It's pointless to joust with these nitwits. They are bereft of reason and lost their nodding acquaintance with integrity when Gore lost Florida. Barking mad and totally unprincipled. Is it any wonder Kerry is their guy?

I have very bright friends that are supporting Kerry, so I can't agree with you on that, but I Murv is silly ... I just wanted to share his fun letter.

We won't make a big deal over Bush's earpiece if you don't make a big deal over Kerry's note cards.

Bush has an earpiece? Roll out the video! Or send it to me - I'll break it!

Not surprising. But this won't have an effect on the race, much like Kerry's eloquence will not, since the importance of these debates is a figment of the DC media's imagination. The number of undecided voters going into last Thursday night's debate was rather small. Virtually all of the polls that took before and after readings found that the support for each candidate did not change, despite Kerry's eloquence. Kerry did not beat Bush on the actual issues discussed in the debate and that is what Kerry had to win on. Looking presidential means jack at this point. It is enjoyable watching the media and their liberal left commentator allies try to spin this into a great Kerry victory. The Newsweak poll is crap given how the party registrations of the sample were manipulated. Bush has built his lead on his positions on national security, not his "style." If we see any movement in the state polls then perhaps this was a big win for him but I doubt that. Well, perhaps Kerry boosted himself in Maryland and New Jersey...some victory at this stage.

I doubt this will get much traction, whatever the truth. Most people already think the terms of the debates are overlawyered.

I mean, come on - it's a DEBATE. Walk onto the stage. Argue. Leave. Very simple. Leave it to two Yale graduates to make it more intricate than the Oslo accord.

That said, if Kerry broke the rules, he's an idiot. (And I'm saying that as someone who still might vote for the schmuck.) It's bad enough Rather and CBS made this election about a set of trumped-up documents for a month. It'll be even sadder if the final month is about a pen, or a useless scrap of paper. There are far greater issues at stake.

It is actually an "accusation" because nothing has been proven yet. Secondly, it's a VERY innefective attempt to get the citizens of the US to ONCE AGAIN ignore the issues and focus on some remedial detail (sort of like, well, EXACTLY like how you, rather than address Murv Sears questions, pointed out his "violations of the rules of English syntax and punctuation".

And for gawds sake, if you believe Nixon lost the debate to Kennedy because he didn't shave, and not because he was a creepy, lying, stealing, coniving bastard - then you ARE living in a dreamworld.

Hate to tell you NeoCons out there, but your little combo punch of scare tactics (the terrorists are coming!! the terrorists are coming!!) and misdirection (See?!? See!?!? Kerry CLEARLY used the wrong color of ink to sign his name on this here bill... And it was RED to boot!! I TOLD you he was a commie pinko!) isn't working anymore.

The conservatives days are numbered. The world is waking up to the HORRIBLE, downright EVIL things you all are doing to this country, and we will mop the floors with G-Dub come election day.

Yes, Bill, I know some MIT Ph.Ds who are supporting Kerry, too. People who are otherwise bright can be personable political nitwits. There is no possible way that anyone who has done any serious research on Kerry to ignore the man's hollow core or his dismal record as a Senator, though. If he is a leader, he certainly failed to act as one in the Senate despite twenty years there. Not a single piece of legislation bears his name. Had his seat remained vacant for twenty years Massachusetts would not have noticed the difference. He's been treating the Senate as a springboard to fulfill his life's obession - to occupy the Oval Office. I am in Massachusetts, btw, and have been throughout the course of Kerry's lacklustre career.

I like posted the inane letters I get, too.

It is actually an "accusation" because nothing has been proven yet.

WRONG. I didn't accuse him of "cheating," I accused him of violating the Memorandum of Understanding. There is clear video evidence.

The rest of your post is drivel, so we'll skip it.

I wonder if Bush saw what Kerry did and if it was the reason he was angry.

That's "posting." Typing too fast.

