I think he is extremely patronizing, so this doesn't surprise me, I also think he overly buys into various stereotypes, I am from the South, not gun toting, but a supporter of the right for others to do so, and I don't think I have ever used the phrase "can I get me . . ."

Ignerance ain't sectional.

Just make him stop putting an "r" on the end of "idea." Is that too much to ask?

I am afraid Asshole is too harsh, in this particular instance. I think the more specific term "Horse's Ass" is apt.

I grew up in a part of the country where the high school closed for the first day of deer season and where you wore red hunting jackets all season long. Believe me, in "them thar' parts," Horse's Ass would be term of choice.

The only shame is this walking, talking
insult to one's intelligence, has a real
shot of becoming the President of The United States!!! Scary!!!!

Every time something comes out of his mouth, I say to myself "there's now way he can top that." yet He constantly surprises me with more BS. It really pisses me off that he'll get away with it, too. He'll prabably use his 2nd favorite rifle, the illegal Chinese one that he has, or maybe he'll get his hands on a CAR-15 fully auto just to show us that John Kerry, can get away with anything.

Thanks Bill for the Drudge link. Now I can link you and still claim plausible deniability.

Oh... and I agree with "mbranca" above

Bush's whole act is about being a Texas good ol boy! He's always mugging for the camera clearing brush and handling a chainsaw. He's no more a ranch hand than Kerry is a hunter. Who cares Bill?

So you're saying that Bush's whole ranch thingy is a ploy...

I doubt Kerry could even start a chain saw. ?? Has Kerry even had a REAL JOB since vietnam. The nursery school we call the senate doesn't count. Kerry hasn't done JACK squat there.

but I digress. We all know Bush isn't as eloquent as others. Kerry is prided as being eloquent and well spoken. So explain why he says "Can I get me..." Did he just have a slip of the toungue. Did his Brain Fart?
No, as always, he's just trying to appeal to a new crowd where he see's himslef slipping. Plus it shows his own perception of those groups. What a Hack.
At least Bush, according to your whole ploy BS, can keep his game face on his whole political carreer.
Kerry' game face changes every time there's a new opponent. This shows he'll kiss anyones ass. He'll do anything to be liked. Why don't we tell him, we'll only like him if he goes away.

Bush's whole act is about being a Texas good ol boy!

Uh, last time I checked, at least he was raised in Texas.

Though maybe we could add "world-class thespian" to "evil genius" on Bush's resume, I suppose.

I wonder of they do a background check for integrity when you apply for a hunting license.

"He'll [Kerry] do anything to be liked."

Bush does not care about being liked. It's as much of a problematic sociopathic disorder as somebody who seeks attention. Maybe worse considering he runs our country.

Bush's daddy was 1/2 New Yorker 1/2 Texan. Let's not pretend that Bush Jr. comes from a simple texan cowboy family. He comes from an elitist rich family just like Kerry. Just because Bush didn't pay attention in grammar class does not mean that he's a normal guy.

Anonymous Scientist, you write that "[Bush] comes from an elitist rich family just like Kerry."

Wrong. Kerry comes from an elitist non-rich family, which is the worst sort of all. He's always thought he was hot shit, but could never afford a pooper scooper.

Who paid for his Swiss boarding school? Rich relatives. Who paid for Yale? Rich relatives. Who has paid for his upkeep thereafter? Two rich wives, the second much richer than the first ("moving on up").

If he were younger and (much) better looking, one could accuse him of being Teresa's boy toy. As it is, he's just a tall guy with a long face, a lugubrious manner, a facile pick-up line, and a propensity for back-stabbing when back-stabbing seems politically advantageous.

One could argue that only someone who thinks America is what's wrong with the world would be pleased to see this man become President.

Bush, when he attended Yale, was one of the boys. He feigned the elitist groups and was more of a "blue collar" guy. Kerry could never go to a ballgame with my buddies without getting his ass whipped before the night ended. Manny Ortiz? Eddie Yost? Lambert Field? This guy is anathema to the everyday working man. He will never fulfill his myriad of promises to the middle class because he doesn't really see these people as reality.

AO: There's nothing wrong with having your family pay for your schooling (I wish my family could have done it). Both Bush had and Kerry (most likely) had their education paid for. As for the huge gap you didn't talk about -- the time between Yale and Heinz -- he worked in Boston, very near where I lived. He worked his way up, and he wasn't given anything. He could afford his own pooper scooper at this time. Kerry was wholly responsible for his success in Boston. He married a rich wife later.

