1
   

Chris Matthews Destroys Swiftboat Liar John O'Neil

 
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 06:50 pm
That there may be no "There" to go to in The Plame Game is a bitter pill for The Opposition to swallow. Few things arouse more ire and vitriol than the exposure and dismissal of a trumped-up charge and few things are more predictable in such instances than the whine, "The Fix is in". The fact of the matter is the Novak/Plame/Leak investigation has not to date uncovered what The Democrats had hoped it would uncover, nor does it appear likely any such discovery may be made. The Democrats, unwilling to accept that there is no "There" there turn to further silly, baseless allegations of high-placed conspiracy, and in doing so serve only to further damage their own credibility and to further distance themselves from The Mainstream.

Fortunately, from my point of view, anyway, The Democrats neither recognize nor even consider the possibility of such consequences. I sincerely appreciate their efforts in such regard, and devoutly hope they continue in their customary vein ... or should I say "Vain"? Mr. Green

I'm really sorta lookin' forward to how badly The Opposition hurts itself in its frantic, ongoing effort to control the damage done by The Swiftboat Vets ... amusing that a small organization, with the expenditure of a few hundred thousand dollars, has stymied The Democratic Party which has spent scores of millions to paint a favorable picture of itself. Amusing as hell, really.

And I just can't wait untill the Junior Senator from Massachesetts' actual, documented, archived, irrefutable, legislative record becomes the focus of the attention directed against his candidacy.

http://www.richardrosenman.com/gallery/eggo.jpg
0 Replies
 
gbayoo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 08:44 pm
johnbelushi
hey johnb,
It is clear you do not understand facts when presented. the New York Times was only one of a great many who reported where the money came from which was obtained from their own tax info. It is fact that they have admitted to. How can they deny it, it is public record.
As for MoveOn.org, you no longer hear about that ad because it was NEVER used. It came from a person who submitted it for a contest that included hundreds of ads. Once that ad was noticed, it was literally tossed out and never used. It was shown on their web site because all the ads submitted were. The only ones that used that ad, or a part of it anyhow was the Bush/Cheney campain. They falsely claimed MoveOn used it. Once it became clear they were wrong, the ad ended.
Do you know who promoted the votes against the
apache? I bet now. You are a listener and repeat what you hear. cheney was boasting that he was against it . He led the fight to vote against it and many other weapons , missile etc that Kerry also voted against. check Cheney votes for yourself. All it takes is some time and determination. I research everything that is being said to know the truth. I learned not to believe politicians from either party. conservative followers like you just buy into whatever you are told. Try to be open minded and check out the people in this administration. You will definitely be surprised.
If your dad was in Nam, he knows full well we did burn cities, kill women and children. Now a large number of GI's did but it did happen as Kerry was told it happened. if you were really willing to learn the truth, you would know Kerry was told this as a result of 150 GI's who were questioned about such atrocities. Kerry in turn, and upset with the way the war was going, spoke out. I am a Vietnam vet and I can not believe any vet that served during the years of 1966 to 1972. You said something that caught my attention. are you saying you heard Kerry's whole testimony. If you did, you should know that he was commenting about a hearing and not just hearsay from a few guys.
You people that listen to Hannity and Rush are really missing a lot. You only know what they want you to know. All I ask is try to check this all out on your own. Go to a variety of sites and gather all the data you can. compare it and then decide. Check out the history regarding Nixon administrations policy on Vietnam and find stories about all the protests against the war. I got news for you, 80 plus percent of Vietnam vets were not happy with the escapade. By the way, it was never declared a a war. It was called a police action. It limited our troops as a result. If you knew anything about Vietnam and that era, you would understand how we felt back then. Many things were said by a generation of people who hated that whole ordeal and everyone knew we did not belong in Vietnam. If your dad was really in Nam, he should have explained all this to you. It was a traumatic time. I am 55 years old and I lived it. I know what really happened. I assure you, we had some whacko guys in the military just as you do in any large groups. We had guys who loved the killing. I knew a guy who wanted to become a mercenary more than anything once he got out. do you have any idea what that is and means he was like. I knew him from home to. He was a real case when he got out and about 10 years ago killed his girl friend and himself. I am telling you, Vietnam was bad. We do not need this crap being relived. McCain was POW for over 5 year and they tortured him. Now I read today these conservatives saying he is "thin skinned"> Cmon, what is that? McCain is a for real hero. he was torutred and never gave up his country. he also hates this garbage these conservatives are spewing about Kerry. It is spearheaded by exactly who the NY Times stated. It is easily checked out. It is easy under the Freedom of Information ACt. Try doing some of your own research. You may change your thinking. I was proud of Kerry having the guts to stand up to the Nixon administration to protest what was going on in Vietnam.
He contributed to the end of that horrible action. He truly did assist in ending that mess. It is all substantiated fact.
gbayoo
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 09:19 pm
Re: whatever!!!
johnbelushi wrote:
whatever, you liberals are so pathetic.


