• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

John Kerry's speech tonight

Status
Not open for further replies.

Leon

Junior Member
No, I'm just baffled at how there's still people who are convinced that Bush doesn't lie about the WMDs.
 

Memles

Member
Watched the Speech...whether he was actually good or not (It was midnight) and whether the crowd was energized...even Tucker fucking Carlson on CNN said it was a good strategic move. And that's Tucker Carlson. Great job or not, it did what they wanted it to do. It got Kerry the last word.
 

xsarien

daedsiluap
Really? That's impressive, and I'm not being sarcastic. Tucker Carlson has about as many good things to say about liberals, nevermind the Democratic party and its candidate. I have noticed that he's throttled back a lot, I think it started with the tectonic shift in reasoning for the Iraq War (Bush shifting the argument from WMDs to "Saddam's a bad man.")
 

Memles

Member
xsarien said:
Really? That's impressive, and I'm not being sarcastic. Tucker Carlson has about as many good things to say about liberals, nevermind the Democratic party and its candidate. I have noticed that he's throttled back a lot, I think it started with the tectonic shift in reasoning for the Iraq War (Bush shifting the argument from WMDs to "Saddam's a bad man.")

Yeah...if it hadn't been 1:30 am I would have yelled "What the fuck?". But alas, it was.

I mean, he seemed almost...bi-partisan. He said Kerry rambled, but noted that Bush rambled too. He seemed more critical of Bush, saying that he started way too slow. It was like...strange.
 

Tenguman

Member
I get annoyed everytime Kerry pushes his vietnam service to help win the election when he denounced his own military service, accomplishments, and his fellow military men in vietnam. It's pretty ridiculous to me that the man who took a shit on the military (see voting record) for all these years is now acting like he's proud of being a part of it just to get those moderate conservative votes.

And what did he think he was going to accomplish with this speach? Take the rub out of the RNC convention or something at 12am in the morning? I only saw it on one station last night and everyone in the audience was sleepy. Barely anyone is talking about it today, it's all convention wrap-up and hurricane. Though that actually may help him cause this last speach was pretty lame.

I also get tired of dems bitching that Bush was a draft-dodger. Hey, I don't like the guy either, but did it ever occur to them that they had a draft-dodger in power for 8-freaken-years?
 
I suppose it's unfashionable or "un-American" to be opposed to war now. I'd rather vote for a former war hero who understands why he is now anti-war than a draft dodger that is a hawk.
 
I personally think the dodge-or-not issue is nonsense. But what stands out are the issue of war in Iraq and the economy.

The Vietnam issue is as moot now as it was in 92, and it's fun watching just about ewerybody with a strong political agenda on either side of the fence flip-flop about it (just as it was fun to watch them defend Quayle's NG service).

Nope, the issue here is the job at hand, and the judgment that it requires. I don't trust GWB's enough to vote for him, even though Kerry's rhetoic is not that inspiring.
 
It's pretty ridiculous to me that the man who took a shit on the military (see voting record)

Bullshit. The Republican talking points about Kerry's military voting record are dishonest and vile. Fred Kaplan took some time to debunk them yet again in Slate yesterday, so I'll leave it to him [full article] :

Still, it is worth setting the record straight. The main falsehood, we have gone over before (click here for the details), but it keeps getting repeated, so here we go again: It is the claim that John Kerry, during his 20 years in the Senate, voted to kill the M-1 tank, the Apache helicopter; the F-14, F-16, and F-18 jet fighters; and just about every other weapon system that has kept our nation free and strong.

Here, one more time, is the truth of the matter: Kerry did not vote to kill these weapons, in part because none of these weapons ever came up for a vote, either on the Senate floor or in any of Kerry's committees.

This myth took hold last February in a press release put out by the RNC. Those who bothered to look up the fine-print footnotes discovered that they referred to votes on two defense appropriations bills, one in 1990, the other in 1995. Kerry voted against both bills, as did 15 other senators, including five Republicans. The RNC took those bills, cherry-picked some of the weapons systems contained therein, and implied that Kerry voted against those weapons. By the same logic, they could have claimed that Kerry voted to disband the entire U.S. armed forces; but that would have raised suspicions and thus compelled more reporters to read the document more closely.

What makes this dishonesty not merely a lie, but a damned lie, is that back when Kerry cast these votes, Dick Cheney—who was the secretary of defense for George W. Bush's father—was truly slashing the military budget. Here was Secretary Cheney, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Jan. 31, 1992:

Overall, since I've been Secretary, we will have taken the five-year defense program down by well over $300 billion. That's the peace dividend. … And now we're adding to that another $50 billion … of so-called peace dividend.

Cheney then lit into the Democratic-controlled Congress for not cutting weapons systems enough:

Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you've squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don't fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. … You've directed me to buy more M1s, F14s, and F16s—all great systems … but we have enough of them.

I'm not accusing Cheney of being a girly man on defense. As he notes, the Cold War had just ended; deficits were spiraling; the nation could afford to cut back. But some pro-Kerry equivalent of Arnold Schwarzenegger or Zell Miller could make that charge with as much validity as they—and Cheney—make it against Kerry.

In other words, it's not just that Cheney and those around him are lying; it's not even just that they know they're lying; it's that they know—or at least Cheney knows—that the same lie could be said about him. That's what makes it a damned lie.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Leon said:
No, I'm just baffled at how there's still people who are convinced that Bush doesn't lie about the WMDs.

Lie? I absolutely despise him as president and I don't think he lied.

I think he got a great big boner on the flimsy intelligence that got delivered then covered his ears and said "I can't hear you!!" when any one dissented or asked for more time to properly validate the questions lying therin.

The Neo-con plan makers that surrounded him basically forced his hand on Iraq, 9-11 gave them the catalyst to move forward, outdated and shallow intelligence gave them a shield. I think the intelligence was real (and severely broken) but that the true crime was that they didn't take the time or energy to do it right (validate info, use inspectors etc), because they simply didn't want to; they had what they have wanted for over 12 years right at there finger tips.
 
But if he stated he was positive about the facts when he could have done more to confirm or deny them, is that not a lie? Or just extreme obtusity?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom