I am sure once they have something other than tv ads to show as proof they will do something.

I don't mean to be rude and try to hijack the debate here, but I'm trying to figure out what the 60-day prohibition on issue advertising that's built in to McCain-Feingold really means, and why it doesn't look like it's being enforced anywhere, particularly with respect to the CBS infomercial.

Details here.

If anybody can help me figure this out, I'd sure appreciate it.

If you're feeling up to it, it might be nice to have a "It's been X many days and y many hours since John Kerry last sat down for an interview with a serious media outlet" counter as well. I'd do it myself, but, well, I'm a musician.

Isn't this the same 60 minutes that recently showed the Princess Di autopsy photos?

Politics aside, it'd be great to see another MSM outlet point out that the once proud network of Murrow and (pre-war) Cronkite is fast becoming the National Enquirer of the major networks. Well, in all fairness, the Nat. Enq. is probably a lot more entertaining.

Don't hold your breath for 60 Minutes to turn its guns on Kerry or his "Little Me" John Edwards. Ain't gonna happen. I once wrote to 60 Minutes regarding why -- after having Richard Clark, Woodward and Clinton plugging their books and bashing Bush -- they didn't have Gen. Tommy Franks on their bogus news show. It was a rhetorical question since I know why. The closest the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth got to a fair deal from anyone in the media was when Bill O'Reilly interviewed John O'Neill last yesterday. Of course, today he had Ralph Nader on his show calling Bush a Chicken Hawk and a former Clinton DoD political hack who believes George Bush would not be so quick to go to war if he'd been in Vietnam. But at least O'Reilly gave O'Neill a chance to tell viewers the truth about the great war-hero John F. Kerry.

Katie:

Polipundit is keeping track of the days Kerry's been AWOL. One month, eight days and counting.

I'm confused. You mean all the negative stuff about Kerry's military history might be wrong? Is that why 60 Minutes is required?

Mike Adamson is absolutely right. We need to investigate the Christmas in Cambodia smears. I personally believe John Kerry when he says his brain was seared in Cambodia. I mean doesn't the various positions he takes on issues, like Iraq say, prove he is a man with a seared brain?

But you have to ask yourself why a man with a seared brain is running for the Presidency instead of seeking help?

--==--

Why did John Kerry meet with the representatives of the Viet Cong and Communist North Vietnam on his honeymoon in Paris?

I guess selling out his home country was more exciting than his new wife.

New Soldier html

What is the War Hero Afraid of?
Form 180. Release ALL the records

Just wanted to suggest that you make the counter Y10K compliant so we can still check it is running in 8000 years.

I would, at least where the NYTimes is concerned, take them a taaad more seriously -- seriously, if at all is more like it -- if they would AT LEAST publish the counter truth and information to their own partisan spin.

For instance, Bush has consistently spoken out about the fact that he believes Kerry served honorably when he was enlisted.

To read the Left media last evening and this morning, there is a preponderance of gloating from the Left that, to the effect, "Bush should now squirm" and/or "it's Bush's turn to squirm" and the like (just read something like that in The Guardian)...referring to what they write was some harm inflicted by Bush upon Kerry's "war record" or thereabouts.

Which completely defies the reality of what took place, of what is on camera, in print, everywhere. But you'd never know that by reading the Left media, where this issue is concerned, in their recent insistence that the two individual "service records" be compared (and insistence that Kerry's must be superior...actually, it turns out that Bush put in more service HOURS than Kerry ever did or has but no one but a conservative site is publishing those statistics, while the Left is continuing to focus on the LIE that Bush somehow used Kerry's military record to harm Kerry, which Bush did not do).

Another thing this morning and last evening is the Left "news" that Kerry's now claiming (but hasn't he always?) that the Iraq War money was money that should have been spent in the U.S. for domestic issues. And yet, Kerry JUST SAID ON "Meet the Press" that the U.S. "should spend whatever is necessary" or "whatever it takes" to "win" in Iraq.

The Media isn't making that last and very important point about Kerry's reasoning known. Or even writing about it. And, the mere fact that Kerry voted against providing fully for U.S. military in Iraq and yet has the nerve to say he "supports the troops" while he voted first to deny them then to fund them but to deny their provisions....Kerry's legacy of statements defy explanation and yet the Left continues to pound on and on about complete fantasies about "Kerry" as if he was a work of fiction.