The conservatives days are numbered. The world is waking up to the HORRIBLE, downright EVIL things you all are doing to this country, and we will mop the floors with G-Dub come election day.

Well, I don't know about YOU guys, but I'm scared.

Trash-talking doesn't impress anyone, holotone.

The PowerLine folks think there really isn't any percentage in Team Bush calling Kerry on this at this point. I tend to agree; Bush should have made something of it then and there on Thursday night if he'd seen what was going on. However, I do suggest that he keep a _very_ close eye on Kerry next time around.

Is it possible that NOBODY has noticed that Bush also took something from his jacket? I mean, it's not as obvious because Bush had his back to the camera, and you won't see it at all if you're a partisan goofball and only watch the close-up. But Bush did reach into his jacket, and then had something white in his hand, which he placed on the lectern and wrote a couple lines on. Watch the full-frame video.

If I were going into a debate where the stakes were as high as they could possibly be (for me and the opponent), I would NOT trust any third party to prepare my materials.

"The PowerLine folks think there really isn't any percentage in Team Bush calling Kerry on this at this point. I tend to agree..."

There's no percentage for the BUSH folks to do this, but there is plenty of percentage for the Bush folks to sit back, just like with the Natl Guard "memos," and let M. Kerry take his fair share of abuse.

"Its not an "accusation," Murv. Kerry violated the terms of the agreement, very similar to the way that you've violated the rules of English syntax and punctuation."

LOL!!!! Why do some insist on calling names like 3rd graders? Just argue the point and let those reading decide. I am truly amazed at the immaturity of some who call themselves adult.

As an ardent Bush supporter, if Bush DID cheat, it would cause me great concern---because he did poorly even WITH the cheat. :) If you're gonna cheat, you must at least make it work for ya.

That's why I love it when Dems come up with the kookiest things to blame on Karl Rove. Like planting the CBS memos. I mean, if the Bushies are THAT good, and THAT tough, they've got my vote any day. (And I suppose it pisses the Dem kook fringe even more for me to say that.)

"Yes, Bill, I know some MIT Ph.Ds who are supporting Kerry, too. People who are otherwise bright can be personable political nitwits."

Terry, I got the sense that Bill was referring to reasonable, rational people who had legitimate issues with Bush's policies, such as his cut-and-spend economic policy, his attempts to erode the church/state separation, his support of amending the Constitution to codify Christian morals, etc. Not everyone who questions a second Bush term is a Moonbat violating Godwin's Law.

Rightwingsparkle,
It's called a retort. It's an entirely adult rherorical device. A childish comeback would be far more ad hominem like, "Well, yeah, but your momma smells funny."
She does, by the way.

Terry, I got the sense that Bill was referring to reasonable, rational people

Bingo.

Senator Kerry won the debate. To the degree my conservative colleagues wish to present argument to the contrary, they do so in a vacuum. But, the Senator’s triumph is not the issue. The issue is did Senator Kerry violate rules that he had agreed to? It is not okay to simply pass it off as “no-big-deal.” I’m not seeing comments from anyone on this blog arguing that Senator Kerry did not remove something from his jacket pocket. Whatever it was, he was not supposed to have removed it from his jacket and placed it on the podium. He broke a clearly stated and agreed upon rule. The question is, why?

Sanity! Thank you!

"holotone"'s paranoid hysteria would be amusing if it wasn't so bothersome: that "the world" and reported factors by liberal media outlets about "the world" ("everyone's AGAINST us!" so reports The Guardian, AP and various other liberal sources, based upon some sort of undefined, illmannered "rating system" that no one's yet defined) are the measure of what the United States should do...sounds, hey, sorta "globalist" in complaint nature.

Everyone needs to think over the "most popular" one or two people in your highschool graduating class and then get in touch with them today, or at least, keep that foolish "the world" and "globalist" emphasis in check, because the United States is not "the world" and "the world" as reported recently is simply who was polled in whatever undefined process various sources did so.