"someone who thinks America is what's wrong with the world would be pleased to see this man become President."

Do me a favor AO, explain this one a bit. This qualifies as one of the most ignorant things I've heard in awhile. I personally don't think America is the problem. I personally think Bush is the problem. I personally owe everything I have to America, but I don't owe anything I have to this administration. I have personally lost about 1/2 of everything I had while Bush was on watch. My losses were minor compared to some of my colleagues. And all of this occured on Bush's watch.

It's as much of a problematic sociopathic disorder...

Hey, "Scientist", are you 1) practicing medicine without a license, or 2) unethically diagnosing someone without having examined him, or 3) unethically releasing a patient's medical details without his consent?

Man, if there's one word I could do without, it's "sociopath". Time was you had to put in a good amount of effort to be called a sociopath. You had to kill a string of people, or shoot up a McDonald's or at the very least hole up in a run-down house with illegal weapons and mutter ominously about the ZOG every time you went to the Post Office to pick up your Klan literature.

When everybody's a sociopath, there won't be no fun in it anymore.

Heh. Daddy likes that comment.

Scientist, you are really drinking the kool ade. If you lost money in the last 4 years, you are one dumb *&*&^%. My personal wealth grew 1/3 through the market and independent investments. Do you think Wall Street is rooting for "Long face"? Stop reading the MSM and understand that this administration has done wonders with the economy, accomplished wonders in Afghanistan and is making very good progress in Iraq. Every ground source that I have gotten reports is perplexed by the liberal media's biased reporting. You know what, if anyone asks me if criticism of our operations in Iraq is unpatriotic, I would say that correlation is correct.

Anonymous Scientist

Everybody's got a story, my friend.

I am a small business owner and thanks to Bush, I will no longer be paying HALF my earnings in TAXATION.

I am hopeful that in the next four years with President Bush, the cost I incur in providing full health coverage for five employees will also decrease.

A sociopath can range from mild to severe. It's nothing more than antisocial behavior Angie dear. Shall I say antisocial next time so you don't relate it to some show you browsed on Court TV?

Grayboy: Yea I lost money and more, and I don't think it's appropriate to call me a *&*&^%. The FIRST thing that Bush did in office was cut funding to groups that provide birth control counselling to women in 3rd world countries (not abortion, but advice on birth control). My wife worked for one of these companies, and she lost her job. Then my 401-K took a pounding after 9-11. I don't blame this on Bush, but I have negative feelings. I worked for a rather large company in the Boston region. All of our jobs were outsourced to India and Russia. So, I lost my job. Then my lovely wife and I got divorced because things were really tough at the time. Again, not Bush's fault, but another negative mark in his column. I found a new job, but I'm only making 1/2 the amount I was making. I had to add to my income by starting my own business, which is nearly impossible to handle when you already work 10+ hours a day.

So, I when I listen to Bush say "and here's some help for you to go get an education. Here's some help for you to go to a community college." I say F&*K YOU Bush. I have a Masters and I was working towards a Doctorate before I got shitcanned. And when I hear you ride my ass for losing money I say F&*K YOU grayboy.

Anonymous Scientist (may I call you AS for short?), here's some of what one might argue.

Since he returned (under questionable circumstances) from Vietnam, John Kerry has made it clear that he is an opponent of America's exercise of power and influence in the world, and he has consistently sought to convert his opposition into political capital for his own advancement. I don't see any other way of reading his history since 1969 or so. Had I more time, I'd run down the list more completely, but here are just four points:

(1) John Kerry betrayed his fellow Vietnam veterans for the sake of his own political advancement (besides his Congressional testimony, his Dick Cavett show appearances and the like, he also made sure that he was the only author named on the cover of the book, "The New Soldier", a cover which mocked the costly victory of the Marines on Iwo Jima);

(2) John Kerry has said that, were it up to him, America's military would only be used for actions ordered by the United Nations (a body which fairly consistently opposes America's exercise of power and influence in the wider world);

(3) over his 20 years in the Senate, John Kerry has consistently voted to reduce the power of the American military and of covert intelligence services (from this, one could reasonably conclude that he believes that America's leaders cannot be trusted to use the military wisely, so the military ought to be kept relatively weak, so as to pre-empt its being used in an aggressive way);

(4) he opposed the first Gulf War, in spite of the fact that President George H.W. Bush amassed the largest coalition in history to oust Saddam Hussein's troops from Kuwait.

