Wow, big bad band-aid man grills a guy trying to get confirmed. Woof, just like a war hero.

Like this guy can give him the answer he deserves:

"And what about those military records and form 180 that you promised to Russert two years ago?"

"What is covered up there John, a section eight, a dishonorable discharge? What?"

Call in Ollie North stud, and bring that shit with him.

On the bright side, the JR Senator from the Peoples republic of Massachusetts finally showed up to work.

Didnt they promise a 5 day work week?

Lorrie:

Why would anyone have to apologize for speaking the truth about Mr. Bush?

I find it "unsatisfying" that you and your fellow right wingers so freely and easily call those who disagree with you cowards and traitors (for after all one who gives comfort to the enemy is certainly a traitor). I find it "unsatisfying" that it is your kind of cheap rhetoric that flies in the face of what this country is supposed to be all about. I find it "unsatisfying" that tossing those kinds of accusations about demonstrates your moral and intellectual bankruptcy.

I find it "unsatisfying" that tossing those kinds of accusations about demonstrates your moral and intellectual bankruptcy.

That's the pot calling the silverware black, sure enough.

How remarkable. Hugh says we call people "traitors," but then has to qualify it and say that he's parsing the term.

Here's a little hint, Hugh: Michael Savage doesn't post here. And speaking strictly for myself, I think the only time I've tossed around the term "treason" was in relation to Sandy Berger.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone ever construct a straw man and then set fire to it in the same comment before. A remarkable achievement, Hugh. One for the record books.

J.

Posted by: Hugh at February 28, 2007 08:12 AM

"I find it "unsatisfying" that you and your fellow right wingers so freely and easily call those who disagree with you cowards and traitors (for after all one who gives comfort to the enemy is certainly a traitor). I find it "unsatisfying" that it is your kind of cheap rhetoric that flies in the face of what this country is supposed to be all about. I find it "unsatisfying" that tossing those kinds of accusations about demonstrates your moral and intellectual bankruptcy."

Oh man! I'm confused again. When I'm "unsatisfied" I do things like walk out of the movie, play, concert, restaurant (but I pay for what I've consumed on that one). I don't demand that they do things my way, I assume they are doing what they feel they do best and that I just don't like it. So I leave.

So explain to us Hugh, what are you doing here?

SO what exactly were those Swift Vet lies?

Christmas in Cambodia a lie, another Kerry lie proven by a eulogy in the Congressional Record, the medals being tossed, Winter Soldier, aiding enemy, etc etc.

Im surprised Kerry didnt put video up on youtube of his daily activities in nam.

Jay:
There you go again. Sticking your foot in your mouth. Pressure getting to you lately? You've become very knee-jerk (no pun intended) lately.

it would be helpful to you were to to read a post and even try to understand the meaning of words and their intended usage before offering your critique to a comment. LORIE'S words Jay were: "...comfort to and embolden our enemies..." Do a little legal research Jay, "giving aid and comfort" to an enemy is treason per the Supreme Court.

Old Guy:

I'm here to bring truth to folks like you.

A leftist bring truth, you mean like Dan Rathergate?

Or the energy conservation a la algore?

Hugh, old chump,

Thanks SO much for the Constitutional lesson. If you would, please continue. In particular, I'm curious how Lorie's "giving comfort" morphed into "giving aid and comfort," and how that ties in to the court rulings that the Constitutional definition that treason also requires a material act. Sounds to me like you're trying to put words in her mouth, then condemn her for what she never actually said.

You're trying to put out that fire you started when you torched your own straw-man argument, Hugh, but instead you're just fanning the flames.

J.

Listen to the precious manner in which Kerry phrased his question.

Fox should have replied, "Release the 180", but I guess he's looking forward to Belgium.

Kerry isn't running next year because focus groups still can't get him past running down river with injured sailors in the water.
===================================

"Do a little legal research Jay, "giving aid and comfort" to an enemy is treason per the Supreme Court." - Hugh

It seems to me that this could apply to what the congressional democrats are doing right now. On that point I would agree with Hugh.

I wish I had time to make some popcorn and sit back and watch the show, but I gotta go to work.

Go J GO. However, for the record, I have called reason once or twice, and I'm not gonna retract my calls.

He gets a medal for foolishly grounding his boat. He gets another for running from his comrades under fire. Both phony. So after he skates his good buddy grounds his boat while his comrades run off. I'd have bad dreams, too.
==================================

And McCain has to get straight with the Swifties before he has a chance. He took Kerry's side in that skirmish(decisive strategic battle) precipitously and without bothering with discovering the facts. He, too, is 'Unfit for Command'.
========================

Jay:

One writes words, one lives with the meaning and intent of those words. Like you so easily tossing around accusations of cowardice Jay. A

But just for arguments sake Jay how would you interpret her words?