If you know some sort of global telephone number where "everyone" calls to "report" their favorites and preferences about the United States, please let me know because I'd be curious who is paying the bill, keeping the wiring engaged, all that, but especially as to who is answering the calls and taking the notes that are later "reported" in various liberal media sources as being some sort of "world" consensus.

More of the leftwing moonbat hysteria -- it does not surprise me that "global/globalist" is/are Kerry's favored expressions, because he certainly is more concerned with some hysterical "world" consensus than he is that from the United States citizens.

I'm always curious, when I read this liberal hysteria, as to the "world" considering the U.S. so unpopular and quite so distasteful, as to why they all continue to come here, legally and illegally, or rather, with any means possible by many of them, indicating a high sampling of urgency. So, all these immigrants are "wrong," too?

A small cheat sheet would be of little help in this format. It would be for 1.recording some numerical facts or 2. giving one a little confidence. 1.is unlikely as real numbers would only be a drag on Kerry's tendency for making them up. 2. would seem to be superflous due to his ego.

P.S.: funny, because when Disco was reportedly "king," everyone said that the Golden Oldies were doomed. Same as "holotone" suggests that "NeoCons" are going by the wayside. Where's disco today?

My point here is that trends are what they are: passing fancies. But, when a trend is at it's height ("globalism" and the "America is bad" meme), it takes on a form of hysteria among personalities who are affected by same. The rest of us maintain our values and preferences and interests over time. I know I'VE never bought a lime green Gremlin, but that's just me.

On repeat viewings, the object Bush takes from his jacket appears to be his pen. But he still took something.

I wonder if they have any video footage of what Kerry did with the paper AFTER the debate. He must have taken it out with him?

The hysterical Bush-hatred/Neocons-are-evil posts are at this point tedious and extremely boring. I used to get a cheap little thrill by reading them, oh, back in 2002 or '03. But a year after the thrill is gone, man this crap's just severely soporific, and that's all.

Hooray for members of the forum intent upon debate for the purpose of establishing truths, whatever they may be. Any of you feces-throwers who knows what that sentence means has a chance of turning over a new leaf. Those of you who don't are permanent obstacles to inquiry.

Bush pulled something out of his pants during one of Kerry's comments.

Video proof here:

http://www.campchaos.com/show.php?iID=890

I am, simply, too exhausted to argue.

So, how about a succint "Screw 'em!"?

Will that suffice?

The Zero Boss

I got the sense that Bill was referring to reasonable, rational people who had legitimate issues with Bush's policies, such as his cut-and-spend economic policy, his attempts to erode the church/state separation, his support of amending the Constitution to codify Christian morals, etc. Not everyone who questions a second Bush term is a Moonbat violating Godwin's Law.

And I have serious differences with Bush over these issues as do many of my conservative friends. None would consider voting for Kerry, though, nor would I, because disjoined issues (despite all the reverence shown them by talking heads) are not the only criteria for casting one’s vote. Personal qualities in a candidate (his or her intelligence and goodness quotients) should weigh as heavily, if not more so, when deciding how to vote. Anyone who doesn’t remember the fatally-flawed Nixon may not realize that it was during his term that Americans began their descent into today’s nasty polarization – with the occasional semi-breaks such as Ford, Carter and Reagan.

Swampman Murv exemplifies the extremes of polarization. I say that because I believe on the basis of watching George Bush closely over the past four years that he is actually quite a nice man completely unlike the character assassination of him by the MSM and Moonbats.

But I digress and this is getting way too long. (Sorry, Bill, I’ll behave myself in the future.) I’ll just end by saying that intelligence without goodness and judgment is not entirely worthless, but to paraphrase Oscar Wilde

I feel sorry for people who mistake mere cleverness for true intelligence …

For the dim buld out there saying *Bush* removed something from his pocket, get your eyes checked. He picks the pen up off the podium, REMOVES THE CAP (the gesture you mistake for him reaching into his pocket -- humanly impossible in this way), and begins to write. All this while Kerry clearly removes something from his pocket (not saying I know what it is), unfolds it and places it on his podium.