Had Kerry's ideas prevailed during the last decades of the 20th century, we can be fairly certain that the Soviet Union would still exist, and that Saddam Hussein would be running both Iraq and Kuwait (and perhaps even Saudi Arabia, giving him control of 30% or so of the world's oil reserves).

How does one not conclude that Kerry has at least acted as if he believes that America is what's wrong with the world in recent times? And how does one not conclude that many of those who seek Kerry's elevation to the Presidency feel the same way? Kerry is the ideal candidate for the 'blame-America-first' crowd. After all, he's done that for most of his adult life.

And, AS, as for your financial losses in recent years, I, too, lost a lot of money in the market. But when did I lose that money? In March of 2000, when Bill Clinton's end-of-the-century bubble burst. That was more than 10 months before George Bush took his oath of office. George Bush did not cause the stock market crash, the recession that followed the crash, the 9/11 attacks, or the recession that followed those attacks. To suggest otherwise is to be either disingenuous or stupid (or both).

"Again, not Bush's fault, but another negative mark in his column."

Hmm. So AS admits that it's "not Bush's fault," but still holds Bush responsibile. Can anyone say "cognitive dissonance"?

Sounds like a bunch of personal problems to me, AS.

Make that "responsible."

Hey Scientist, lighten up. You have had a run of bad luck, which you state was not Bush's fault. You can vote for JFK. Go ahead, that is your right. Bush does own a ranch in Texas, he does REAL ranch work on that ranch. He likes it. It is a great stress reliever for a man who has a high stress job.
We think Kerry was insulting with the "Where can I get me a . . ." question. He was insulting with the Lambert Field comment, the Mary Cheney comment, and many others.
Bill Clinton could get away with being Every Man. John Kerry is clummsy and awkward at it. He should quit doing it. It makes him look foolish.
John Kerry is not warm and does not connect well with people when he tries to be something he is not.
Whether you like Bush or not is beside the point as far as I am concerned. I could care less, but to say Bush is not exactly what he gives you on TV is just wrong. I am from Texas, he was my governor for 8 years. He is exactly what you see. I promise you he is not a Sociopath, nor is he antisocial. Please stick to what you know. You sound bitter and angry, perhaps you should take care of yourself first.

Ann: I'm sorry but I'm not going to sit here and debate Kerry's record with you. Jesus, you just barfed out stuff that everyone with a brain has been discussing for months upon months. Do you have anything to say that hasn't been beat to death by a major news channel? I can't even bring myself to respond.

To suggest that the 8 years of economic growth while Clinton was in office was the work of Bush Sr. is disingenuous, retarded, stupid, or all three. I hope you are not the type that attributes everything bad to Clinton and everything good to every other president!

Anonymous Scientist: with your reasoning skill, you can prove the world is flat. I.G., you blame your and your friend’s financial losses on Bush. Hitler blamed Jews for his and Germany's financial problems. Therefore, Bush is a Jew and Anonymous Scientist is Hitler.

Matt - Did you selectively read around everything else to just quote me on that one thing? Go screw yourself. And armygirl (another selective reader), I'm blaming the other stuff on Bush's administration. I'm also personally offended by someone who would say to me, someone who lost their job "and here's some help for you to go get an education. Here's some help for you to go to a community college."

Don't pick and choose what you want to respond to. I wrote more than what you are harping on, so keep my quotes in context.

"Please stick to what you know" -- Armygirl, how do you know what I know? Sorry, but GWB has symptoms of a sociopathic disorder. Some basic signs (http://www.nlm.nih.gov): "Individuals with antisocial personality disorder are often angry and arrogant but may be capable of superficial wit and charm. They may be adept at flattery and at manipulating the emotions of others". Sounds like every politican I know! Some more that others.