hey cyclo, good thing for you johnbelushi showed up. else wise you would have continued on never knowing you were pathetic. Laughing
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 09:30 pm
timberlandko wrote:
That there may be no "There" to go to in The Plame Game is a bitter pill for The Opposition to swallow.


hmmm. well timber, since i have not heard that bush has called off the dogs ( if in fact, he ever loosed them :wink: ), i'd have to say that he has yet to determine that there is no "there".

let me try this again...

o.k. novak's actions may be legal, but,imho, they certainly are not moral or ethical.

but your "status" comment made me think, since i'd never heard that there was debate on it. i did a quick, short search for plame's status at the time this started. of course i got back a boatload of mostly differing opinions. she was, she wasn't. what else is new?

and what we do know is this; SOMEONE in a position to know such things put political motivation above what is right and told novak things that they shouldn't. as i understand it, the same person also leaked it to a couple of other reporters.

unlike novak, they seem to have the morals and ethics not to yell it from the rooftops.

whether plame had a cool "man from uncle" camera or if she made tenet's coffee makes no difference. she was an officer in an american intelligence service trying to do good for america.

that is what is important.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 10:39 pm
DontTreadOnMe wrote:

hmmm. well timber, since i have not heard that bush has called off the dogs ( if in fact, he ever loosed them :wink: ), i'd have to say that he has yet to determine that there is no "there".

Yup, the investigation continues ... its just not makin' many headlines.

Quote:
let me try this again...

o.k. novak's actions may be legal, but,imho, they certainly are not moral or ethical.

I don't hold that opinion, nor is it held by a significant number of media and academic types. There is considerable energy behind the notion that a journalist ought to present the facts precisely as that journalist has found them to be.
Quote:
but your "status" comment made me think, since i'd never heard that there was debate on it. i did a quick, short search for plame's status at the time this started. of course i got back a boatload of mostly differing opinions. she was, she wasn't. what else is new?

Nothing new at all. The matter is not decided, it is under investigation.

Quote:
and what we do know is this; SOMEONE in a position to know such things put political motivation above what is right and told novak things that they shouldn't. as i understand it, the same person also leaked it to a couple of other reporters.
unlike novak, they seem to have the morals and ethics not to yell it from the rooftops.

No, we know no such things. Nothing disclosed either confirms or dismissses the contentions presented. Oh, and by most accounts, it was supposedly at least 6 journalists, and again, no information regarding the thought-process behind their individual decisions to treat the information as they did has been disclosed. One is welcome to believe what one finds appropriate. One may only know that which is known.

Quote:
whether plame had a cool "man from uncle" with a camera or if she made tenet's coffee makes no difference. she was an officer in an american intelligence service trying to do good for america.

that is what is important.

No, what is important is
1) Was actual, justified, operational classified information disclosed?
2) If so, by whom, and what was that individual's relationship to that information?
3) If validly classified information was disclosed, was it disclosed purposefully and with prejudice, or inadvertantly?

Those are the plain-and-simple matters at examination under law. No matter what ever else anyone else might feel is important, those are the only matters which, by law, can and do matter to the investigative authority.

But enough of that ... lets get back to The Story The Democrats Don't Want Told

Kerry takes another hit ... this one from The Navy itself:

Quote:

Plot thickens after checking records


August 27, 2004

BY THOMAS LIPSCOMB

In the midst of the controversy between the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and Kerry campaign representatives about Kerry's service in Vietnam, new questions have arisen.

