1
   

He said they said who cares?

 
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Aug, 2004 09:40 pm
panzade wrote:
Nothing. There's plenty of hypocrisy to spread around. Certain A2Kers have pointed out that 527 has given rise to a new campaign tactic. Murder by proxy.


True, and it is enabled by the sort of attitude we see expressed in this thread.

"Yeah move.on.org is a shady 527 group, but what they say about Bush is true! The Swiftboaters are a shady 527 group and what they say about Kerry is slander!"

I suspect that each political party has more to do with the 527s than their true believers will accept and less than their opponents will charge.

No matter how you slice it though, it is pretty vile. Whether applied to Bush or Kerry, it is a version of the Big Lie. Say it loud and long enough and people will believe it.

At the same time, we run a risk if we overreact and seek to blot out such criticism. If Bush actually went AWOL it should be made known. If Kerry faked a Purple Heart to get out of Vietnam, it should be made known. Sometimes its the iconoclast who brings the truth to light. The process should be able to properly deal with all criticisms and cast them aside as scurrilous or give them the legs they deserve.

The Media has investigated both issues pretty closely and, in both cases, cannot find the evidence to affirm the charges. Unfortunately, partisans on both sides are not prepared to accept the results of mainstream media investigations. They want to believe the charges are true and so they do.
There are any number of left wing and right wing websites prepared to print whatever it takes to maintain these beliefs.

What I find most disturbing is the willingness of partisans on both sides of the spectrum to believe the worst about the opposition's candidate.

Unfortunately the two parties have come to recognize this sad phenomenon and are perfectly willing to exploit it, as winning is everything.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Aug, 2004 10:52 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
just one opinion kelt...I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.....


I appreciate the good wishes, BiPolar, but I think you got things a little wrong. I don't have to worry what McGentirix says-he has to worry what I say. I'm about to back this stuff up.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Aug, 2004 11:16 pm
kelticwizard wrote:
McGentrix:


Bush was a graduate from Yale, How many other candidates for flight school were? You speculate and pretend it's fact. It isn't, it's speculation. There is ZERO evidence, even anecdotal evidence that demonstrates Bush Sr. was responsible for getting Bush Jr. in the guard. You wish there was, so there is.


There are three parts to this. First, Bush had to get into the Guard, then become an officer, then get into flight school.

There was a waiting list of 500 men to get into the Texas National Guard. Bush had not applied, and his student deferment ran out in 12 days. Bush was immediately accepted over 500 other men. Please show me any evidence where a Yale degree entitles you to jump over 500 men, many of them college graduates themselves, who had been waiting a year and a half.

Second, after completing eight weeks basic training, Bush gets appointed as an officer. He had no ROTC, degrees or minors in engineering, anything. Just gets appointed. That is also not normal, even for college graduates.

Third, his officer's appointment made it possible for Bush to go to flight school, (only two slots open), even though on the Pilot's Aptitude Test he scored-get this- 25%!!! [/b]. Gee, that Yale degree resulted in an impressive showing, didn't it? Two slots open, bush scores 25%, but he gets the appointment.

No strings pulled? Then why did the guy in charge of the unit, Staudt, insist on getting his picture taken with bush Jr upon his acceptance to the Guard and his graduation from flight school? In fact, Bush was accepted a day or two before-Staudt just wanted a special occasion to get his picture with the young Bush.



Evidence that Bush Jr. knew the F-102 was going out of service in VietNam? McGentrix, Bush Sr was a Congressman. He votes on military appropriations bills. If he has any questions about planes and their likelihood of being employed in VietNam in two years, he just asks. they have to give him that information. He's voting on the bills!

Are you trying to say that after all these anomalies occurred, all these strings being obviously being pulled, that it is just coincidence that young Bush ended up on a plane that wasn't being sent overseas? Please.