AS. Do you really feel that PETS.COM was a good thing. Beause that kind of crap is what made th Economy good. and look what happened. The floor fell out from underneath everybody. That combined with a couple of assholes who blew up two HUGE icons in the security of the US economy, its no wonder tehstock market fell on its face. And while CLitnon was busy "smoking" ciagars, the part that Clinton neglected, terrosim, struck. His lack luster attitude towrds the USS Cole bombing and the WTC of 93' and all of the other Crap that was done to our emabassies, was pathetic. It set the stage for 9-11 as it showed our weakness in defense, and offense. People act like 9-11 was the first time we were ever hit. Bull shit. Multiple terrosit Oragnizations used to try to take blame for bombings. Now when you hear about an attack, no one wants anything to do with it. You ay not like how Bush does certain things. but you should be happy that we don't bend over to terrosim like the EU.

AS, are facts that have been mentioned before not worthy of being mentioned again? Facts are facts. If anything I've said is incorrect, prove it; otherwise, logic requires that you accept it and find some other way (besides invective) to rebut it.

There are good reasons for attributing much of the early progress in the economy during the Clinton years to foundations that were laid during the Bush Sr. Presidency and built upon by the Republican-controlled Congress. But I didn't argue that in my previous post, as even a cursory perusal will show.

AS, your use of 'retarded' as an epithet is offensive (but not surprising).

I wish you all the best. By all means continue your education (although I suspect that a Ph.D. isn't going to help you in the ways that you need help).

perfectsense: Unfortunately for you, your logic does not suit your name. I have no earthly clue about what you were trying to be clever about. Maybe you can put it in another, more simple way for me? This is the way I read it: with my skills, I can reason that the world is flat. Then Hitler blamed the Jews, and Bush is a Jew, so I am Hitler? Is that right? Good stuff!

So Steve-O, are you blaming pets.com on Clinton? Do you think if Bush was in office pets.com would not have existed? The internet boom had very little to do with the administration at the time, and it would have occured no matter who was in office.

For the record, I've never blamed 9-11 or terrorism on Bush. But, since were talking here, do you think you would have blamed Gore for 9-11. You bet your Hawaiian ass you would have!

The facts! Is this a fact, or your interepretation? "John Kerry has said that, were it up to him, America's military would only be used for actions ordered by the United Nations". You were the one who stated this -- I don't need to prove it! I would say it's your interpretation. I don't accept this, so the burden is on you Ann.

Ann, why does retarded bother you? Are we speaking as adults? Because if we are, then you suggested that I am either "disingenuous or stupid." If you are really mentally retarded, then I apologize. Otherwise, take it as namecalling and nothing more. You opened the box Ann.

Hey, Scientist, I am not attacking you. I WAS addressing your comments, but you do sound bitter and angry. I was trying to tell you that I thought you would feel better if you got some help. Jeez, lighten up!!!!!
I am genuinely sorry for your losses, but President Bush is not to blame for them.
Also, please do not insult my intelligence. I have as much education as you do.
As I said, if you want to vote for Kerry, go ahead. I do not care. But don't come here and insult us for supporting Bush. Where I come from (here in the Great State of Texas) it is considered rude to insult someone in their own house.
Now, I have given you more attention you deserve. Go get some help and then come talk when you can be civilized.

Scientist, I think you need to find a better finance guy/girl. My investments have grown quite a bit over the last two years or so.

Also, I don't think the good ol' Texas boy is an act, I think it is the legit George Bush, there might be a silver spoon in there with it, but the good 'ol boy part is legit.

Kerry doesn't have a drop of good ol' boy in him anywhere, and it shows, when he tries to fake it.

armygirl: I dont' need help. I'm fine. I got a little pissed when grayboy said "If you lost money in the last 4 years, you are one dumb *&*&^%." Everybody in this forum has a unique experience. Everybody has a reason for voting how they are voting. I'm not here to knock anyone -- I'm really here to learn. I only attack someone personally when they attack me first. Otherwise, I try to stay with the issue and have a real discussion. Some people insist on making things personal, and I don't appreciate it. You just happened to pile on while I was on the bottom and getting angry. I apologize to you armygirl.

BTW - I've been coming here for awhile. I don't recall seeing posts from you before. But, you said, "But don't come here and insult us for supporting Bush".

And here I am, amongst the great debate, with a simply query:

But, did he ask with a twang?

Do we have audio?

AS, try not to make rebutting you so easy, okay?

You write:

The facts! Is this a fact, or your interepretation? "John Kerry has said that, were it up to him, America's military would only be used for actions ordered by the United Nations". You were the one who stated this -- I don't need to prove it! I would say it's your interpretation. I don't accept this, so the burden is on you Ann.