The Kerry campaign has repeatedly stated that the official naval records prove the truth of Kerry's assertions about his service.

But the official records on Kerry's Web site only add to the confusion. The DD214 form, an official Defense Department document summarizing Kerry's military career posted on johnkerry.com, includes a "Silver Star with combat V."

But according to a U.S. Navy spokesman, "Kerry's record is incorrect. The Navy has never issued a 'combat V' to anyone for a Silver Star."

Naval regulations do not allow for the use of a "combat V" for the Silver Star, the third-highest decoration the Navy awards. None of the other services has ever granted a Silver Star "combat V," either.

Fake claims not uncommon



B.G. Burkett, a Vietnam veteran himself, received the highest award the Army gives to a civilian, the Distinguished Civilian Service Award, for his book Stolen Valor. Burkett pored through thousands of military service records, uncovering phony claims of awards and fake claims of military service. "I've run across several claims for Silver Stars with combat V's, but they were all in fake records," he said.

Burkett recently filed a complaint that led last month to the sentencing of Navy Capt. Roger D. Edwards to 115 days in the brig for falsification of his records.

Kerry's Web site also lists two different citations for the Silver Star. One was issued by the commander in chief of the Pacific Command (CINCPAC), Adm. John Hyland. The other, issued by Secretary of the Navy John Lehman during the Reagan administration, contained some revisions and additional language. "By his brave actions, bold initiative, and unwavering devotion to duty, Lieutenant (j.g.) Kerry reflected great credit upon himself... ."

One award, three citations



But a third citation exists that appears to be the earliest. And it is not on the Kerry campaign Web site. It was issued by Vice Adm. Elmo Zumwalt, commander of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam. This citation lacks the language in the Hyland citation or that added by the Lehman version, but includes another 170 words in a detailed description of Kerry's attack on a Viet Cong ambush, his killing of an enemy soldier carrying a loaded rocket launcher, as well as military equipment captured and a body count of dead enemy.

Maj. Anthony Milavic, a retired Marine Vietnam veteran, calls the issuance of three citations for the same medal "bizarre." Milavic hosts Milinet, an Internet forum popular with the military community that is intended "to provide a forum in military/political affairs."

Normally in the case of a lost citation, Milavec points out, the awardee simply asked for a copy to be sent to him from his service personnel records office where it remains on file. "I have never heard of multi-citations from three different people for the same medal award," he said. Nor has Burkett: "It is even stranger to have three different descriptions of the awardee's conduct in the citations for the same award."

So far, there are also two varying citations for Kerry's Bronze Star, one by Zumwalt and the other by Lehman as secretary of the Navy, both posted on johnkerry.com.

Kerry's Web site also carries a DD215 form revising his DD214, issued March 12, 2001, which adds four bronze campaign stars to his Vietnam service medal. The campaign stars are issued for participation in any of the 17 Department of Defense named campaigns that extended from 1962 to the cease-fire in 1973.

However, according to the Navy spokesman, Kerry should only have two campaign stars: one for "Counteroffensive, Phase VI," and one for "Tet69, Counteroffensive."

94 pages of records unreleased?



Reporting by the Washington Post's Michael Dobbs points out that although the Kerry campaign insists that it has released Kerry's full military records, the Post was only able to get six pages of records under its Freedom of Information Act request out of the "at least a hundred pages" a Naval Personnel Office spokesman called the "full file."

What could that more than 100 pages contain? Questions have been raised about President Bush's drill attendance in the reserves, but Bush received his honorable discharge on schedule. Kerry, who should have been discharged from the Navy about the same time -- July 1, 1972 -- wasn't given the discharge he has on his campaign Web site until July 13, 1978. What delayed the discharge for six years? This raises serious questions about Kerry's performance while in the reserves that are far more potentially damaging than those raised against Bush.

Experts point out that even the official military records get screwed up. Milavic is trying to get mistakes in his own DD214 file corrected. In his opinion, "these entries are not prima facie evidence of lying or unethical behavior on the part of Kerry or anyone else with screwed-up DD214s."

