1
   

Is Zell Miller Suffering from a Mental Disorder?

 
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:06 am
That's pure genius.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:10 am
Brand X wrote:
Lightwizard wrote:
Miller blathering about the difference between liberation and occupation was contradicted by none other than George W. Bush who recently used the terms several times before a mike concluding that, "Nobody likes to be occupied." I guess Zell Miller believes they should change the sign on airplane toilets to "liberated" instead of "occupied."


Now LW, you know that is an intellecually dishonest argument.

Occupation has to come before liberation, duh!


Nothing dishonest about that at all -- Bush never mentioned liberation in that press sound bite and everyone but Miller is referring to the current state as occupation. It's Miller who is being dishonest.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:11 am
(duh!)
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:25 am
"I wonder if it was smart to have him out there in such a hot fashion," said George Stephanopoulos.

"He looked angry," said Mara Liasson.

"Miller went over the line into demagoguery," said Mort Kondracke

"I've never heard such an angry speech," said Bill Schneider

"I don't think I've ever seen anything as angry and ugly as Miller's speech," said Joe Klein.

The Wall Street Journal's John Harwood said Miller "looked like a spouse at a divorce proceeding who says, 'Oh yeah, she's a child molester too.' "

"Cheney and Miller, the night's two prime-time speakers, left no trace of the kinder, gentler party that had been showcased in the first two nights of the Republican National Convention." - SF Chronicle

"The Republican crowd lapped up the red meat Miller sliced off and served up, loudly booing after nearly every Kerry reference. - NY Post

"Last night was therefore a revealing night for me. I watched a Democrat convince me that I could never be a Republican. If they wheel out lying, angry bigots like this as their keynote, I'll take Obama. Any day." -Andrew Sullivan

"Did Karl Rove vet Zell Miller's speech? This might be the most hateful major address delivered at a national-party convention since Pat Buchanan's 'culture war' speech of 1992, delivered with remarkable bitterness and anger.

"It's so idiotic that it's not worth picking apart." - Dan Kennedy

"The truth is, no political organization should want to keep company with Zell Miller. His conscience -- which, he writes, is 'on steroids, has a Black Belt and long fingernails, and stomps around inside of me, sometimes in hobnailed boots' -- evidently tells him to do a lot of things these days. But where was his conscience when he was a pro-Jim Crow Democrat campaigning against civil rights? What about when he worked for a notorious segregationist governor he called 'a father'? In fact, Miller's conscience has never been anything more than a barometer for populist appeals.

The Republicans shouldn't be proud of him as their standard bearer. And they shouldn't attribute his embrace of conservatism to anything other than political expediency." = Joshua Zeitz, New Republic
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:36 am
Miller was frothing at the mouth by the time he got to an interview with Chris Mathews, blurting out that he wished that dueling was still legal. Welcome to the eighteenth century.

John McCain on the Daily Show expressed his dismay over Miller's chewing up the scenery. Drama queen is too mild a description.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:38 am
Kerry was frothing last nite, in desperation, if Miller was frothing it was out of passion and concern.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:42 am
Kerry was frothing? Laughing

Miller is as passionate as any political whore, that I will agree.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:46 am
You have to remember even Kerry's frothing is boring, so yeah he was.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:51 am
Can you imagine the Kerrys distancing themselves from Obama? "I don't know that we share that point of view"?

Zell was the KEYNOTE SPEAKER.

<shaking head>

Meanwhile, what midnight rally in Ohio?! How come I have to keep reading about these things after the fact?
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:51 am
Harper wrote:
georgeob1 wrote:
But they aren't smears or lies. John Kerry really did put himself in for three Purple Hearts (one for each band-aid) and later use those awards to get an early release after a 13 week tour of duty. John Kerry really did appear prominently before the Congress and testify to his direct knowledge of widespread atrocities done by those with whom he served - and later deny that he ever saw or participated in any himself. He did all this and then thirty years later go on to great lengths to portray himself as a war hero.


The lies and smears have already been documented, your denying it simply reveals the fact that you are either dishonest yourself or lack comprehension skills.


Now there's a solid, factual and logical putdown!
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:57 am
This better, george?