Read the article linked below, won't you? I call your attention to the fourth paragraph in particular.

Old Crimson Interview Reveals A More Radical John Kerry

You also wrote: "You opened the box Ann."

AS, are you reading what you're writing? There is absolutely nothing personal about you in my first response to you in this thread. In your response to that response, though, you write that "[t]his qualifies as one of the most ignorant things I've heard in awhile."

So, no, AS, you opened the box.

*****

Sorry, Bill, to be taking up so much of your bandwidth. I was under the impression that someone calling himself 'Anonymous Scientist' would at least take the trouble to read what he writes and what is written to him, to respect argument and facts (whether newly discovered or not), and to realize that a candidate's history and character are of immense signifcance in a Presidential campaign. I would appear to have been mistaken about that.

Just Me: I'm doing just fine in the financial area now. But I had rough years from 2000-03 in Boston. Everybody was having a tough time there. If you were in the high-tech industry in Boston, you were most likely not doing so well.

I don't think Kerry has one bit of good ol' boy (gob) in him either. He looks very stiff when he tries to do it. But, personally, I don't want a gob for a president.

But I had rough years from 2000-03 in Boston. Everybody was having a tough time there. If you were in the high-tech industry in Boston, you were most likely not doing so well.

Sounds like you should blame your senator.

Im placing blame on Clinton for the internet boom. I did't say it wouldn't have happened under Bush. My point was more that if you want Clinton to take cedit for those good econmic years, The rest of it has to follow. Now as far as blamign 9-11 on Gore. I woudn't place the Blame on Gore. I would still put most of the blame on the Clinton administration. Also, I don't want to put Full blame on Clinton or his admin. But as far as Bush, or Gore, theres no way a couple of months worth of administration can be blamed for years of planning. What I would be pissed at Gore for, though, would probably be how he would have sent a few bombs into Afgan, and call it a wrap.

Change "Im" to "Im not". Sorry my mind thinks fsater than I type

Ann, are you talking about this paragraph?

“I’m an internationalist,” Kerry told The Crimson in 1970. “I’d like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations.”

Are you serious? Did you see that this is a quote from 1970? Do you give any heed at all to the changes that have taken place in the world in the last 34 years? Ok, Ann, you've proven me wrong. You are right!

Ann, you made this statement ABOUT ME: "someone who thinks America is what's wrong with the world would be pleased to see this man [Kerry] become President." Which prompted me to call your statement ABOUT ME "ignorant". So, after I said that your statement ABOUT ME was ignorant, you called me "stupid and disingenuous" to get back at me? For what?

Dammit Bill! I don't need you to come here an point out the obvious! I'm having a rough time here tonight!

A sociopath can range from mild to severe. It's nothing more than antisocial behavior...

Congratulations. You've now defined sociopathy down to the seriousness of a bad hair day.

Shall I say antisocial next time so you don't relate it to some show you browsed on Court TV?

Oh, look: condescension. Antisocial? Check.

Sorry, but GWB has symptoms of a sociopathic disorder. Some basic signs: "Individuals with antisocial personality disorder are often angry and arrogant..."

Sounds like you.

Bill, get the butterfly net.

Anon Scientist,

I'd go to bed. Angie's pissed me off a few times, but I tend not to mess with her. (hint hint) She's ... (makes loco sign with the twirling finger) Look - she'll cut you, dude.

No shame in tactical retreat. Live to bring the liberal pain another day.

"now defined sociopathy down to the seriousness of a bad hair day."

Angie, good one. I didn't think this was the place for a clinical diagnosis of his behavior. It's my opinion, and it's obviously not yours, so I don't really want to discuss this with you anymore.

Undoubtedly, condescension is part of sociopathic behavior, but only when it is unmerited condescension. So, if I was always that way, which I'm not, then it would apply. I kinda felt like you deserved it, but I could be wrong.

Bill, I trust you. It's sleepy time for me. I love you Angie. Sorry I made you mad.

Science!

AS, I accept your apology. Sounds like you owe some more here tonight.
I do not post ordinarily, but you made statements about Bush that I thought were highly personal, uncalled for, and petty. I have a hard time not responding to comments like that.
Bush is not only a good ole boy (gob, as you phrase it) he is the real thing. Believe it.

I keep forgettign that you guys are 6 hours ahead of me. Im still at work. Now who am i supposed to disagree with?