Granted, one of the websites below is partisan. but it's info is largely backed up by the Washington Post and the Guardian.
http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm#got%20in

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7372-2004Feb2?language=printer

http://www.guardian.co.uk/US_election_race/Story/0,2763,206136,00.html

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/heraldleader/news/opinion/8467053.htm
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Aug, 2004 11:42 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Oh, BTW, your dismissal of the Swift Boat Veterans completely destroys any credibility you could have had.


The comment still stands. People are coming forward to contradict the Swift boat vets, the official reports contradict them, in some cases their own medal citations contradict them.

Just looked in on Fox News and and they had a pollster who found that independents who watched one Swift Boat ad were swayes somewhat against Kerry, but if they watched two Swift Boat ads, they really weren't. Translation: the more these Swift boat jerks talk, the less people believe them.

By the way, I just consiulted some maps to check out the statements of one Steve Gardner, anti-Kerry Swift boater, regarding if was possible for Kerry to be in Cambodia at any time. I freely admit that he wasn't there on Christmas Eve, but Gardner says he couldn't be there at any time. One look at a map, and it become obvious Gardner is lying.

Details upon request.

In a short time, the anti-Kerry Swift boaters will be exposed, much as they are being exposed right now, piece by piece.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Aug, 2004 07:22 am
Good follow up. I am glad you have backed up your opinion, but the fact remains that it's mostly speculation.

could Bush have been pushed ahead of others because of influence? Sure. could Bush have made a good impression on the commander that made the decision to bump him? Sure. We don't know. You speculate on the negative because you don't like Bush, I speculate on the positive because I do.

Byron York wrote a good report on Bush's service here.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Aug, 2004 07:44 am
McGentrix
Speculation? One could get convicted of murder on speculation such as that.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Aug, 2004 07:47 am
Not quite.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Aug, 2004 12:01 pm
kelticwizard wrote:
Sofia, sweetie, "heavy lifting" in the way of saying nasty things about the person is one thing. Indeed, you might feel that some things said in Fahrenheit 911 were even untrue. But the biggest claims that are challenged in Fahrenheit 911 are about Saudis.

What these Swift Boat people are doing is taking the times that Kerry performed well in battle-the highest pressure you can put anyone under-and claiming he did not. That is disgusting.

You cannot ask a man to do more than to put his very life at risk in a battle. This, Kerry did. To try to take credit away from him for it goes far beyond campaign tactics, or even sneaky campaign tactics. The fact that Kerry, along with the rest of the country, later came to realize the war itself was wrong is immaterial-he did what those in authority asked him to do-risk his life. In fact, he volunteered for an especially dangerous detail.

That is what makes the Swift Boat vets' behavior so hard to take. The Bush campaign, denials aside, has really gone past any acceptable point here.

If you don't understand that, you are truly hopeless.

Bush has nothing to do with the Swiftvets.
If you don't understand that, you are truly hopeless.
They have been after Kerry since Vietnam.
Bush has said Kerry's service wasnoble, and he should be proud of it.
The Bush campaign knows Kerry's service trumps his, and would be nuts to draw comparisons.
The Swiftvets were on Kerry's ass before Bush ever consideredpublic office, and they refuse to stop assailing him.
Bush has said he'dlike all the 527s to disappear.
Why continue to pretend this hasn't happened?
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Aug, 2004 09:32 pm
Bush campaign has no ties to the Swift boat people. Oh please.

Is that why they were funded by the biggest GOP contributor in Texas?