Burkett, who has spent years working with the FBI, Department of Justice and all of the military services uncovering fraudulent files in the official records, is less charitable: "The multiple citations and variations in the official record are reason for suspicion in itself, even disregarding the current swift boat veterans' controversy."


Nope, this ain't nowhere near close to goin' away just quite yet.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 12:59 am
timberlandko wrote:
Those are the plain-and-simple matters at examination under law. No matter what ever else anyone else might feel is important, those are the only matters which, by law, can and do matter to the investigative authority.


but, i think you missed my point. whether or not novak's actions were LEGAL isn't the issue. that many people think it is not right is...

remember the starr investigation? sex is not illegal. many people believe that adultry is wrong, but it is not illegal. yeah, i know, i know... o.k. maybe a few states may still have some archaic law on the books somewhere. but do they vigorously pursue and prosecute such things? without an external motivation?

so, does that mean that it's o.k. to put an entire country through the wringer to prosecute something that's not illegal if it's a democrat,
but not o.k. to put a few politically motivated people through the wringer to prosecute something that's not illegal if it's a republican at stake?

i find it odd that people that talk about values and character all of the time seem to adjust what is or isn't moral according to what political affiliation the target is.

btw, how would you react if some guy at work was ticked off at you and started messing with your wife?
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 06:01 am
Didn't miss your point at all, Dont ... That dog won't hunt. The point of the Starr investigation and of the impeachment was perjury and obstruction of justice. That the perjury and obstruction of justice related to sexual misbehavior is immaterial; Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice in the Paula Jones matter. The "It was just an affair with an aid" plaint doesn't carry water; who was boffin' who how was not the issue. The issue was who lied and tried to use his Office to cover up his lies. Consensual sex between or among adults is generally legal. Perjury and obstruction of justice by definition absolutely are not.

And in answer to your second question there, I imagine I'd be amused ... assuming she let him live.
0 Replies
 
angie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 09:43 am
The bottom line, which has not and can not be smeared by the Bushies, is that KERRY VOLUNTEERED TO GO TO WAR AND RISK HIS LIFE FOR AMERICA. Bush hid out in Texas.

Whatever did or did not happen in the hell hole of Vietnam, Kerry was in harms way over there, Bush was safe at home.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 10:17 am
Re: johnbelushi
gbayoo wrote:
As for MoveOn.org, you no longer hear about that ad because it was NEVER used. It came from a person who submitted it for a contest that included hundreds of ads. Once that ad was noticed, it was literally tossed out and never used. It was shown on their web site because all the ads submitted were. The only ones that used that ad, or a part of it anyhow was the Bush/Cheney campain. They falsely claimed MoveOn used it. Once it became clear they were wrong, the ad ended.

Deserves highlighting and repeating ... we've heard enough about it. Welcome to A2K, gbayoo
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 10:19 am
angie wrote:
The bottom line, which has not and can not be smeared by the Bushies, is that KERRY VOLUNTEERED TO GO TO WAR AND RISK HIS LIFE FOR AMERICA. Bush hid out in Texas.

Whatever did or did not happen in the hell hole of Vietnam, Kerry was in harms way over there, Bush was safe at home.


As were tens of millions of others. No shame in that.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 10:32 am
Re: whatever!!!
johnbelushi wrote:
whatever, you liberals are so pathetic. [..] Kerry makes me sick, and I'm moving to Norway if he gets elected, my family's beens here since 1632 so thats saying alot.

Gotta love Norwegian politics. The two oldest parties are called simply Hoyre and Venstre - Right and Left. They're in government together now, together with the Christian-Democrats. The biggest party however remains the Norwegian Labour Party, which was in power for some 40 of the past 60 years. Most recent Labour governments were led by Gro Harlem Brundtland, nowadays boss of the UN's WHO; a much-respected politician, tho of course in American terms she would be distinctly to the left of the Democrats.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 10:38 am
Larry434 wrote:
angie wrote:
Whatever did or did not happen in the hell hole of Vietnam, Kerry was in harms way over there, Bush was safe at home.

As were tens of millions of others. No shame in that.

Depends on how it came about, no?