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=32213
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 08:59 am
georgeob1 wrote:
Harper wrote:
georgeob1 wrote:
But they aren't smears or lies. John Kerry really did put himself in for three Purple Hearts (one for each band-aid) and later use those awards to get an early release after a 13 week tour of duty. John Kerry really did appear prominently before the Congress and testify to his direct knowledge of widespread atrocities done by those with whom he served - and later deny that he ever saw or participated in any himself. He did all this and then thirty years later go on to great lengths to portray himself as a war hero.


The lies and smears have already been documented, your denying it simply reveals the fact that you are either dishonest yourself or lack comprehension skills.


Now there's a solid, factual and logical putdown!


Thank you.


You are wlcome to rebut the facts for a change like the one that Miller's claim that Kerry's position is that he will seek UN Approval before using US Military is a flat out lie. Or any of the other lies already documented on this thread and never rebutted by ANYONE.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 09:08 am


Not really. Just a lot of nit-picking over details, and well stretched rationalizations. I gave the essential - and fully sufficient -facts in my post above, and no one here has either disputed or diluted them.
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 09:12 am
georgeob1 wrote:


Not really. Just a lot of nit-picking over details, and well stretched rationalizations. I gave the essential - and fully sufficient -facts in my post above, and no one here has either disputed or diluted them.


Really? Which post is that?
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 09:14 am
The one you just quoted.
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 09:15 am
georgeob1 wrote:


Not really. Just a lot of nit-picking over details, and well stretched rationalizations. I gave the essential - and fully sufficient -facts in my post above, and no one here has either disputed or diluted them.



It would help if you actually read what was posted on the thread, which at last count was 21 pages. You are losing any semblance of credibillity here. Wait a second, you can't lose what you never had...
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 09:17 am
Oh but we have.

Let's put it this way:

Quote:
John Kerry really did put himself in for three Purple Hearts (one for each band-aid) and later use those awards to get an early release after a 13 week tour of duty.


"Put himself in for"?! How awful! How illegal! How unusual!

No?

What exactly is wrong with the above, even if we assume it is factually true? (The "bandaid" classfication is highly arguable, for example.) Where is the lying?

Quote:
John Kerry really did appear prominently before the Congress and testify to his direct knowledge of widespread atrocities done by those with whom he served


Again, what is wrong with this? Do you say that he lied? That they lied? That no atocities took place? WHAT is your beef with the above?

Quote:
and later deny that he ever saw or participated in any himself.


I asked McGentrix to find a cite saying that he recanted his testimony, and he couldn't come up with anything. What he did come up with confirmed that Kerry had stuck by his testimony all of these years. Can you come up with anything? (And not, of course, any nit-picking or well-stretched rationalizations about how actions against the Geneva convention like blowing up food supplies were atrocities.)

Quote:
He did all this and then thirty years later go on to great lengths to portray himself as a war hero.


He did all this -- what? So far you have said he legitimately got three Purple Hearts, which legitimately got him sent home -- but you don't like it. He legitimately took testimony and relayed that testimony from soldiers, which he hasn't recanted -- which you don't like at all. He has responded to numerous attacks from the Bush campaign about his perceived toughness and ability to lead during war time with the obvious, that he has already proven his toughness in actual war, unlike Bush -- which you really, really don't like.

Aside from your personal dislike, what is there?
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 09:18 am
Harper wrote:

It would help if you actually read what was posted on the thread, which at last count was 21 pages. You are losing any semblance of credibillity here. Wait a second, you can't lose what you never had...


Another well-reasoned, factual putdown.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 09:21 am
Harper wrote:
georgeob1 wrote:


Not really. Just a lot of nit-picking over details, and well stretched rationalizations. I gave the essential - and fully sufficient -facts in my post above, and no one here has either disputed or diluted them.



It would help if you actually read what was posted on the thread, which at last count was 21 pages. You are losing any semblance of credibillity here. Wait a second, you can't lose what you never had...


Laughing Laughing

That's just too funny for words!
0 Replies
 
Harper
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Sep, 2004 09:26 am
Quote:

But they aren't smears or lies.


I have already posted at least a half dozen lies and smears. So georgeob1's above statement has been proven false. The biggest lie is that Kerry will not use our military without UN approval. Of course, not everythig Miller said was a lie but most all of it was a distortion.
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 01/26/2025 at 10:39:22