I've proctored examinations at law schools and everyone who has ever sat for one is familiar with how strictly the rules are enforced. At least where I was, they were read orally to every student in the room and the proctor was responsible for keeping an eye on the students during the exam. If the rules from said no materials, they meant NO MATERIALS. That means no reaching into your vest pocket to take out a piece of paper, no handkerchiefs up your sleeve, no nothing. Students were instructed to place all of their materials at the edges of the room, out of reach, and not to have any kind of electronic devices or cell phones. Only one student at a time was allowed to leave the room to visit the restroom, and were made to sign out and sign back in when they did so.

Certainly John Kerry has been to law school and understands that the rules are in place and are meant to be followed. If he didn't want the rules, his negotiators shouldn't have agreed to them, and his campaign director shouldn't have signed them. I'm sure Kerry read them - they're not "The Oslo Accords; they're written in plain, easy-to-understand language.

And the idea that some form of mental cues, no matter how rudimentary, wouldn't have helped in a live debate, under immense pressure, with enormous stakes, is ridiculous. Of course it would.

So if he brought something he shouldn't have had to the podium, in my judgment he forefits the debate. Any objects he might have needed (handkercheifs, extra pens, whatever) could surely have been given to the Debate Commission prior to the broadcast and placed on the podium. There was no need to carry anything up there that I can see unless he didn't want anyone on the Commission to know about it.

We know we must have a valid issue when the liberals come out and are so vehement in their defense of Kerry...

Somebody post some screenshots of Kerry pulling out his notes.

For the dim buld out there saying *Bush* removed something from his pocket, get your eyes checked. He picks the pen up off the podium, REMOVES THE CAP (the gesture you mistake for him reaching into his pocket

Actually, that isn't the gesture that looks like him reaching into his pocket. The gesture where he reaches into his pocket, just before the camera change as he comes around the podium, is the one that looks like him reaching into his pocket.

The gesture where he takes the cap off looks like, well, taking the cap off a pen. and the gesture that looks like Bush writing, is Bush writing. That's how the object can be identified as a pen.

I can't see where a cheat sheet would have helped. Both guys should know this stuff going in without any prompts.
I'm more anti-Kerry than pro-Bush, so it pains me to admit that Kerry came off better in this round. I wish I had had an earpiece in Bush's ear, my wife says I won the debate, without even one swear word, well perhaps one.
Bush let Kerry take the initiative several times. He seemed to want to fill the time just because it was there. For example, when asked if Kerry had any faults that would preclude him from becoming President, if you didn't plan to attack the answer should have been a simple "no". When Kerry stated nuclear proliferation was the biggest problem, Bush should have talked about the immediate War on terrorism. When Kerry said OBL was the target, Bush should have stated that OBL was an emasculated figurehead, and that it was simplistic to think the Jihad would grind to a halt over one man. When Kerry accused us of outsourcing the capture of OBL to Afganis, Bush should ask: "Do we form alliances, or don't we? As CIC I give the on site commanders the initiative. Your approach repeats the known pitfalls of the Vietnam war you recall."
When Kerry walked into the NK negotiations, Bush had a perfect chance to call him on his ability to work within alliances.
Oh well, you can't un-ring a bell.

Wild Bill: you sure have to put up with alot of guff from we the freeloaders, no? By the way, were you aware that you dangled an Arab participle with your tranlsation in yesterday's post....?

Kerry didn't cheat. He was simply running late and grabbed Sandy Berger's jacket by mistake. We should be grateful he wasn't wearing his pants, too.

No wonder the president looked peeved during the whole debate. The caption under some of the off-camera pictures of Bush that the DNC is publishing should read; "Why you cheating sumbitch ..."

But everyone is missing the most important issue, excerpted here from the debate introduction by Jim Leher ...