Ah, AS, surely you don't think that I wouldn't think that you'd say that the article I linked to was old (I know you don't like old facts). That's exactly the response I expected. Which is why Kerry's history since that time is relevant (not to be cavalierly dismissed as old hat, as you did earlier).

Do the words "global test" ring a bell? John Kerry uttered those words just days ago. They are completely consistent with the attitude he has had towards America's exercise of power and influence going all the way back to 1970. And he uttered the "global test" words in a moment of off-the-cuff speaking, which is even more significant. It reveals his settled view of the matter.

Then you write:

Ann, you made this statement ABOUT ME: "someone who thinks America is what's wrong with the world would be pleased to see this man [Kerry] become President." Which prompted me to call your statement ABOUT ME "ignorant". So, after I said that your statement ABOUT ME was ignorant, you called me "stupid and disingenuous" to get back at me? For what?

Re-read the statement, AS. It was quite carefully worded, and it doesn't mention you at all (when I wrote it, I wasn't even sure whether you were completely convinced that Kerry ought to be President).

Here's what I wrote:

"One could argue that only someone who thinks America is what's wrong with the world would be pleased to see this man become President."

Perhaps you should try to contact Jacques Derrida for help in finding mention of you in that statement, AS.

Jesus Ann - let's just drop it, ok? You are right and you win. You were clearly not referring to me even though I am the only person on the page who likes Kerry, and you posted right after me! Proximity and context mean nothing in this world, it's true!

As far as the "global test" and statements made in the 70s -- I take Kerry's explanations about protecting the U.S. at face value. I don't think he's plotting and planning to turn the security of the U.S. over to the U.N. If you want to go on believing that, then feel free. I'm not buying into your paranoia, OK?

I accept your withdrawal from the field.

Not a withdrawal Ann. Not at all. It's just that I have nothing left to say to you that I would be proud of. It's a withdrawal from our conversation which was a waste of time - in my opinion.

But your willingness to take John Kerry at his word, while touching, is puzzling. How do you decide which word to take?

Good G-d...this is like watching a fight between my mother and my daughter: Each has to have the last word.

Ann, I'm trying to be kind and respectful. If you want to vote for Bush then go ahead. I will vote for Kerry. I've been involved in this political discourse for longer than the last couple of hours, so you aren't going to change my mind or prove anything to me. Ok? So just forget about it, and so will I.

jmflynny: I don't think Ann and I would be very compatible as lovers. Ha!

AS, evidence and argument are the primary instruments of science. I'll leave it to others to decide which of us has appeared (at least this evening) more interested in using those instruments.

As I said earlier, I wish you all the best.

AS,

I excerpted one example from a post rife with the same sort of cognitive dissonance ("X isn't Bush's fault -- but I blame Bush for the effect that X had on my life!) in order to make a point. That's not "selectively read[ing] around" anything -- that's just efficient use of time in making what should have been an obvious point. I'd tell you to go screw yourself, but you might break down in tears and blame Bush.

AS: Just so you know, some people call Clinton a sociopath too, and I thought this was equally inappropriate.

Angie's pissed me off a few times...

You wound me, Bill.

...but I tend not to mess with her. (hint hint) She's ... (makes loco sign with the twirling finger)

You know, all through high school I tried for this effect, and could never get it down. I should've twitched more.

twitch

mutter

The voices tell me Elvis loves us all.

Matt: Oh, if you aren't going to use it then I will - go screw yourself nit.

AS,

Ouch! That stings even more the second time around! Maybe it was the addition of "nit" that did it.

Took me awhile to get throught all of this, but I gotta say... is everyone from Boston so full of themselves?? Sheesh...

Out of microphone range, Kerry was overhead asking: "Eyez got to teach Vanessa to be victim, can I get me some of them thar lesbian videos?

AS I am not associated with the computer or tech industry-I admit I barely know how to use the internet, and my 11 year old uses word better than I do. I am mostly just a mom and substitute teacher on days they call me in.

As for the really old quote from Kerry about the directives of the UN, I really don't think Kerry has changed much at all from the man who said those words. He has said enough things to make me think, he pretty much still believes what he said back then. You can go on pretending that he didn't mean "global test" or those words back then, and if your guy wins, we can watch our foriegn policy go down the tubes, because not only will Kerry be listening to the polls here in the US, he will be doing focus groups in France and Germany to see what his position should be.

