Is Zell Miller Suffering from a Mental Disorder?

I'm pretty certain these two baby-eaters scared away anyone even remotely undecided this evening.





Tonight was a disaster for the GOP.

And I couldn't be more thrilled.

No one here watches Nightline?

Luntz had a focus group right after the speeches. It was nothing but undecideds.

11 out of 17 DECIDED right then and there.

BUSH!

The really cool part was they all had special remotes they could adjust in relation to the speeches as they watched. The line went off the chart when Zell made his NOW FAMOUS Spitball pitch!

America is seeing reality as it occurs. Whatever some of you guys are "seeing" is sort of like the impression the blind men got feeling around the elephant.

i've said on one of these threads that i don't think bush is hitler. i'm not too sure about zell, though.

fuher, volk und fatherland !

jeeeezzzzzzz....

andrewsullivan.com


Zell Miller's address will, I think, go down as a critical moment in this campaign, and maybe in the history of the Republican party. I kept thinking of the contrast with the Democrats' keynote speaker, Barack Obama, a post-racial, smiling, expansive young American, speaking about national unity and uplift. Then you see Zell Miller, his face rigid with anger, his eyes blazing with years of frustration as his Dixiecrat vision became slowly eclipsed among the Democrats. Remember who this man is: once a proud supporter of racial segregation, a man who lambasted LBJ for selling his soul to the negroes. His speech tonight was in this vein, a classic Dixiecrat speech, jammed with bald lies, straw men, and hateful rhetoric. As an immigrant to this country and as someone who has been to many Southern states and enjoyed astonishing hospitality and warmth and sophistication, I long dismissed some of the Northern stereotypes about the South. But Miller did his best to revive them. The man's speech was not merely crude; it added whole universes to the word crude.

THE "OCCUPATION" CANARD: Miller first framed his support for Bush as a defense of his own family. The notion that individuals deserve respect regardless of their family is not Miller's core value. And the implication was that if the Democrats win in November, his own family would not be physically safe. How's that for subtlety? Miller's subsequent assertion was that any dissent from aspects of the war on terror is equivalent to treason. He accused all war critics of essentially attacking the very troops of the United States. He conflated the ranting of Michael Moore with the leaders of the Democrats. He said the following:

Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today's Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator. And nothing makes this Marine madder than someone calling American troops occupiers rather than liberators.

That macho invocation of the Marines was a classic: the kind of militarist swagger that this convention endorses and uses as a bludgeon against its opponents. But the term "occupation," of course, need not mean the opposite of liberation. I have used the term myself and I deeply believe that coalition troops have indeed liberated Afghanistan and Iraq. By claiming that the Democrats were the enemies of the troops, traitors, quislings and wimps, Miller did exactly what he had the audacity to claim the Democrats were doing: making national security a partisan matter. I'm not easy to offend, but this speech was gob-smackingly vile.

OPPONENTS OR ENEMIES?: Here's another slur:

No one should dare to even think about being the Commander in Chief of this country if he doesn't believe with all his heart that our soldiers are liberators abroad and defenders of freedom at home. But don't waste your breath telling that to the leaders of my party today. In their warped way of thinking America is the problem, not the solution. They don't believe there is any real danger in the world except that which America brings upon itself through our clumsy and misguided foreign policy.

Yes, that describes some on the left, but it is a calumny against Democrats who voted for war in Afghanistan and Iraq and whose sincerity, as John McCain urged, should not be in question. I have never heard Kerry say that 9/11 was America's fault; if I had, it would be inconceivable to consider supporting him. And so this was, in truth, another lie, another cheap, faux-patriotic smear. Miller has absolutely every right to lambaste John Kerry's record on defense in the Senate. It's ripe for criticism, and, for my part, I disagree with almost all of it (and as a pro-Reagan, pro-Contra, pro-SDI, pro-Gulf War conservative, I find Kerry's record deeply troubling). But that doesn't mean he's a traitor or hates America's troops or believes that the U.S. is responsible for global terror. And the attempt to say so is a despicable attempt to smear someone's very patriotism.