"These debates are sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates. Tonights will last 90 minutes following detailed rules of engagement worked out by representatives of the candidates. I have agreed to enforce their rules on them."

Read the .pdf document for the rules.

So, why didn't Leher call out Kerry for pulling something out of his jacket pocket ? Freeze at the frame at 1:58. Leher was looking at Kerry as he placed whatever it was on the podium. First RatherGate, now LeherGate ...

edleary -

I dont think it's appropriate to assume that Lehrer saw it, especially from a low angle.

As an Anybody But Kerry voter: Is it possible that he was removing some BLANK paper or note cards? I believe the debate rules allowed for blank paper and note taking. Who knows, now? At this point it's probably impossible to judge.

Is it possible that he was removing some BLANK paper or note cards? I believe the debate rules allowed for blank paper and note taking

John re-read the posted rules - blank paper would not be that significant, but the candidates were specifically instructed to bring NOTHING. The paper and pens were laid out on the podiums for them.

I am going to dispute, in a friendly sense, what you said in the main post. The important thing is not to enforce the rules in the future. The important thing is the damage this rightfully does to Kerry's reputation. Yeah, maybe he wasn't cheating. Maybe he forgot to have paper there, so he brought his own. Maybe. But these rules are designed to prevent cheating, and having broken them, the burden is on him in my mind to prove an "innocent" explanation. And for a candidate who claims he is going to bring "new credibility" to the White House, to behave like this undermines that claim to credibility. Because, a cheater is a liar, in short.

Well, actually, I was just talking smack. But since you're willing to listen, here's some weak circumstantial evidence in favor of the earpiece theory:
he makes non sequitur utterances which sound like he's repeating instructions rather than responding to the questions. Some things he's said are hard to explain in any other way.

Some transmissions to the hypothetical earpiece may have accidentally been broadcast. See the item "DOES HE HEAR VOICES?" on that page; this seems the sketchiest item, so feel free to dismiss it.

He's got something stuck in his ear.

In all fairness and in a bipartisdan effort to return at least the appearance of a fair competition into the next one I believe Kerry ought to be told to leave the can of WHOOP ASS! behind for the next debate.

>>> I dont think it's appropriate to assume that Lehrer saw it, especially from a low angle.

With all due respect, Bill ...

If he did, what could he say or do ? "Senator Kerry, you are breaking the rules of the debate by bringing an unauthorized crib sheet to the podium. The Democratic party will now be penalized 10 Newsweek poll points in favor of President Bush."

Kerry is soooooo busted on this one...he is clearly caught with a cheat sheet...

Now I won't hold my breath waiting for the MSM to even devote one second of time to this story...it would be far too honest of them to do so...

IF Lehrer had seen and wanted to, a simple "The rules said no items were to be brought in, Senator. Please hand it to my assistant." would have sufficed.

Of course, if I were a reverse moonbat (a tabnoom?), I could say that Leher gave Kerry the questions. That's no more unethical than creating a "news" story based on forged documents.

A gleeson.us exclusive!
Kerry's Cheat Sheet!
(From an unimpeachable source, naturally.)

I watched the extended CSPAN video. At the end of the debate an aide came on stage and picked up Bush's notes, then proceeded across the stage, behind Kerry's podium. As he walked by, he glanced at the material on top of Kerry's podium.

Seconds later another aide came on stage and removed Kerry's notes from his podium.

Maybe seeing that video would let you see the size of the paper removed from Kerry's podium.

The size is not relevant.

Maybe it's time to start a contest. No one has to accuse Kerry of cheating. Just a contest to guess what he pulled out of his pocket. A Letterman Top 10 List.

10 Best Guesses as to what Kerry pulled out of his pocket.

10. Good luck note from Dan Rather.
9. Original Killian memo--on WordPerfect!
8. Directions to Cambodian Christmas party.
7. John Edwards' billable hours on campaign trail.
6. Appointment slip for next Botox treatment.
5. French to English dictionary.
4. Lucky CIA hat!
3. Commitment papers for Teresa.
2. Leaves of Grass.
1. One way ticket to Boston!!!!

