on most international trade agreements, and his stance on women's rights is beginning to show conservative influence. (he has already stated that he would appoint anti-abortion judges). The list goes on.

The key to this election is not to merely criticize Kerry and/or Bush. Today, pressure is being applied to the Kerry campaign to push him left, particularly in swing states, as Nader achieves more ballot access. Nader's presence, which angers some on the left, has encouraged the Green's to field their own candidate, and, further build their party. The most important work is not done on election day, but in using all of the frustration felt by Americans to build a stronger movement for the left. In my opinion, this is happening, and it's great to see.

Personally, I believe the Irish can learn a lot from the American situation. Your two major political parties have vritually no difference between them, and your labour party has moved further right. It does nothing for you to repeat these claims, but instead, you should focus on building a strong movement on the left.

My state will deliver the votes to Kerry. But, as it is a "safe state", we're working hard to get smaller parties votes, and most importantly, getting people involved on a community level.

by Hilaal Tue Sep 21, 2004 00:15

Kerrys main backer and associate is our old friend George Soros.

He is as much a Neo-Con as any of his old friends : Henry Kissinger, the Carlyle Group, The CIA, and indeed GW Bush himself.

His most recent lie was to set up a group called "Human Rights Watch" which declared the US did no wrong or comitted no war crimes by invading Iraq.

He is one of the main devils you may remember from Davos.

If this "man" and the other millionaire backers of Kerry are to be the alternative to Bush then what do they intend doing?

They simply hope that with a new friendy face they can fool the world into supporting the invasion of Iraq and the UN/EU into supporting it with soldiers.

True, there is a power struggle in the US between the greedy capitalists behind Bush who want to grab all the oil now and help out Israel by crushing neighbouring arab countries and the other greedy bunch of capitalists who want the world to help them do the above because they don't think they can pull it off on their own. To hell with all of them!

by being cleverer than you think Mon Sep 20, 2004 23:33

it's like this, the central issue of this campaign is _not_ the Iraqi War.
And if you are pro-Bush, then hinting at cannon and hurling and all that sort of Irish stuff that means different things to us than it does to you people,

and is counter productive.

Tell us straight up, for we are straight talking people.

"I dont like Kerry and I'm voting Bush and I'd never even think of Nadar if his friends were in the same room as me"

by TIME magazine 2004 Mon Sep 20, 2004 23:29

"do you remember that time we asked you had you made any mistakes and you answered no?"

- "Yes".

"what d'ya think of that now Dubya?"

-"You wanted me to say I thought Iraq had been a mistake".

by TIME magazine 2003 Mon Sep 20, 2004 23:24

"do you think you have made any mistakes"?
pause.
"no".