|
« Technical Difficulties | Main | Dan Rather's Apology » September 20, 2004
Mouth Agog, GOP Watches DNC Take Rope ...
Posted by Bill
... tie a noose, put it around their necks, throw it over a tree branch, and stand on a stool ... ... and then proceeds to pick its jaw up off the floor and scurry in to kick the damn thing out from under them. As I mentioned last week, this DNC strategy doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Posted by Bill at September 20, 2004 04:36 PM | TrackBack (4) CommentsLook to Hillary to revive the Democratic party in '08... Posted by: SJDoss at September 20, 2004 04:45 PM Heh. I thought there are 13 loops in a true hangmans noose. Posted by: CyberZombie at September 20, 2004 04:57 PM Now you're telling me that they can't even tie the noose right?! Posted by: Bill from INDC Journal at September 20, 2004 04:59 PM Given that the 13-loop nooses are meant to break the hangee's neck quickly, while a smaller noose would have tended to do slow strangulation, I think the picture is about right. Posted by: Russ at September 20, 2004 05:06 PM (bangs head against wall for a long time) Ok, I was wrong to make fun of Karl Rove. Evidently, he really does have a mind control device that he uses on higher ups in the DNC. I can think of no other way to explain what is happening. --Rick Taylor Posted by: Rick Taylor at September 20, 2004 05:08 PM - Their handywork shows 7 loops - Maybe they were hoping the rope would break - something like hoping no one would notice their docufakes were.... well ....fakes.... - The DNC of 2004 will forever be known as the gand that can't even get hung right...Susan Esrich must be laughing in her latte'....this debacle will push her maleprop campaign of '88 out of the Dem memory slots... - FOX news via Reuters has said that the video of the latest Isalamic Extremists beheading of American Eugene Armstrong has been posted on an Al Qaeda website... The US sate Department has confirmed that Armstrongs body has been found and Identified... - Another statement from the religeon of peace.... Posted by: Hunter at September 20, 2004 05:13 PM Comment deleted because it simply posted the release linked in the post above. Posted by: mr lawson at September 20, 2004 06:00 PM One has to ask why CBS would run with this story in the first place? It seems to me that there could only be one answer: that someone very high up did indeed vouch for these docs...someone like Cleland from the Kerry Kampaign. Imagine this...if CBS just gets these docs from Burkett, knowing his reputation, they probably don't run with them. However, if CBS gets these docs from Kerry/DNC, with some encouragement to run with the story, then CBS may be prompted to commit such an egregious error. This also explains why CBS has been so slow to admit their error...they are covering for someone really big. Posted by: Another Thought at September 20, 2004 06:13 PM You know the real irony. After all this came out I found out Bush actually did more than I thought he did. 2 full years of fighter jet flying ain't shabby. Posted by: ctob at September 20, 2004 06:24 PM Four years. Two years mostly off. Total of six. Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 20, 2004 06:27 PM You know, I almost hate to say this because it's so far-fetched, but it is not outside the realm of possibility that Kerry himself could be indicted. Of course it's very unlikely that Kerry would have been stupid enough to actually tell someone to do this, or that said person would admit it if they had, but then again Clinton was dumb enough to not only have an affair with a 21-year-old intern but also to leave DNA evidence on her dress. Posted by: TallDave at September 20, 2004 06:30 PM Bill, did you see the Boston Globe article? I found this especially amusing: "The pro-Bush blogs shrieked that the incriminating documents were obvious computer-created fakes; the anti-Bush blogs shrieked that, beyond any doubt, typewriters capable of producing these memos were available in the 1970s." The obvious clonclusion should be: the right-wing blogs were correct, the left-wing blogs were wrong. But instead we get more blue-truth vs red-truth mumbo-jumbo.
Posted by: TallDave at September 20, 2004 06:37 PM Was the McAuliife new release in Times New Roman?