THE FOREIGN AGENT: Another lie: "Senator Kerry has made it clear that he would use military force only if approved by the United Nations. Kerry would let Paris decide when America needs defending. I want Bush to decide." Miller might have found some shred of ancient rhetoric that will give him cover on this, but in Kerry's very acceptance speech, he declared the opposite conviction - that he would never seek permission to defend this country. Another lie: "John Kerry wants to re-fight yesterday's war." Kerry didn't want to do that. Yes, he used his military service in the campaign - but it was his opponents who decided to dredge up the divisions of the Vietnam war in order to describe Kerry as a Commie-loving traitor who faked his own medals. What's remarkable about the Republicans is their utter indifference to fairness in their own attacks. Smearing opponents as traitors to their country, as unfit to be commander-in-chief, as agents of foreign powers (France) is now fair game. Appealing to the crudest form of patriotism and the easiest smears is wrong when it is performed by the lying Michael Moore and it is wrong when it is spat out by Zell Miller. Last night was therefore a revealing night for me. I watched a Democrat at a GOP Convention convince me that I could never be a Republican. If they wheel out lying, angry old men like this as their keynote, I'll take Obama. Any day.

Kerry is going to have multiple opportunities to defend his flipflopping Viet Nam and Senate voting records over the next couple of months in responding to media questions about it.

The SBV revelations and Miller's indictment simply cannot be ignored if he is to have any chance at sending Mr. Bush back to Crawford.

Are those enough lies for you?

Anyone who can listen to this hate-filled liar and the praise and defend him has a serious problem and doesn't undersrtand what it means to be a real patriot.

To spread hate and lie about and smear a legitimate poltical opponent is not what this country is all about.

Labeling Miller a liar will not make his charges go away. Kerry MUST address them if he is to salvage any credibility he has left.

Zell Miller is a liar and his charges are lies, that doesn't make them "go away"it just makes them lies and quite frankly not worthy of a rebuttal from Kerry. Again, I will say anyone listening to this speech and agreeing with it has serious problems. This is the kind of divisveness that has typified Bush's one term though.

Thank goodness we only have a few more months to put up with these maniacs. Racists and haters like Miller should be angry though, they know their time is almost up. There will come a day in America when there will be freedom and civil rights for everyone and Neanderthals and haters like Miller will be a thing of the past?

"...quite frankly not worthy of a rebuttal from Kerry"

Maybe not, but if he ducks questions about them without at least a "yes but" he will leave the impression that they are indeed true.

Usually on a political forum, when someone lies and those lies are exposed, some kind of rebuttal is offered. It is shocking and pathetic that someone would say that the smears will need to be adddressed. Have we gotten that far down in the gutter? And George Bush promised to restore honor to the Oval Office? Since when is smearing an opponentt considered honorable?

Are you suggesting the Democrats, including John Kerry haven't been doing the same and worse for the last several years?

I didn't detect any lies either. Of course at one time or another, in elaborating all the subtle nuances that only he can understand, Kerry has taken just about every conceivable position on every major issue. Perhaps that means thar somewhere in his record there is something to confount any vriticism offered for his actions.

Do you have some exclusive hold on the understanding of "what this country is all about"?

Wow! This is unbelievable. Larry434 admits they are lies buty wants Kerry to answer them anyway. This is beyond the pale.

Nothing much "honorable" about politicians, IMO. Opportunistic maybe.

Kerry MUST offer a rebuttal lest he risk giving credence to the charges.

If you would like to rebut my and Sullivan's documentation of Miller's lies , feel free to attempt to do so. Making a blanket statement that "I didn't detect any lies" makes you appear that you lack comprehension skills.

If you feel that lying about and smearing an opponent is an admirable trait and something that contributes to "what this country is all about" kindly make your case.

Oh so now you are admitting that Bush is a liar too. Thanks.

So this is the Republican strategy? Keep smearing Kerry and keep him tied up answering false charges? I don't believe I am reading this!

Anybody find it interesting that the RNC has dedicated an entire night to talk about Kerry? I don't remember the DNC saying more than a few words about Bush.

That's because they are still trying to convince people that Kerry should be president. People still don't know what Kerry stands for. Even after the DNC.

"Oh so now you are admitting that Bush is a liar too. Thanks."

You are welcome. Surprised that it comes as news to you that politicians equivocate, quibble, distort, mislead, engage in hyperbole, or sometimes outright lie.

Have you been living in a cave somewhere?

Well, if it's that bad for Kerry you would think they could save their breath for more positive topics.