Err, actually, now that I think about it, perhaps the point IS that Kerry is a work of fiction.

And that the Left has no point other than it makes no sense and can lie accordingly...but for what purpose? Why? The behavior by the Left in our world this morning appears to be one of confusion to the point of complete annihilation.

Because, surely, the Left cannot hope to create an effective means of government by this scorched truth policy. The fearful conclusion to that is, then, WHAT will be delivered? Even the French are nearly rioting about the idea of having to "only" receive two weeks' annual vacation and to work, OMGosh, a forty hour week. The outrage!

What will it take to please the Left? If they have a Kerry in the White House? No, that's not going to change their course...their course is set for destruction, based upon what I read lately, destruction of democracy, hail the Red Dawn. Scary.

Edwards = a Kerry-ette with a personality implant...

Nice idea. However, I suggest you add a little logic to display the word "day" rather than "days", where appropriate (e.g. on the first day of a clock's activation).

I have to say, I am in hushed awe at the ferocity with which the mainstream media is going about the business of destroying its credibility. The umpteenth regurgitation of the Bush/Guard story gets this kind of coverage?? Good god, I am almost embarassed for them (but not quite). I just can't believe that they are willing to go to bat like this for a slug like JF'nK. Is anybody ever again going to believe something they read in the NY Times or watch on SeeBS?

Great idea, Kevin! You continue to turn out cool ideas!

I would also recommend linking the counter to the new "Stolen Honor" documentary that came out today (http://www.stolenhonor.com/documentary/samples.asp). Those guys are Medal of Honor recipients, not policital hacks. Perhaps sending some viewers their way might help to discredit the shameless Kerry apologists like your first commenter above.

But you have to ask yourself why a man with a seared brain is running for the Presidency instead of seeking help?

The whole Kerry campaign looks to me like a cry for help.

Great idea. But... "it's been 1 dayS?" Sloppy, very sloppy. As a programmer, I disapprove. Sure, it won't be an issue after tomorrow, but still.

The Swift Boat Veterans first press conference was held on May 4, 2004.

It's been 128 days that CBS News and 60 Minutes have failed to air an unbiased report about their charges.

Since it's clear the Swifties and the President's men who are behind (and among them) have engaged in a campaign of lies and distortions that is the hallmark of the Atwater-designed, Rove-built political slime machine, I see no reason whatsoever to kowtow to them. They would tell any lie they could get away with. The Bush records dump demonstrates not ony that Bush skipped out on his obligations (about which, I do not care in the slightest!) but also (and importantly) that Bush has lied to cover up that failing -- numerous times and for years. You got that? This is PROOF that Bush has lied again & again. The Swifties' claims HAVE been all over the "media" and they have nothing but suspicions and partisn claims. Many of their claims have been demonstrated as bald-faced lies or have been contradicted by other accounts. The Swifties process of developing their charges has also been demonstrated to be dishonest and run by political operatives.

We know they are liars and so there is no reason to pursue their slime further. We know the President is a liar so there is no justifcation for reelecting him.

Ta Ta!

It's been 128 seconds since oldradus made a fool of himself.

Hurts, don't it ??

oldradus: "Ta Ta!"

That must be French for "let me outta here before someone responds with something unnecessary, like the facts."

I would also be interested in knowing who their "document expert" was that signed off on the obvious forgeries they used as "evidence" for this production.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007760.php

Old Media business as usual I guess.

Oldradus, the Swiftees stung Kerry on the very first try. Don't believe me? OK, where was Kerry the night of 24 December 1968?

And why did his citations change twice? And why is his 214 wrong? And did the other 4 boats leave when the boat hit the mine, or just his?

And why hasn't he taken open media questioning in over a month?

Oldradus, the only reason your side can throw these stones is because Bush signed SF180 releasing ALL of his records. Why won't your rich girl boy toy do the same?

I consider 60 Minutes to be false advertising because it's not really 60 minutes long. If you take out commercials and promotions for other news shows, it's more like 42 minutes.

"Contents measured by weight, not by volume." ought to run at the bottom of the screen.