Posted by: N. 'Brain at September 20, 2004 06:51 PM The Washington Post spread yesterday included a full-page graphic contrasting the CBS memos with Killian memos released by the TANG and identifiing "typographical differences," "style differences," and "content issues." While I was scouring the differences in the documents and was impressed with the graphic presentation of those differences, what really struck my wife was the content of the "Officially Released Killian Memo" dated Nov 3, 1970, which neither of us had ever seen -- "Lt Bush is a dynamic outstanding young officer. He clearly stands out as a top notch fighter interceptor pilot. Lt Bush is possessed of sound judgement, yet is a tenacious competitor and an aggressive pilot. He is mature beyond his age and experience level .... Lt Bush's skills far exceed his contemporaries. He is a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership. ... Lt Bush possesses vast potential and should be promoted well ahead of his contemporaries." When have we heard CBS or anyone else highlight that content? Posted by: Stuart Dornette at September 20, 2004 07:24 PM The first comment made me think. I wouldn't put it past the Clintonistas to cook up these documents as obvious forgeries, peddle them to CBS through Burkett since he is a known Bush-hating moonbat, then sit back and laugh when it all falls apart. That torpedoes Kerry's election hopes and gives Hillary the chance to run in '08 with no incumbent and no sitting VP to face. Posted by: Steve L. at September 20, 2004 07:32 PM Honestly, I don't get it. John Kerry seems to be staying on message; he's currently talking about the war on terrorism. Why is Terry undermining that? Is this just an example of Will Roger's quip? "I belong to no organized party. I am a Democrat." --Rick Taylor Posted by: Rick Taylor at September 20, 2004 07:34 PM Rick Taylor... This whole episode makes me wonder if you've unwittingly written an oxymoron. Is there any possible way for the DNC or CBS to have played this any more amateurish? Does the DNC have "higher ups"? Posted by: azlibertarian at September 20, 2004 07:45 PM If the memos had been originals signed in blood and the dna didn't match, Dan Rather would have still stood behind them. Posted by: donald sjulstad at September 20, 2004 08:40 PM Something else, and we need to start spreading it far and wide: If you are, or ever were, in the Guard or Reserves, and blew off a weekend drill because your kid was sick, or had to make up something you missed for whatever reason -- The Democratic Party and John Kerry say you're a deserter, that you were AWOL, that you could be prosecuted under the UCMJ. Never mind that you didn't have an assignment; never mind that you reported to an alien unit and nobody wanted you around and paid you no attention. Never mind that the Guard and Reserves are set up to accommodate that sort of thing. If you didn't make it, or if you can't find someone to testify that you made it, you're a criminal. A deserter. A lying betrayer who abdicated from your sworn service to your country. Yes, you. According to Terry MacAuliffe, the Democratic candidate's right hand man. You ready to be prosecuted next January? Regards, Posted by: Ric Locke at September 20, 2004 09:08 PM Here's something else that's funny. The DNC seems to have lined up a TANG blitz that has been stopped short. Unfortunately (for them), some of the tanks didn't put on brakes fast enough. Take a look at the front page of http://www.democrats.org and notice that they have a video ad prominently displayed, titled "GUARD". The sidebar item to the right of it shows "DEM TV Fortunate Son" and talks about TANG. The video, however, doesn't have anything to do with Bush's National Guard service. It's all about Bush's "Mission Accomplished" declaration and subsequent Iraqi quagmire. "They got CBS! They're onto us! Quick quick use the other video! NO, WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO CHANGE THE TITLES AND SIDEBAR!" Posted by: Cap'n Yoaz at September 20, 2004 09:29 PM Can somebody tell me what is the difference in Bagdad Bob and CBS Dan? Posted by: Jimmy Phillips at September 20, 2004 10:02 PM Jimmy, I believe Bagdad Bob hoped he was telling the truth to suit Sadass. as for the other fellow, bad digestion? Ric Locke is correct about the guard and reserve "time share" system. Are the maint. mechs. who prepared your aircraft on thursday and friday AWOL on when you flew on saturday and sunday? Are the pilots who flew on monday and tuesday ahead or behind the curve? Caiman Posted by: Steve Bellofatto at September 20, 2004 10:46 PM Actually, the wrap count for this NOOSE would be 8-and that's good. In many states, making an actual hangmans' knot and having it in your possession would getyou jailed-'cuz it is considered a deadly weapon-just like an executioners' sword-trivia, but not trivial...Retired AF and a Texan... Posted by: Pietr at September 21, 2004 01:21 AM |
-
av
Search
Archives
June 2008May 2008 April 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004
Extras
PDARSD Atom RSS 2.0 RSS 1.0
Credits
Our Blogroll
|