Squinney just posted this:

Quote:
In a video originally posted on the Web by a pro-Kerry organization in Austin, Texas, Ben Barnes, a former lieutenant governor of Texas, apologized for his role in getting a young George W. Bush into the Texas Air National Guard while young men who were not from prominent or wealthy families "died in Vietnam." [..]

Barnes said at the time that it was a wealthy Bush family friend, a Houston oilman named Sidney Adger, who came to him with the request to help the younger Bush.

For what it's worth ...
0 Replies
 
angie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 10:46 am
... wasn't implying any "shame", just a difference.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 10:57 am
Angie - The shame was on Barnes part for his actions in getting Bush into the Guard so he could avoid "real service."
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 11:44 am
Larry434 wrote:

As were tens of millions of others. No shame in that.


Well, actually about 2.6 Million Americans served In Country between 1954 and 1973, 2.5 Million of them between the 1965 ramp-up and the 1973 Cease Fire.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 12:13 pm
timberlandko wrote:


And in answer to your second question there, I imagine I'd be amused ... assuming she let him live.


hahahahahahaha! yeah, really... my wife's the same way. i've watched her torch those that bothered her far better than i ever could. and without raising her voice or cursing. now that is real talent!
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 12:18 pm
timberlandko wrote:
Didn't miss your point at all, Dont ... That dog won't hunt. The point of the Starr investigation and of the impeachment was perjury and obstruction of justice.


well, i guess we'll have to agree to disagree about what the point of the starr investigation was.

we all have already spent a lot of time here re-running the vietnam era. i don't think i've got enough nitro tablets on hand to do the same with the "kill bill" era...

Laughing
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 12:25 pm
timberlandko wrote:
Well, actually about 2.6 Million Americans served In Country between 1954 and 1973, 2.5 Million of them between the 1965 ramp-up and the 1973 Cease Fire.


Yeah, and Bush wasn't one of them. Didn't finish his tour, take his physical, complete his training... And What IS that award he's wearing that he didn't earn?

http://www.awolbush.com/awards.asp
0 Replies
 
angie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 01:27 pm
I guess I have a somewhat difficult time attributing "shame" to those who didn't go to Vietnam. Some of us knew from the start that it was an extremely ill-advised venture.

The US military was there to prop up petty dictator under the guise of democratization in an area that wasn't ready for real democracy. And though the country was quickly united under the "dreaded" Ho Chi Min after we left, it proved to be no real threat to the free world, the domino theory notwithstanding.

Some people who avoided going did so for reasons of conscience, others may have had other reasons (e.g. Cheny: "I had other priorities at the time). Those who did go and serve, however, voluntarily or through the draft, deserve our utmost respect. It speaks to their character that they were willing to serve, to potentially make the ultimate sacrifice for their country, and for that reason, among others, I respect and support Kerry and believe he would make an excellent Commander-in-Chief.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 01:38 pm
squinney wrote:
... And What IS that award he's wearing that he didn't earn?

http://www.awolbush.com/awards.asp


Sorry, squinney, but apart from the AWOL crap having had its legs blown out from under it, the "mystery medal" is a real non-starter, as I pointed out over Here :

The United States Air Force wrote:
Quote:
147th Fighter Interceptor Group (FIG) History

On May 16, 1958 the 147th Fighter Interceptor Group (FIG), with its five new squadrons, was formed to support the 111 Fighter Interceptor Squadron. In August 1960 the unit was one of the first to transition to the F-102A all-weather fighter-interceptor and began a 24-hour runway alert commitment as part of the North American air defense network ...

... The 147th earned the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award in 1966 when it was proclaimed, "The most combat ready of all Air Guard units ...


Winged Shield, Winged Sword: A History of the United States Air Force (1182 pp. 2 Vol., illustrations, photos, notes, suggested readings, index): Nalty, B. C. (ed); US Government Printing Office 1997
GPO Stock No. 008-070-00717-7 ISBN: 0-16-049009-X


Of course, there likely will be some who would contest the official history of the US Air Force should it conflict with baseless, ill-informed, unfounded, utterly incorrect partisan screed
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/23/2025 at 04:29:24