Just Me: I really respect your opinion. But I just don't agree. I hope we both have the opportunity to find out. Truly - AS

OneDrummer: I'm not from Boston, I was just working there. What you read was ONE left leaning person in a room full of conservatives. At least I have the sack to leave the relative comfort of a familiar forum and mix it up with the right.

Matt: I thought about explaining to you why you were wrong to deconstruct what I said above. In the context of my whole post, I think it's clear why I have negative feelings towards Bush. Not everything we feel in life is logic based, you know? But, I suspect you already know you were wrong. I suspect you were just trying to get me worked up.

Wow...this guy never ceases to amaze me. Being from Ohio myself, which would make me an Ohioan, I have to take a little offense to some elitist gigolo from Massachusetts trying to "connect" to us simpletons here in the midwest with poor english.

Plus, didn't Kerry say he likes to hunt deer by crawling around on his belly with a double barrel shotgun? What a joke this man has become.

MT - I'm originally from PA. I hunted using a 233, so I wasn't too sure about what he was talking about. Massachusetts has a muzzleloader, archery, and shotgun season for deer hunting. You can find out more here: http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dfw/dfw_deer_faqs.htm

AS,

I'm sorry. I mean that in all sincerity. My comments last night were inexcusably and unnecessarily nasty. I don't find your arguments persuasive, and I disagree with many -- most? all? -- of the premises that underlie them. But none of that execuses behaving like an asshole. Again, my apologies.

BUT . . . . MT, yes, Kerry said that. The double-barreled shotgun part is weird, but just barely conceivable; some folks do still hunt with buckshot, which could be fired from a double-barrel, though it's certainly not a gun I'm used to seeing used for deer hunting. The part that makes Kerry's statement about deer hunting an obvious lie -- or a very, very embarrassing truth -- is that nobody hunts deer by crawling around on his belly in the woods. Nobody with a tiny little fraction of a clue, anyway. I long ago wrote that statement off as pure pandering -- which makes me question whether Kerry's whole hunter persona isn't something his advisors dreamed up for this election cycle. I mean, if he's really a hunter, why not just give a straightfoward answer to the question (which was along the lines of "what's your favorite kind of hunting?")? Why invent this incredible story about deer hunting? Why not just say, "duck hunting," if that's what he's into?

Okay, I admit I know nothing about guns, deer hunting or what kind of guns you hunt with, but don't you hunt deer from a blind (basically find a nice spot near a watering hole and wait for the deer to show up)?

I don't even know when deer season is, but I think the moose season just ended up here, and I am pretty certain you don't hunt them with a shotgun.

Matt: I don't know if it's pandering or not. I have no way of knowing if the guy actually hunted like this. What I do know is that MA has a shotgun season. I'm not sure of the type of shells they use. To me, it seems like it would be tough to bring down a deer with shot, but I suppose "Buck Shot" got its name for a reason. I remember my father telling me he hunted somewhere in the U.S. that permitted shotguns only - no rifles. I wouldn't doubt that the region around Boston disallows the use of rifles because it's so highly populated.

Do they crawl around on their bellies? I know I have, but it was not a full time thing. In MA and PA, you can get into some tight thickets. Sometimes crawling is the only way to get through. Maybe he's just thinking back to a single experience he had while crawling around in the dirt?

Why am I telling you all of this? Since moving from rural PA, I've been living exclusively in a big city. Nobody I know can imagine that I grew up in a rural setting. When I tell people that I've hunted deer, squirrels, rabbits, pheasants, bear, and turkeys -- they think I'm full of it. But, my family still lives in rural PA, and my brother and I own a hunting camp near Cooks Forest in northern PA. So, looks can be very deceiving.

"but don't you hunt deer from a blind"

Just Me: This is just one way of hunting deer. I personally never hunted from a blind. I sat on my butt out in the middle of the woods, usually on a cold log. In PA, you are required to have a 400 sq. inches (I think this is right) of flourescent orange on your jacket. Plus you are required to wear a flourescent orange hat. All of this super camo stuff you see in Cabela's can only be used during archery season. Anyway, tree stands and blinds were too expensive, and rarely used by people I knew. If you are covered with orange, and sitting in the open, it's not easy to lure in a deer. So, a shotgun was not a choice. We used rifles with scopes because we could only hunt at a distance.