The Left only dreams that Bush squirms for he has no regard for their smears and I fully intend to follow his example. The REAL story is how far Old Liberal MSM will go to control the flow of information and try to tilt a national election in favor of their candidate and their agenda.

Digging up Bush's teenaged driving record while ignoring the fact that Kerry refuses to sign Form 180 just says it all. They are so far beneath contempt and have once again over-played their hand. Kerry refuses to listen to Clinton even and I suspect the new smear campaign will have the opposite effect than intended. Their sense of fair play is non-existent and this like all their other lame attempts is going to produce a tremendous backlash. Americans do not like being jerked around like this and will not take them seriously for their exaggeration and hyperbole is just too excessive and one-sided.

Clinton tried to warn Kerry but like the nutcase Kerry is, he cannot turn loose of VN. Someone needs to adjust his meds and quickly! While the feeding frenzy over all Bush's records is taking place, not a single one of Kerry's has even been released. Do they REALLY want them released days before the election which is now going to happen? Stupid strategy.
~

Not entirely threadjacking, but this is a "flood the zone" moment. The docs posted on the 60 Minutes website are forgeries. Saw it on Powerline Blog first:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/007760.php

I totally agree - the docs were done on a laser printer. In 1973!

You know and I know that whatever Kerry does, it will not be enough for you.

The Kerry Swiftie story made it to the frontpage of the Star Tribune here in Minnesota (The "Strib" is regarded as a left-leaning paper btw). The Bush story made it all the way to ... page 8!

The Bush White House just said last week that "that's all ... everything is out" and then yesterday they release two more documents! GOTCHA!

It really hurts when what goes around comes around, doesn't it? The newly discovered documents are fair game for reporting. If you are waiting for Kerry to answer for Cambodia, I am waiting for Bush to answer for not showing up, in Alabama and Massachusetts. By the way, I was not so subtly solicited for a bribe by an Army Reserve colonel to get into the National Guard. I was shocked and walked away immediately, and regret to this day that I didn't have the courage to report it (although thankfully he was later convicted on a similar charge). Bush bribed his way into the Guard, ahead of hundreds of others who were not the sons of an ambassador and congressman, not through money but through political influence and backscratching, which to me is the same as bribery for the rich and powerful. Indeed, Bush's entire education and career were the result of political and economic influence of family and friends, from getting into Yale, then the Guard, then (failed) business ventures, then Harvard Business School (does anybodly have his grades?, then Governor of Texas, and finally as nominee for President as the most qualified Republican candidate capable of being controlled by the business elite including the criminals of Enron, and the far right in general. George Bush is the least distinguished president since Warren Harding (which is perhaps an over-endorsement of Calvin Coolidge).

Now that I see the difference the amount of issue advertising CBS News is doing with its 60 minutes show, should they have to certify themselves as a 527 organization?

They certainly cannot use being a journalistic organization as an excuse.

The Bush White House just said last week that "that's all ... everything is out" and then yesterday they release two more documents! GOTCHA!

Sorry, but the Bush White House doesn't "release" anything at their leisure. Form 180 authorizes release of records that are in the military's possession, and it's quite conceivable that not all records are going to be in one nice, neat pile in some government warehouse someplace.

Genius...

But the clock should have started long ago. Maybe when 60 Minutes fronted Paul O'Neill's book? Or Richard Clarke's? Or Bill Clinton's? How bout Anthony Zinni's? Maybe Abu Ghraib?

The CBS News division doesn't even make a pretense of objectivity anymore...

Well Ira, that's some assessment!

Let me get some cups for some more kool-aid.

Ira, maybe you can help me out as I am trying to decide who to vote for:

Where is your positive proof that Bush didn't show up. Saying he can't prove he did is not the same thing as proving he didn't, right?

You sound certain that Bush bribed his way into the Guard. Can you cite anything other then the partisan quoted on CBS to back up this claim?

To save time and space, can you just prove ONE of the things you are saying without resorting heresay or conjecture?

Me thinks that the panic has set in. The donks are on the wrong side of a landside in the making. Oh, and by the way, did we ever hear much about Gore's failed divinity school tenure? Nooo, because there is no such thing as a dumb democrat, they are so intellectual, thoughtful, and complex compared to the barbarian Republicans. Which doesn't explain why so many democrats had problems with the commonly used butterfly ballot - a real brain teaser if there ever was one.