Here's the strawman argument, Jay.

Lorie: ..."and to make statements that give comfort to and embolden our enemies, and to threaten to "slow bleed" our troops"

Show me the "180" (or whatever proof you can muster) that supports the contention that any statements made Obama have brought comfort to and emboldened our enemies.

After you flail about, avoiding the question, show me where Obama has threatened to slowly bleed our troops.

These kind of statements, which are repeated daily by conservatives 'round here with respect to any Democrat who dares disagree with the the throne, don't have an ounce of truth behind them. Lorie imagines it to be so, but show us proof - any proof - that these theories have any validity, and aren't just made of straw.

About time you got here Lee. Fending off this rabid horde alone is never easy.

Jay:

One writes words, one lives with the meaning and intent of those words. Like you so easily tossing around accusations of cowardice Jay. A

But just for arguments sake Jay how would you interpret her words?

Hugh, it would appear to me that you answered your own question. What Lorie wrote is quite different from what you claimed that she wrote.

Why not simply take her at the words that she wrote rather than manufacturing something that she didn't say?

However, if you still need clarification, why are you asking Jay? They are LORIE'S words.

Ask her.

The lie is/was that political operatives funded by the likes of Sam Fox and supporting the most despicable of chickenhawk nominees blatantly and hypocritcally had the gall to smear the oppposition nominees who actually went and fought in battles however few or described and did not hide behind mama's skirt stateside.

When speaking of those who promote war but don't fight it and those who DO fight in war and oppose its reasons for being there I suggest that the armchair commandoes who think it is so necessary stop what they are doing and go take up some position endangering their lives somewhere near the front lines. (let's say for the local right wing crowd here as journalists). Go for the duration with several re-ups (since that's what the present "war" M.O. seems to be )and then we'll talk about the practices of right wing smear operatives. How they try to win "campaigns" (politcal, military or otherwise) by using the tactics of cheating, lying or stealing and how that is to be applauded or somehow rewarded.

Foolish American, Lorie Byrd.

Lee, a quick note before I head off to The Day Job.

Give the FULL QUOTE, why don't you?

Now for the Obama line. I find it "unsatisfying" that so many of the Democrats' highest office holders will not say it was a mistake to accuse President Bush of "lying us into war," and to make statements that give comfort to and embolden our enemies, and to threaten to "slow bleed" our troops. Quite unsatisfying indeed.

Lorie did NOT say Obama said those things, merely used his turn of phrase against the Democrats' highest office holders. Murtha, for one. Pelosi, for another.

It's a rhetorical device, and a damned good one.

Now off to the work that actually pays the bills...

J.

These kind of statements, which are repeated daily by conservatives 'round here with respect to any Democrat who dares disagree with the the throne, don't have an ounce of truth behind them.

Ummmm, Lee .....

Lorie wrote an opinion.

Just because you believe that your opinions are the same as fact doesn't mean everyone else thinks that theirs are. (Or, for that matter, that your opinions are "facts" either. LOL!)

Not to worry, Hugh, always happy to help out a fellow patriot.

And Jay -- nice flailing and dodging. You ducked the question (and ducked out the door) so if there is anyone else -- feel free to jump in.

With respect to the statements made by Democratic office holders show us any proof that the statements made give comfort and embolden the enemy. Show where anyone has threatened to slowly bleed our troops.

If these are not factual statements, if there isn't an ounce of verifiable truth behind these statements, then they are made of straw drawn from Lorie's imagination.

The only "contribution" the not-so Swifties ever made to society was the term "Swiftboating" -- to smear via viral marketing and using gullible, deceptive and/or utterly lying-ass spokespeople as proxies. The whole lot are a disgrace to their service and uniform, and any all members, current and former, should be held accountable for their malicious, GOP-toadying behavior during the 2004 Presidential election when their turn comes up.

Way to go there Jay... you say Lorie did not describe Obama as treasonous....just other dems. Talk about straws? LOL, you're grasping at them now which of course would be a natural thing for a person who likes to label folks as cowards.

cb, I have only ever found one person using the chickenhawk argument who wasn't themselves a chicken.

BC: I think you will find that the verb 'to Swiftboat' varies in meaning according to the political persuasion of the speaker. It is a fascinating phenomenon. Also, are you aware that you haven't a hope of proving your allegations against the Swifties without the information contained in Kerry's 180? So why don't you prove your allegations?
=============================

Show where anyone has threatened to slowly bleed our troops.