Darn, Barry!

That's a list that would likely make even Jeff G. proud!

I particularly like numbers 5 and 7.

Kerry took out a notepad. Y'know, to take notes on. And you bunch of whining girls are are sheiking in horror. And you forgot Poland.

Boy.

Kerry won the debate

let it go

christ if you're going to watch kerry pull out a note card and then ignore 4 years of cheating and lying and other perfidy from Bush, then you're officially a fucking idiot

OK, Barry, here's my entry:

10. Rosary
9. Gameboy
8. Naked pics of the Bush twins
7. The Global Test
6. "Fortunate Son" sheet music
5. Bunny ears
4. Kryptonite
3. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion
2. Zog's Sex Wax
1. Cheat sheet with notes for debating

I tried to post this over at LGF, but I've never posted there before and they have unregistered comments turned off, so I had to register. But when I clicked on the "register" link, I discovered that comment registration was temporarily closed. So there was no way for me to post this on LGF at all. Which is a shame, because I'm pretty sure I've figured out what the object is that Kerry took out of his pocket.

I'd appreciate it if someone who's already registered at LGF would copy this post and post it over there, it the discussion thread at http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=12967_A_Better_View_of_Jacketgate -- it's the only way I'll be able to say this over there.

Following is the exact entry, word-for-word, that I tried to post. ("The video" in my post refers to the Quicktime movie at http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/.Movies/JFKCheat.mov).

Watching the video the first time, I couldn't quite make out what the object was. The second time through, I watched his hands rather than trying to squint at the object. And suddenly I was certain that the object was a pen. Watch his hands during the last section of the video: he's pulling the cap off the pen, flipping it over, and placing the cap on the back end of the pen. The pen then ends up held in his right hand in a writing posture. It's a very familiar gesture; I've done it myself hundreds of times.

To see it for yourself, watch the video at full speed, instead of frame by frame. Kerry walks toward the podium, pulling an object out with his left hand as he turns. He then looks down at the podium and the object, which he's holding in both hands. Then his head comes up and he's looking at the audience -- watch his hands carefully from that point forward. From that moment when his head comes up, I see the following sequence (my interpretations are in parentheses):

His left hand moves away from his right hand, as if pulling something. (The cap away from the pen).

While his left hand remians stationary, his right hand flips an object 180 degrees. (Turning the pen around.)

While holding the object in his right hand and holding his left hand stationary underneath it, he brings his right hand down towards his left hand. (Pushing the pen down onto the cap which his left hand is holding).

He then flips the object around again, his right hand shifting position on it. Notice especially how his index finger can be seen separating from the other fingers briefly before re-grasping the object. (Grasping the pen between his thumb and index finger, and turning it point downward in a ready-to-write position).

The video ends at this moment.

My conclusion: I'm now firmly convinced that the object John Kerry pulled out of his pocket was a pen. Still a violation of the debate terms, since no material objects were to be brought at all and he should have had it cleared beforehand. But for the Bush campaign to raise a big stink about this would be a major mistake on their part, since it would sound like sour grapes, especially if/when better video comes out (or an overhead camera) and proves that it was indeed a pen.

I think this one's a no-story.

More on earpiecegate.

Oops, I meant "in" the discussion thread at http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=12967_A_Better_View_of_Jacketgate, of course, not "it" the discussion thread...

That's what I get for skipping the Preview button just this once.

Could they be forged memos?

Get Mary Mapes and Dan Rather on the case!

I think it's worth noting the candidates were supplied with notepads by the debate commission (I believe).

My guess is, Kerry was pulling out his French-to-American-electorate dictionary.

Nah, too much "substance" in the object to be a pen. At least, no pen that I've ever seen, heard of or read about.