Is that why the following flyer was being distributed at a Bush camapign hedquarters in Gainesville, Florida?
http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/swiftboat.pdf

http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:UXCyC9Bkho8J:seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apelection_story.asp%3Fcategory%3D1131%26slug%3DBush%2520Swift%2520Boats+Swift+boat+flier+Republican+Gainesville,+Florida&hl=en

Is that why a lawyer for the Bush campaign is advising the Swift Boaters?
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/24/veterans.group.ap/index.html

Oldest trick n the book. Let other people do the smearing while you try to pretend you are separate from it. The Bush campaign is obviously behind this.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 06:50 am
Just like the Kerry campaign is behind all the MoveOn.org and other anti-bush 527 groups.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 07:58 am
Quote:
Third, his officer's appointment made it possible for Bush to go to flight school, (only two slots open), even though on the Pilot's Aptitude Test he scored-get this- 25%!!! . Gee, that Yale degree resulted in an impressive showing, didn't it? Two slots open, bush scores 25%, but he gets the appointment


Not to nitpick, but would it be fair to assume that since the military won't let just anyone fly their planes, that 25 percentile cutoff still puts him above average of the general population?

I found this to be interesting:

Bush's other published scores are from the Air Force officer test he took when he applied to join the Air National Guard. The Dallas Morning News reported on July 4, 1999, that Bush's "score on the pilot aptitude section, one of five on the test, was in the 25th percentile, the lowest allowed for would-be fliers."

Gottfredson pointed out, though, that officer applicants are a relatively elite group, so that's much better than the 25th percentile among the whole population. Further, this subtest focused on spatial questions that don't come up regularly in the Oval Office, such as "identifying the angle of a plane in flight ... and figuring out which way a gear in a machine would turn in response to another gear's being turned."

In contrast, the Morning News recounted, "On the 'officer quality section,' designed to measure intangible traits such as leadership, Mr. Bush scored better than 95 percent of those taking the test."

Gottfredson commented, "What do you want in a president -- spatial ability or leadership?"
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 08:31 am
Spatial abilty and leadership are not opposing values. ;-)
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 10:12 am
JustWonders

I would like someone who did not have a marshmallow between his ears. And can at least utter a coherent thought. Is that to much to ask from someone who has a finger on the button?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 10:20 am
I am continually amazed when I hear and read the Bush was elected based on his likeability. Hell I had a cat that I liked very much but I would not vote for him to be president.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 10:20 am
Removed duplicate post
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 12:59 pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Just Wonders:

I found this to be interesting:

Bush's other published scores are from the Air Force officer test he took when he applied to join the Air National Guard. The Dallas Morning News reported on July 4, 1999, that Bush's "score on the pilot aptitude section, one of five on the test, was in the 25th percentile, the lowest allowed for would-be fliers."

Gottfredson pointed out, though, that officer applicants are a relatively elite group, so that's much better than the 25th percentile among the whole population.


So what? Bush still got hilariously favorable treatment at the expense of others. And that favorable treatment was part of a series of events where it was made certain that Bush would not be sent to VietNam. I don't know if that 25% is a percentile or a flat score-doesn't make a difference.

Quote:
Originallyposted by Just Wonders: In contrast, the Morning News recounted, "On the 'officer quality section,' designed to measure intangible traits such as leadership, Mr. Bush scored better than 95 percent of those taking the test."


The average grade of the applicant taking that leadership section was 88%. Again, I don't know if we are talking percentiles or straight scores here. That means that Bush qualified as a slightly better than average leader-among the applicants anyway-but way, way down the list on skills useful to pilots. I think it is fair to say that there were many, many applicants with a better combo of aptitude/leadership skills. But surpirse! Bush gets one of two slots open-and gets put into a plane destined never to see VietNam by the time he graduates training.

Approximately 300 servicemen were being killed each month in VietNam at the time.
http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm#2ndLt
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 01:05 pm
What was the average score for the pilot aptitude test?
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 01:11 pm
PS: Sorry-make that 300 men killed each week in VietNam in 1968, when Bush entered the National Guard.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 01:15 pm
McGentrix:

I do not know the actual score of the test. I have only read twice that 25% was the least acceptable score. they could not take you, under any circumstances, if you scored lower than that.

With all those people waiting to become pilots, it's fair to say there were many, many people with better aptitude/leadership combos than Bush.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 01:20 pm
But, what if the average is 30%? Does that make a difference?
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 01:06:37