Lee, are you seriously going to claim ignorance of the term "slow bleeding of our troops" with respect to Murtha's plan that was discussed at lenght last week?

And it is unfortunate that you don't think statements about ending our presence in Iraq don't embolden our enemy. Knowing that your foe doesn't have the will to finish the conflict is a great motivator, in my opinion.

If these are not factual statements

Of course they are not. They are opinion, just as you have yours. You may disagree, but that doesn't mean you are any more correct than Lorie.

Please meditate on why the founders gave the legislature the power to 'declare' war, and the executive the power to 'make' war.
=====================================

Simple, Cuz. It's easier to get into a quagmire than out of one.
=====================================

The only "contribution" the not-so Swifties ever made to society was the term "Swiftboating" -- to smear via viral marketing and using gullible, deceptive and/or utterly lying-ass spokespeople as proxies. The whole lot are a disgrace to their service and uniform, and any all members, current and former, should be held accountable for their malicious, GOP-toadying behavior during the 2004 Presidential election when their turn comes up.

Posted by: BC at February 28, 2007 09:49 AM

Well, since BC has admitted that the Swiftboat group are indeed comprised of veterans of the Vietnam War, perhaps he could now explain why he thinks that ONLY THOSE VETERANS WITH WHOM HE AGREES (ie, John Kerry) should be permitted to express their opinion and why he believes the rest should NOT be permitted to speak freely.

ALL other veterans are "utterly lying-ass spokespeople" and "a disgrace to their service and uniform". Also, they made no other contribution whatsoever to their country. (Per the first line of his post.)

Also, perhaps he could explain if the they also are "disgraces" to the medals that they recieved - including at least one Congressional Medal of Honor.

Here's an irony for you. For the Democrats to ever retain any national defense credibility, we have to be lucky enough for this administration's efforts against radical Islam to be successful. If Bush and Company fail, and al Qaeda resurges, the Dems are finished.
===============================

Kerry is the gift that keeps on giving. He is a permanent lightening rod for the absolute disgust of Vietnam era veterans (along with many more real men). Nothing can be said that will change that. It can only get worse. He should go away and keep absolutely quiet until he releases his 180. But he won't and thus we have to rehash his disgraceful performance once again.

If you think that the Swifties provided substantial evidence, than you must admit that the Rather Gate evidence was substantiated as well.

We all known that Bush got his post through connections, he rarely showed up, and he lost his flying status. All of those were substantiated by witness testimony or documentation.

On the other hand, Kerry's accounts are backed by witness testimony of persons that were actually at the battles, and documentation does support his accounts as well as the fact that Kerry was patrolling near the boarder at that time of year.

If it is completely plausible that Scooter can forget (within a couple of months) from whom he learned the identity of V. Plame (Cheney), and that he revealed her identity to a half dozen reporters. Than it is plausible that Kerry would not know his exact location (within jungle river system without the aid of GPS) on which exact day a few years later.

If the efforts expended by the Bush administration in the GWOT are proven to be not successful in eliminating the threat from al Qaeda the Dems are finished? Why would the Democrats be fininshed as a result of the failure of the Republican administration?

ss, one of the more important rituals in small town VFWs and American Legions is to critique the war stories of the Newbies. Kerry, not being military, didn't understand that this action is drilled over and over and over again. He didn't stand a chance. The lizards were crying in their beers and the bargirls were sending tips to the Swifties.

Only Kerry was narcist enough to believe he could pull off being both a geniune Anti-War Hero and a genuine War Hero. It is possible to do so, look at Webb try. The trouble is you really have to be a genuine war hero to do so, and Kerry is only a hero in his mind.

Oh yes, and in his pix. Let's see those pix. Lots of pix. Even better than the 180. That came out in a focus group. His obsession to film himself. That's fatal daffodil taffy.
==================================

BG2, you don't know enough to make those allegations. The difference of opinions between Kerry and the Swifties can not all be settled perfectly but it is clear to all that the information in his 180 would go a long ways toward settling the matters. In the meantime, what about the first Purple Heart, what about Christmas in Cambodia, and what about the flight down the Bay Hap. In all these the Swifties are pretty much proven right and Kerry wrong. That's three strikes, all right down the middle, and Kerry hasn't lifted his bat off his shoulder. Nor did he in August of '04. Why not?
=================================

Lee, think about it for awhile. Do you really think another attack like 9/11 is going to have everyone stampeding to the Democrats' pup tent? Don't you remember how 80% of the nation thought that Saddam was dangerous and that we ought to remove him, no doubt including a number of your heroes.
===========================