The object, whatever it was, that Kerry withdrew from his suit coat had enough surface area to reflect a white or white/grayish color and definitely had enough surface area to be recorded in the video as having a hard edge, and in relationship to Kerry's hand also photographed simultaneously, makes the object at least several inches in the edge that's showing in the video. So, definitely not a pen, unless Kerry withdrew a plank of board to use as a "writing instrument" that measured five, six, seven inches wide. Highly improbable.

Sgt. Taze:

You may consider violating the debate rules as inconsequential, but I assure you it is not to millions of voters. They (the two campaigns) signed a written agreement as to conditions of the debate, and the rules were and still are very specific (they're in effect for the remainder of the campaign from what I understand), and Kerry violated one of those rules.

AND, he did so in that moment when he turned his back to the audience and visible cameras, reaching into his suit coat pocket to withdraw whatever object he withdrew, and then used that object for whatever purposes during the campaign. The rules clearly forbid ANY object being taken to the podium by either candidate, "any tangible object..."

Kerry violated that rule. So, no, he did not "win" the debate, but lost it, and proved that he has questionable character along with that.

This isn't a partisan arguement. Perhaps you never attended college or a university but I assure you, what Kerry did equates with academic dishonesty and the three universities I attended would and still do expell anyone who engaged in academic dishonesty, the first time. No opportunity for a second chance, but expelled, first time, you're out.

Kerry's got an education from Yale. He's been in the Senate, lo, these many thirty years. He's supposedly been a member of "security" and "intelligence" committees in the Senate. He's saying he's qualified to be the President of the U.S. And yet, he violated with a cavalier moment an agreement that should be respected and abided by...

I just can't express how badly I think of Kerry for doing this. Given his history, all things considered, he's either crazed at this point to such an extent that he didn't hesitate to violate the rules of the debate based upon his own arrogance (no one would criticize or "catch" him, no one is there to "correct" or "punish" him, so why not violate the code of ethics for the debate), or he's plain and simple a deceptive creep. Stealing, lying, cheating, they are all indications of very bad character, and Kerry's just evidenced that that includes him.

Any item that either candidate took with them to the debate was to be -- also as per the agreement -- handed over to the person leading the debate, and clearly publicly displayed. Instead, Kerry walked in smiling, turned his back to the audience to approach his podium, and reached into his suit coat as he turned away (and from the frontal cameras -- we now have this video of his stealth act because there was a side-stage camera rolling that may not have been clearly visible to the candidates) and then had that object before him at the podium by the time he turned back to face front.

And he had access to whatever that object was throughout the campaign...a "Kerry aide" was reported to have been also photographed after Kerry left the podium, removing whatever Kerry had propped up there and taking it offstage with him (the aide did).

Clear violation of the rules of the debate, and a very dishonest one at that...since the campaign's now said that "Kerry didn't cheat" and yet we see the violation of Kerry cheating right there on the video.

This might explain a certain disconcerted tone by Bush from the very beginning...perhaps Bush saw Kerry do what he did and responded with criticism about it, between the two of them. Unless someone speaks up about it, we'll never know that finer point, but, larger point is that Kerry violated the rules of the debate, which makes Kerry a clear LOSER of the debate.

Winners don't cheat. Kerry cheated. Kerry's no winner.

I watched the video, and Bush was unfolding a piece of paper at the same time Kerry was reaching for his pocket. What did Bush bring to the debate? I doubt it was notes, because if it was he wouldn't have gotten his ass kicked so badly. You can see this here: http://www.dailyrecycler.com/blog/2004/10/winners-never-cheat.html
just view it full screen.

Are you gonna break this story?
Doubt it.

Kerry has cheated before on campaign agreements. When Kerry ran against Weld, the candidates made two agreements on campaign spending. First, they agreed to an overall limit on campaign spending. Second, they agreed to limit the amount of their own money spent on their respective campaigns. When Kerry was trailing against Weld in the last week or so, Kerry infused $1.7 million of Teresa's money into a last minute TV ad buy, thereby breaking both agreements. Kerry’s nuance response was something like: “I didn’t spend money on the campaign; I lent the money to the campaign.”