But, if you are hunting with a shotgun, bow, or muzzleloader, then I'm sure camo is permitted. The weapons are not as dangerous or deadly if you get hit (I guess that's the thinking?). This type of hunting relies on stealth and remaining scentless. Crawling around is not out of the question I suppose.

BTW - I can't speak to the "stealthy" type of hunting because I've never done it. I've only seen the equipment that my brother and father use during bow and muzzle season in PA.

AS,

Yes, people absolutely do hunt deer with shotguns. In my home state of Indiana, at least when I was growing up, there was no such thing as a modern rifle season for deer. Shotgun, muzzleloader and bow were the only options, and slugs were the only legal ammo option for shotguns.

But slugs require rifle sights on the shotgun. Ideally, it would also have a cylinder bore(s) (more accurate, though not strictly necessary) or a rifled barrel. I've never heard of a double-gun with two cylinder bores, nor have I see one with rifled barrels, nor -- most importantly -- have I seen or heard of one with rifle sights. So if he's hunting with a double gun, he must be using buckshot.

Buckshot can indeed be effective on deer, and did indeed get its name for a reason (though it should probably be called "manshot," since it's likely more common in police and military applications than deer hunting). Many state fish & wildlife regulations specifically mention it as a permitted load for shotgun hunting (they usually require 00 or larger shot). Max range for humane, reliable killing on something the size of a a deer would be about forty yards, though. As you know, that's pretty close.

Bottom line: Yes, it's conceivable to me that Kerry hunts deer with a double-barreled shotgun loaded with buckshot. What I don't find believable is the crawling around on his stomach part. In the quote, Kerry is talking about stalking deer, a.k.a. still-hunting: "I go out with my trusty 12-gauge double-barrel, crawl around on my stomach. I track and move and decoy and play games and try to outsmart them. You know, you kind of play the wind." Nobody stalks deer at close range on his belly; it's just too damned noisy. Crawling into a thickly wooded area to get to a stand (even your kind of "stand")? Sure. But taken as a whole, Kerry's statement just doesn't seem to me to add up.

Matt, he may very well be over-dramatizing the hunt. He's all about drama. Some people believe that Kerry is condescending, smug, or as Bill puts it being an "asshole". I can understand why he comes off as condescending, but I don't see it that way. It's just my opinion, but I don't think he intends to be that way -- it's just his style.

I've hunted with all types. There are trophy hunters (usually rich guys), people who hunt only for the free meat, and others who just do it for the comraderie. I only did it because everybody in my family did it. I don't hunt anymore (don't carry a gun), but I still go out with my family.

We all have our nostalgic hunting stories; he was telling one of his. But, there's no doubt Kerry has hunted in MA.

If you say so . . .

Wow AS, Its nice to see you're pep is back after a good night's sleep. As far as Kerry telling a story about crawling around in the dirt hunting deer with a shotgun, thats his whole story. Why doesn't he elaborate a little? Who was he with, Pa or cousin Billy Bob? What woods was he in (bad grammar to stress point).
personally, I don't care if he actually does hunt, but it doesn't sound like he does. He doesn't sound credible, and anyways, Last I checked, Hunting with any kind of gun isn't one of those key reuqirements to become President. My point being, Kery comes off as a rich boy, snobbish, stiff. Instead of trying to mix this appearence with almost totally opposite smidgets of sound bytes and photo ops, he could just tone down his real appearnce of a pompous prick. Thats how you get people to like you. Accept who you are first.

"Accept who you are first."

Some say that GWB could have kicked ass in the debates if he could have followed this same rule. Instead of being GWB, he was trying make sure he didn't make himself look stupid compared to Kerry. When he calmed down and acted more like himself (2 & 3), he did better.

At least he didn't say "Iffiniwuntoo buy me a license." I wonder if he also purchased a firearm to hunt with, since he only owns one or two. Or will he just borrow one like Clinton did for his photo ops?

I have to correct your anatomical reference to Kerry. He actually is a pussy. Bush is a dick. Al-Zarqawi's an asshole.

Am I the only one who thought of that classic Eddie Murphy SNL skit, "gonna get me a shotgun, and kill all the whiteys I see . . ."

Probably not the association Kerry was looking for.

Now, y'all quit pickin' on ol' John.

I'd purely LOVE to take him hunting with me.....

Test

Audio of Kerry's "Can I get me a huntinin license" is available on Rush Limbaugh's website