"Americans began their descent into today’s nasty polarization – with the occasional semi-breaks such as Ford, Carter and Reagan."

Um... Reagan? The evil dupe of the military-industrial complex who was going to ignite a nuclear war with the Soviet Union?

I was around back then, and I remember a rather large amount of vituperative rhetoric. Wasn't politically conscious during Ford/Carter, so I can't speak to either of those.

Honestly, as far as polarization goes, we haven't been even close to the depths of incivility that characterized, say, the election of 1860.

Yours truly,
Jeffrey Boulier

Violet Slandre: By damn, I do believe you're right! He's got a drum in his ear.

Apologies if someone has already mentioned this, but, Kerry was making notes during the debate. It's quite possible that what he's seen placing on his podium is a pad or paper for notes.

Frank at IMAO has got ahold a copy of Kerry's notes.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/31273.htm

Oooooo. A Pen.
Of course, it could have been THIS pen:

http://www.awolcowboy.com/gfx/Kerry-pen.gif

...I'm sure lengthy, detailed apologies will be forthcoming from all of you, particularly the ones who reflexively took this non-incident as more "proof" of Kerry's "lying, deceitful character" (And to be fair, lots of us took Bush's 'performance' as more proof that the supposed he-man Cowboy from Crawford keepin' thuh security moms safe is really an incompetent, blathering, ineffectual, Korsakoff's-addled, whiny little man)... Yes, Kerry supporters nationwide would be waiting breathlessly for the mea culpas from the right wing blogging class, but unlike y'all we occasionally date non-inflatable women-- so you'll have to leave them on our answering machines. But... you know what this little 'flap' makes you guys?
(Come on.. Come on............ Wait For It...)
.
.
.
"Sore Losermen"

Ha!
Peace!

Well, the entire right-wing blogosphere have made grand fools out of themselves on this one.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/31273.htm

"ut the mystery was solved when The Post reviewed a Fox News Channel feed from Thursday's debate: Kerry pulled out . . . a black pen.

Kerry campaign spokesman David Wade remained angry at the bloggers' guilt-by-insinuation.

"The right-wing attack machine will say anything to steal a debate do-over," he said.

"We plead guilty to having a pen." "

Change out of your pajamas next time.

"Well, the entire right-wing blogosphere have made grand fools out of themselves on this one."

You forgot to include this part of the article:

"Was it a cheat sheet — as some conservative bloggers claimed — or was it something innocuous?

Either way, it would violate the debate rules agreed to by both campaigns: "No props, notes . . . or other tangible things may be brought into the debate." "

If it is a pen, it still breaks the debate rules. Try reading them.

So Kerry was proven -- and just admitted -- to breaking the debate contract. Got it.

As for the object having a hard edge in the video, *if* the frame(s) where you see an edge have that edge horizontal or vertical, then I'd guess that what you're looking at is a compression artifact. MPEG compression artifacts tend to be rectangles with straight horizontal and vertical sides, and this would easily account for seeing an edge where the was none in the original, uncompressed video.

I think the thing to watch here is not the object, but Kerry's hands. It looks to me like he's taking the cap off a pen, flipping the pen around, and placing the cap back on the bottom of the pen, then holding the pen in his right hand to write with it.

For myself, I'm convinced that's what it is. A violation of the debate rules, but not a cheat sheet. Not a reason for a "do-over" of the debate, but a good enough reason to emphasize "Hey! Next time, try to avoid even the *appearance* of cheating, OK? Because next time, if you pull any object out of your pocket, we're going to stop the live debate right there while we examine the object and embarrass you thoroughly."

5672 How can this all be as nice? Check out my site http://www.pai-gow-keno.com